from Rasmussen:

Sixty-two percent (62%) of all voters now believe that Barack Obama will win the Democratic Presidential nomination. That's up from 54% in late March. Just 23% now believe Hillary Clinton will be the nominee, down from 24% in March.
Among Democrats 63% expect Obama to win (up from 52%) while 26% say it will be Clinton (down from 28%). Rasmussen Markets currently suggests that Obama has an 82.4 % chance of winning the nomination.

Gee, maybe he was just frustrated that half the progressive blogosphere was cheerfully rubbing their hands together in anticipation of this being his downfall....

certainly tried to come to his rescue last night. Not sure how successful she was. I only watched a few minutes of Sen. Obama after Hillary Clinton was done. I can only take so much of the "and..and..and..um.....ah..um.".

Obama is not the "gotcha" and willfully misleading candidate.  I'm sure you don't agree, and that's fine.  Most voters have and will agree with me.

I do -  

NEITHER candidate will have enough delegates going into Denver.
Obama may also have 8 out of 10 late primary losses.

You guys are too funny.  LOL.

He doesn't think Annie Oakley is a negative... he was making fun of Hillary for pretending she was Annie Oakley.

It would be like Obama telling a story about how his grandfather taught him how to kill bears when he was a kid, and Hillary called him "Davy Crockett". Nothing demeaning about Davy Crockett in that... she'd be making fun of Obama's blatently political pander of bear-killing.

Most progressive democrats would recognize the alleged "Dean scream" for what it was - a youtube-fed absurdity of media overreaction to a non-event.

It's precisely reactions such as yours that makes me despair about democracy in this country - maybe even bitter.

If you look at the link I posted, it shows that the comparison was made by a supporter.  Nevertheless, Queen Esther is an excellent role model in my view because of the selfless actions she took on behalf of our people.  When I was younger I was more of a Vashti fan (and I still like her spunk) but you have to go into the story deeper, and see that Esther realize she had no choice but to sublimate her own needs and wants for a higher purpose.

Regarding Clinton's response, she was given the opportunity and ran with it.  I don't think you can honestly say that Obama has not taken advantage of missteps by Clinton, could you?

I am familiar with everyone you listed, and I agree that they are all wonderful role models, but they all had different attributes and qualities.

If you look at Esther, I will agree that she is not a fighter, as are many of the woman on her list, she is not a scholar, as are some of the other others, but she is a woman who embodies modesty and selflessness living in the diaspora (unlike most of the others you include in your list) and subject to capricious revenge by Haman and others.  As a result of her environment, she has to sacrifice herself for the good of her people.  She was, as we are told, blessed with beauty, and she used that to impact the King, just as Judith used her feminine charms against Holofernes.  The difference between those two is that Judith used violence, and Esther used words and pursuasive ability.

As a feminist, I had a hard time seeing Esther's strengths, but eventually I did see the value of the way she acted.  Of course, you are free to disagree.

I saw him saying the same sorts of things that everyone knows; he could have just said "wedge issues" but decided to spell them out.

God, guns, and gays.  If you don't understand that Republicans have been making electoral hay out of wedge issues for the past 40 years, then you haven't been watching.  Hillary Clinton certainly understands this.

If anyone comes away from this seeing Hillary Clinton(!) as a champion of small town values who wasn't already going to vote for McCain over EITHER Democrat, then I'd be shocked.  She isn't exactly Mary Landrieu or Lloyd Bentsen.  She's already got a reputation for both elitism (see: remark, Tammy Wynette) and dishonesty that she's carrying into this campaign.  She can't win on social issues.  Just like she can't win on military experience.  She can provide an assist for John McCain, when he runs against Obama but that's it; if she's the Democratic nominee she'll get killed on those issues.

with respect to liking a certain logo (which contains political speech I happen to agree with) deserve a troll-rating?

You don't get it... it's okay to make insulting propaganda posters AGAINST Obama, but it's evil, sexist, misogynistic, and anti-Democratic to create similar images demeaning Clinton.

I can appreciate art, even if it was created by a Republican : )

Just as a matter of interest, has your candidate done anything at all that you disapprove of?  Has Obama done anything that you approve of?

If you want to get technical, it was Hillary that started the Tuzla thing by lying about it. And claiming it was part of her vast foreign policy experience. And that Obama had no experience like that... you know, the dodging-sniper-fire kind.

So fill me in on some poor elitists, please. I'd like an example, just one will suffice. Elitism does refer to privilege, yes? And most often in the context of financial status. But, please, do provide that example nonetheless.