So ulcerating!

Maybe worse was a bad choice of words.  How about "Is it because Hillary is not as good?"

only republicans and about 30% of HRC supporters think Obama is so bad.

the MAJORITY of Clinton supporters would vote for either them, just like the majority of democrats.

basically any democrat that says they won't vote for either of them, they are in the 'vocal minority' and in no way represent their side.

so just remember if you read a "obama can't win diary" is from a 'vocal minority' and most HRC supporters will support Obama no problem.

I guess that's one way of looking at it. The other is that at least folks might get real tired, at least in London, of the conservatives, before 2009.

shhhhhh we don't like politicians who learn from their mistakes.

we only like to play gotcha games, I mean its not like hitting this allows Obama to go
"yeah I voted for it, I thought like Hillary that it would help, It doesn't, so yeah trust me I have seen it a gas tax holiday will not work, this is why every expert is against the idea"

....Republicans have already made hay of such statements.

Jerome's willful misrepresentation of the gas tax issue is just reprehensible. If you read the article in its entirety, it shows how the ineffectiveness of a 6-month, consumer sales-tax holiday in Illinois only reinforces the argument against a much weaker 3-month, producer tax holiday. Moreover, in Illinois Obama was pushing for permanently repealing the sales tax, not just a holiday.

Honestly, I don't see how anyone could read that article and not see that Obama is on the right side of this issue. And he's there because of legislative experience on the issue, which Clinton apparently lacks in this area.

You wouldn't want someone who works/lobbies for DIEBOLD to worry about voting, now would ya?

<snark>

the majority of people this election season have been "short-sighted" then.

get off your arrogant high-horse already. Obama can and will beat McCain just as Hillary can and would beat mcCain. It just happens that Hillary can't even beat what some on here have labeled a "weak" candidate.

Claiming he's only backing Obama to 'end the process' is a bit of selective quoting. According to the AP:

Andrew said the Obama campaign never asked him to switch his support, but he decided to do so after watching Obama's handling of two issues in recent days. He said Obama took the principled stand in opposing a summer gas tax holiday that both Clinton and McCain supported, even though it would have been easier politically to back it. And he said he was impressed with Obama's handling of the controversy surrounding his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

Just like Obama will not win in the fall w/out the suburban areas and "country" counties either.  Oh, and the little thing like "big states"...they're just distractions right?

I've always thought this same thing but I always thought that by playing the same games that some of the diarists and other members play, I'd be dumbing down the debate.

I'm glad you said it though. People can hopefully see how twisted the argument really is.

Feh, we've heard lie after lie from the Obama camp about this stuff. If his demographics don't change then he is in big trouble and it will be obvious that he can't win the general election. We can still nominate him but it'll be obvious that we're putting forth a sure loser.

Actually, a 9% win in NC will probably amount to about 180-200k vote spread, thus neatly destroying all the 'popular vote' metrics that have been tossed around. Because independents can vote in NC, a 2 million turnout is entirely possible.

Wait, the media is Obama's enemy?  Are you serious?  Are you guys trying to displace the Bush folks as conquerors of us in the Reality-Based Community?

The media has been totally adoring of Obama, and totally dismissive of Hillary.  What we who have not drunk the Kool-Aid have long been saying is that the media worship of Obama would eventually end, their pro-Republican bias would show through, and Obama's "post-partisan" nonsense would be crushed by a hostile media dictating McCain's talking points.  Now that they've started hitting your guy a little bit (and I for one think this is extremely mild compared to what the media would throw at him in a general election campaign), you guys are complaining about media bias?  

Ridiculous.  If Obama can't handle this mild heat, he is totally unfit to be the Dem nominee.  He'll face a lot worse than that.  Remember Swiftboating?  Remember "Al Gore invented the Internet"?  The media made that stuff up, and hammered away on it.  You think the coverage of Rev. Wright is media bias against your candidate?  Wait til the GE.

The other thing you're ignoring is that people actually do care about the Wright story.  I don't.  I don't think that politicians should need to renounce everything that other people have said, and I think it's sad that we force them to do so.  In fact, the Probama rush to destroy Hillary because she didn't denounce Ferraro strongly enough or quickly enough was the moment I decided I couldn't support Obama.

So yes, I think it's messed up.  But you're being delusional if you think people don't care about this story.  I know a few folks who have actually stopped backing Obama because of this, and many more who are  taking a second look at their support because of this.

So as someone who dislikes Obama's campaign, and who wants to see Hillary win, I can honestly say that I hope Wright is not the reason for this.  But what I hope will happen is not the same thing as what will actually happen (a lesson that Obama supporters apparently need to learn).

stop asking why Jerome does such things. He's clearly partisan for Hillary and that's not going to change.

Why did you omit the Rasmussen poll released today that shows Obama up by 14 percent in North Carolina?

Maybe because it was three days ago and I blogged it then:

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/4/29/1330 42/264

That's not how I meant it at all, I could have said "covering" which is what I meant it to be taken.

Has sounded eternally pissed off about the assignment for the whole series...   I guess HuffPo couldn't get her on the bus.   Not sure why.   But she's the one who published all the subtle cracks about Obama being a dangerously flirty black man, and other nonsense.   She might be trying to be a fair player here, but maybe she's just not that good.

I'm actually glad to see some critical "ink" on Obama at HuffPo, but her coverage hasn't been issues-oriented thus far.

"If 1930s Germans had blogs and were well-to-do white collar office workers, I think it's an open question whether they would have been as vitriolic in their hatred of media figures who criticized their Great Leader, as today's Obama supporters are."

Thank God Obama, and Hillary, and McCain etc etc supporters are more able to slam media figures than 1930s Germans.

you're misreading the situation.  I also think, in the abstract, that the gas tax holiday is a bad idea.  but in reality, the way Hillary does it, it's a good one.

it defuses a major issue, which is gas prices.  By ignoring the real impact of gas prices on working class folks, you're betraying your economic circumstances, which are clearly good.  

Hillary is talking about taxing the oil companies to pay for a TEMPORARY gas tax holiday for everyone else.  This would of course be in conjunction with longer term policy changes to change American usage of energy, and to encourage alternative energy production.  But in the near term, there aren't a lot of ways to address gas prices, and this is, like it or not, a major issue that lots of Americans will vote on.

But of course you're right.  Obama will win this primary, and the general election, with his coalition of bloggers, rich Dems, and AAs.  That's  a proven recipe for success.

John Kerry 2.0

For what it's worth - early voting in NC is showing a 38% African-American turnout.

You are correct. Today and tomorrow are the moments when the news cycle is set for the weekend. It was the 5-6 day out window that changed things for Hillary in TX and OH.

I agree, Clinton's got to close as strong as she has in recent contests. She's got to keep getting the undecideds. Today's poll numbers look good for her too.

" I wouldn't be surprised if several more Super Delegates announce for Obama today and tomorrow, including one or two major ones."--markjay

Interesting point. To be counter intuitive though, bringing out these Super Delegates looks and feels a bit like the Obama campaign is trying to, how shall I put it, hustle and bamboozle the voters of North Carolina and Indiana. The media who serve as Obama's helicopter parents always overdo it, and will over play their hand in covering any new superdelegate endorsements of Obama, as a fait accompli, as if to say "shut down the race, the Super Delegates have spoken." I don't think the average voter in Indiana or North Carolina will take kindly to having their votes superseded by these delegates. And the bigger the name of the Super Delegate, the larger the sense of disenfranchisement will be. Trying to use Super Delegates to shut down the race before voting has begun in North Carolina or Indiana will backfire. Obama will look like to ultimate pampered establishment candidate who cannot fight his own battles. From this point of view I hope you are right and some obnoxious big Super Delegate tries to intervene before the votes in Ind and NC.

for the media coverage to be split (and not benefit Obama), Hillary will need to win Indiana by as close a margin to what he wins N.C. by.

It's what she needs to aim for and what he needs to prevent from happening IMO.

Except she's a much better writer than Dowd.

Ugh.  I get that you don't like her but it's one thing to use a common metaphor and quite another to take it to another level as far as being violent.  

I got thousands of hits on google when I investigated that yesterday.

There were excited "gotchas" all over this site about it.

Nevermind the fact that his experience with that situation is what is telling him that this won't work.