If Obama lost PA by 20+ points, that would be something to worry about in the general. 8 points just means that Clinton is liked more there but Obama is also considered to be a strong candidate. Sounds good to me.
May be you should read this. History repeats itself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:1972D emocraticPresidentialPrimaries.gif
Stop with 2008 being compared to past elections. There is NOTHING comparable. Look at Dem turnout! Look at youth turnout! Look at minority turnout (black and hispanic)! That is the problem with Hillary's campaign. Her stupid advisors (and her, because she picked them), are stuck back in the old days. These are not the old days. These are brand new days with unpredictable trends.
I am a Hillary supporter, but am I ever disappointed in her campaign strategy. I wish she had employed Obama's tactics-- she'd have won hands down 2 months ago. That said, when she does lose (and I am a realist, I understand delegate math)I will whole heartedly support Obama. He does know how to change the paradigm when it comes to politics. He'd be a great president.
There were lots of young folks like clintons, Gary Hart and Tom Daschle that supported McGovern. The whole anti Vietnam crowd supported him very enthusiastically. He was a WWII war hero though he never made much of it.
We will see what happens. The future is not ours to see.
I have to say that the historical comparison between 1972 and 2008 are almost nonexistant other than there being a democrat, a republican, and a war.
