The post to which you so punaciously respond appears a question, not an argument.

Also, for the people in the cheap seats, please explain the difference between off-topic and off-point.

Well, it's an excellent way to prove your point of how horrible Obama supporters are because they insult people... by insulting people.

Jerome waits to develop his "yardstick for spin" until Obama releases one memo to the Super delegates to counter the months of spin from the Clinton folks (where are they at now? oh yeah...the supers should decide alphabetically)...

All in an effort to show what exactly?

Jerome is an objective commentator. It's reality that has the bias. Reality is responsible for Obama's popular vote lead, pledged delegate lead, and rapid closing of the superdelegate gap. If it weren't for objective reality, Clinton would be the nominee right now! And she'd be flying around the country on a dragon.

Reality: It's the only reason Obama's winning and dragon-riding Clinton isn't.

If you want to repeat this mindlessly, at least get the spelling right.

It should be "Think you're mad now? Wait." I can take nonsensical argument, or bad grammar, but not both at the same time.

Heaven forbid, the wife who had 8 years of training by the side of a man who left office at a 68% approval rating after 8 years of peace and prosperity.  A brilliant, gifted politician who is the only Democrat to get himself elected president in 28 years.  Heaven forbid.

And establishment?  You haven't looked at Obama's career to date, obviously.  What a rude awakening some people will get if they get their wish.

thanks for the threat

My concern is not how pro- Obama or Pro- Hillary the site is. I love both candidates and am supporting Obama because I happen to love him more. My problem is the tone of certain people; including, at this point, Jerome. They take glee in pointing out the faults of Obama they way they would with a Republican...its become a civil war and that depresses me.

we know this is not a close race. That's why anyone who's objective should be appalled by Jerome's recent approach to this race. It's straight from the  Hillary playbook. It reeks of desperation, it lowers the discourse of how to get progressives (or anyone) elected and it plays on division.

tell me, at what length will you go to get Hillary elected?

You mean, counting the votes? Counting the delegates? That kind of "playing games?" Clinton's only (for the moment) successful metric comes from pretending no one would vote for Obama in Michigan in a real election. Counting all the HRC votes from the election that everyone acknowledged before hand did not count, and counting no votes for Obama even though exit polling shows he would have gotten almost all of the uncommitted vote and some of the Clinton vote had it been a real election, and had he been on the ballot, she can for now (not before PA, and almost definitely not after NC and IN) claim that "more people have voted for me."

Who's "playing games" with numbers? Who is denying something they know in their "heart of hearts" to be true?  

You should look at the list of superdelegates.  

those salt-of-the-earth, hard-working , real American party insider elites

how do you stand the hypocrisy: the candidate of change who has his surrogates play the race card against the Clintons and anyone who criticizes him (confirmed by Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC the memos Clinton referred to do exist), the candidate who is for hope but stays for 20 years at a church where sermons are filled with language that at a minimum is "bitter" and divisive that even Oprah left, the candidate whose lifestyle is best described by his wife

Michelle Obama is sitting with a group of six women around a table in the basement playroom of the Zanesville Day Nursery, here in economically troubled central Ohio. Her talk is of struggle -- her own struggle, the women's struggles, the struggles of women across the country. There are struggles over money, over kids, over jobs, over husbands and ex-husbands. And perhaps most of all, there is the struggle inside.

"It's a constant sense of guilt," Obama, dressed simply in a blue sweater with a triple strand of pearls, tells the women of her own dilemma as a working mother. "It's guilt, feeling guilty all the time."

So how does she keep it all together? "I'm fine, because I have a strong informal support network," Obama says. "I have a mother who lives five minutes from me. I don't know what I would do, even if we weren't running, I don't know what I would do as a professional without having that kind of support system. So that keeps me sane."

But not everyone has a close relative living nearby. And not everyone can afford to keep it all together, especially here in Muskingum County, where, according to the census, the median household income in 2004 was $37,192, below both the Ohio and national average. Out of that, there's the mortgage. And child care. Health care. Education. Lessons. "I know we're spending -- I added it up for the first time -- we spend between the two kids, on extracurriculars outside the classroom, we're spending about $10,000 a year on piano and dance and sports supplements and so on and so forth," Mrs. Obama tells the women. "And summer programs. That's the other huge cost. Barack is saying, `Whyyyyyy are we spending that?' And I'm saying, `Do you know what summer camp costs?'"

With all those concerns, one might wonder whether the women should be comforting Mrs. Obama, but she assures them that she's really O.K. "We don't complain because we've got resources because of our education. We've got family structure," she says. "So I tell people don't cry for me."

But there are still problems. As she has many times in the past, Mrs. Obama complains about the lasting burden of student loans dating from her days at Princeton and Harvard Law School. She talks about people who end up taking years and years, until middle age, to pay off their debts. "The salaries don't keep up with the cost of paying off the debt, so you're in your 40s, still paying off your debt at a time when you have to save for your kids," she says.

so how do you stand it. Both candidates are flawed. Some of us would rather have the flawed candidate that we know instead of the flawed candidate we don't know.
 

Jerome is hardly a shill, he started out for John Edwards, then smartly shifted to the most plausible general election winner; Sen. Hillary Clinton.  Andrew Sullivan, on the other hand, is a frothing-at-the-mouth Clinton hater, has been since the 90's, and can hardly be considered an objective observer at this point.  Nor can Kos, since he has been a frothing-at-the-mouth DLC hater from the start as well.  

I think we can safely assume they'd both rather lose with Obama than win with Hillary (and right now they are likely to get their wish), whereas Jerome has sensibly made the case for a Hillary general election candidacy, and subsequent Democratic victory in November.

I have always suspected that many Hilary haters really are little boys with mommy issues. lmbo.

I'm a HillBot and proud of it

I don't think so.

I may vote for the same candidates, donate to the same candidates, and even work for the same candidates... and I will gladly remember people who were willing to have reasonable dialog as my friends and allies. But there are plenty here, on both sides of the fight, that were nowhere near reasonable. They were petty, thoughtless, rude and they showed how little they actually care about the Democratic party. Those people will never be my allies again, hell- I will never respect them again.

I mean, we're all Democrats

Not what I've been hearing.

Read some posts here.  Apparently only certain kinds of Democrats are Democrats.  Just recently, I learned that Harold Ford Jr. was not a "real Democrat," from the wisdom of a sagacious Democrat.

I wish everyone could grok this fundimental truth.  It may feel good to tear into someone who supports the other candidate, but it does nothing positive in the long run.  Trash talk and name calling will never convince anyone to change their mind... it can only indirectly harm the candidate you support.  If you really want to support your candidate, you need to be respectful and polite when making your point, even if you feel provoked.

It is basically the fundimental principle of customer service that was drilled into me when I was a bartender.  We had to be polite at all times, even when cutting a drunkard off or throwing them out of the bar.  It wasn't just about the oppinion of the one customer causing a problem... but all the other customers that might form an oppinion (about the bar and not just you) based on your behavior.

Just remember, when we start bashing our fellow Dems... it makes Karl Rove smile.

If he's able to put these two states into play, then I think Sen. Obama will have a very good November, and ND/SD will just be the excessive icing on a sugary, bloated, Democratic victory cake.