Senator Clinton carries the great bluegrass state of Kentucky and delivers a wonderful speech.

Congratulations to her.

But, as was planned awhile back, May 20th is the day.

NOTABLE in the Indiana and North Carolina primary results and in many recent polls are signs of a change in the gender weather: white men are warming to Hillary Clinton -- at least enough to vote for her. It's no small shift. These men have historically been her fiercest antagonists. Their conversion may point less to a new kind of male voter than to a new kind of female vote-getter.

Pundits have been quick to attribute the erosion in Barack Obama's white male support to a newfound racism. What they have failed to consider is the degree to which white male voters witnessing Senator Clinton's metamorphosis are being forced to rethink precepts they've long held about women in American politics.

 

Yes, IT has never made sense to say that men who previously supported Obama are now racist.  That is not what is happening, she is winning them over and he is losing them.  My opinion is that once white males got to know Obama  they liked him less.  Once they got to know Clinton better they liked her better.  According to an old friend of mine "she is the toughest person in  the race" and "has the "best poker face and we need a poker player right now".  When I read this article I thought of him.  

For years, the prevailing theory has been that white men are often uneasy with female politicians because they can't abide strong women. But if that's so, why haven't they deserted Senator Clinton? More particularly, why haven't they deserted her as she has become ever more pugnacious in her campaign?

Maybe the white male electorate just can't abide strong women whom they suspect of being of a certain sort. To adopt a particularly lamentable white male construct, the sports metaphor, political strength comes in two varieties: the power of the umpire, who controls the game by application of the rules but who never gets hit; and the power of the participant, who has no rules except to hit hard, not complain, bounce back and endeavor to prevail in the end.

For virtually all of American political history, the strong female contestant has been cast not as the player but the rules keeper, the purse-lipped killjoy who passes strait-laced judgment on feral boy fun. (snip)

The specter of the prissy hall monitor is, in part, the legacy of the great female reformers of Victorian America. In fact, these women were the opposite of fainting flowers. Susan B. Anthony barely flinched in the face of epithets, hurled eggs and death threats. Carry A. Nation swung an ax. Yet they were regarded by men as the regulators outside the game.

(snip)

 

More over the fold

I'd be interested to hear some input.

I'm not saying that this is what Obama should do.  But if the contest now swings entirely on the super-d's and their individual judgement, what about the Obama campaign doing a complete 180 from the intra-party pie fight and concentrating all of his considerable firepower on the real enemy: McCain?

Alright, ready, here we go.
"Do ya'll really think Clinton can win the general election if she wins the nomination through super delegates after having lost in pledged delegates and most probably the popular vote?"
Just wonderin.

Just in over the wire...

Calipari suggests new rule be applied retroactively, giving Memphis win

(Sportswire, San Antonio) John Calipari, head coach of the Memphis men's basketball team which lost the NCCA title game last night to Kansas, has called for a change in rules on three point shots to allow one foot of a shooter to be on or inside the three-point line at the time of the shot.

I would like to put forward a personal plea and a personal pledge.  The tenor on this site has been severely acrimonious over the last several months.  

Regardless of my own support for my candidate and the animosity generated:

I hereby pledge to support either Democratic nominee, no matter which one it is.  I also pledge to not post any disparaging articles about my non-favored candidate on this site.

Also, in the hopes of crafting unity in the general election and fostering constructive debate on this site:

I hereby call on everyone here to support the democratic nominee, whoever it might be.

I also call on this site to ban any member that posts any disparaging posts about the democratic nominee.

Yesterday I stood in line for several hours to see Hillary at Scranton HS.  The rally was to be in the gym and I knew that there was only room for 3 thousand people and that was not going to be nearly enough room for all the people waiting, so I worried I would not get in. In fact all the people around me in line were worried too.  As we watched some people rudely go to the front of the line we employed a near by cop to stop them and when people got past him we made jokes and laughed and occasionally confronted someone ourselves, with humor of course because "that is how we roll" here in NE PA.

The experience of standing in line for a long time is always interesting.  You get to know people you never met and it is a great opportunity to influence people.  In this circumstance, to get them to volunteer or feed them defensive arguments to attacks on Clinton you know they have heard or will hear before she is ultimately nominated.

The blogosphere is blowing up over the issue of Superdelegates.  Today, the reductio ad absurdum was brought to the forefront when 21-year old Jason Rae of Wisconsin was interviewed on MSNBC.  

He's a Superdelegate, and... he got a date with Chelsea Clinton.  (I wonder if he made any moves--doesn't sound like the type on the radio...but, I digress.)

Call me biased, but the reason this is a bigger issue that the MILLION people who voted in Florida and those who voted in Michigan is because, at present, it is hurting Obama.  When/if they start to flip to him, I'm sure we'll hear it less.  But, again, I digress.

The solution is on the flip.