...and yeah, Democrats rock.

to YOU for posting this!

Progressive Blue

Agreed.

dg

Hear, hear.

It's disgraceful to see a poll where something like a third of each candidate's supporters claim they won't vote for the other.

she'd have a lot more credibility in calling for party unity if she'd stop praising McCain and started actually....you know.... attacking him.

i'm getting sick of her sabotaging the dems by praising the opponent instead of attacking him.

everytime we try to create a narrative, she breaks it down with more praise and it's fucking outrageous.
 she's complimented McCain more then she has Obama, and that's troubling.

This is at least the second time Clinton has made these statements.

Obama has never made these statements because, as it has been explained to me BY AN OBAMA SUPPORTER, he wants to appeal to voters who are ready to say they were wrong about Bush, but will never be ready to say they were wrong about Clinton.

So he would never urge those supporters to reconsider that decision.

Well crap, now what I am going to do with all these toy soldiers with their guns pointed at each other.

Lets recommend this thread to get it on the recommended diaries!!!!!!!

and fast david

Actually, I'm pretty sure Obama has said as much in a town hall meeting in the past.  I'm glad to see both Clinton and Obama on the same page on this matter - John McCain is about the worst person we could elect to get ourselves out of the mess we're in with our economy and Iraq, never mind the upcoming appointments on the Supreme Court.

UNITY!

rec'd

Hillary Clinton's lead in the Democratic contest has been boosted by her extraordinary strength among women. About 60 percent of Democrats are women, while Republicans and independents tilt in the male direction. Women have been voting in substantial numbers in Democratic primaries all year, regularly casting more than 55 percent of the ballots. On Super Tuesday, women were 57 percent of the electorate and they voted for Clinton by a 10-point margin. In Wisconsin, they split their votes evenly, leading some analysts to suggest her campaign was in serious trouble given her weakness among her core female supporters. But women came back again in Ohio and Texas. In Ohio, they were 59 percent of the electorate, up from 52 percent in 2004. In Texas, they were 57 percent, up 4 percentage points. In both states, women's support helped to put her over the top in the popular vote.

Since 1980 the much storied gender gap in our politics has been discussed largely as an interparty division. In 1980, men voted 36 percent for Jimmy Carter and 55 percent for Reagan. Women split their votes, 45 percent for Carter, and 47 percent for Reagan. The gender gap is now a permanent feature of our politics. Women lean consistently toward Democratic presidential candidates, and men to Republican ones. Even though other gaps in our politics are larger (the marriage gap, for example), the gender gap still captures the lion's share of press attention, especially when more women are voting than men. In 1980 women voted at the same rate as men for the first time. Fast forward to the 2004 elections, when, according to the Census Bureau, they cast nearly 9 million more ballots than men.

The gender gap today has a strong intraparty dimension that has been evident throughout the Democratic contests, with men being more reluctant to vote for Clinton. In Ohio, she won the votes of women by a substantial margin (57 to 41 percent), but she won the votes of men narrowly, 50 to 48 percent. In Texas, she beat Obama among women by 55 to 44 percent; among men, Obama barely won, 50 to 48 percent. Why do Democratic women and men see the race in different terms? Over time, the polls have documented a sea change in the nation's attitudes about women in politics. But they provide no easy answers about the intraparty dimensions of the gender gap that have been such a prominent feature of the Democratic race in 2008.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con tent/article/2008/03/05/AR2008030502960. html

More on presidential races and the gender gap:

President Clinton and five Democratic U.S. Senate candidates owe their victories to women voters. A historic 11-point gender gap propelled President Bill Clinton to victory -- the first time a U.S. President was elected by a majority of women voters while a plurality of men voted for the losing candidate.

http://feminist.org/research/report/84_t hree.html

And another:

Gender played a major role in providing a margin of victory for President Bush. According to the nationwide election day voter polls conducted by Voter News Service (VNS), a 10 percentage point gender gap was evident in support for the Republican candidate, with 53% of men and 43% of women voting for George W. Bush. Similarly, a 12 percentage point gender gap was evident in support for the Democratic candidate, with 54% of women and 42% of men voting for Al Gore.

http://www.cawp.rutgers.edu/Facts/Electi ons/gg2000.html

And yet...we also have this from the Clinton Campaign:

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/03/in_letter_a_dozen_top_clinton.php

What is the message here - in light of the comments today?

Even though I posted on this earlier, but am happy it is getting a response.  Just like in Todd's thread in my thread.

Lets get this to the top.

So much for Party Unity:

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/27/830276.aspx

Someone really needs to ask the former POTUS to start acting like the respected statesman that we know he is...his surrogating is getting out of hand. The nominee (even if it is not his wife) will need him in the Fall...