"Are you a closet American Spectator reader???"<br><br>Not yet, but that was an interesting read. Although, I'd forgotten the details of Carter's presidency. Not a fun place to revisit. That was my first presidential election. I voted for Ford.<br><br><br><br><br><br>[color:white]xx</font color=white>[color:blue]I always deserve it. Really.</font color=blue><br><br>

Then they won't win. And there will be plenty of Obama supporters that will moan about if only Clinton hadn't . . . fill in the blanks. They already blame her for . . . fill in the blanks. No, I don't believe his loss would actually be her fault. But I don't believe the majority of his supporters will be willing to put an ounce of blame on him.<br><br><br><br><br><br>[color:white]xx</font color=white>[color:blue]I always deserve it. Really.</font color=blue><br><br>

Okay, we get it... you don't like or trust Obama's supporters. Are there any more blanket statements you'd like to make?<br><br>-- Cee Bee Double-U

Uh, that you're taking my opinions a little too personal? <br><br>Or how about ~ last year, everybody's favorite sport here was to pile on Bush. He's a monkey, pinhead, dickhead . . . but criticize ODude? Joke about a room full of man crushes? <br><br>It sure puts a new spin on With Us or Against Us, doesn't it?<br><br><br><br><br><br><br>[color:white]xx</font color=white>[color:blue]I always deserve it. Really.</font color=blue><br><br>

I always thought it was in poor form to pick on Bush's voters though. I can't say that I agreed with them, but I never held them is such disdain to play would-a could-a with them. Say what you will about Obama and his policy. But talking about his supporters as though they are uniformly thoughtless and irresponsible is not worth the insult for whatever such little wisdom is contained in blanket statements of any type.<br><br>I have no idea what is going to happen in the general election. I believe that Sen. Obama will win. He will be taking a steady, bottom-up, decentralized campaign that favors popular policies into a contest against the old political system. Should something go wrong, it will probably be because the style of campaign that Sen. Obama is running just hasn't been refined enough yet. This is after all the fire that the Dean campaign started in 2004.<br><br>For all of the race-baiting Sen. Clinton has done in this campaign, it would take her going completely off the rocker for her to ruin the general election for Sen. Obama.<br><br>-- Cee Bee Double-U

"WV is a solid Democratic state, if Obama can't do well there, what makes you think he'll do well in Republican states,..."<br><br>well he's running against another democrat, Ron. geee ... and she's a very formidable one too... she's not the tooth fairy !!<br><br>I don't know why the talking heads, react this way... there are 2 democrats .. and only so many votes... <br><br>In the fall, I just don't think they'll vote for McCain and 100 years more of bellicose policies... , and NO energy policy.. except drill more !! .. and no fiscal policy except, spend more .... in Iraq ! ... and No health care policy... except private insurance no one can afford. .. even businesses are screaming it's killing them. The problem with the health insurance companies and that approach is they are gouging people just like the oil companies! they're not the solution - they're the problem !<br><br> I think McCain is a goner,,,, unless Obama does something really, really stupid. ... like join Hamas !! <br><br>McCain is 4 more years of Bush policies... he can't shake that image... <br><br>David (OFI)

A bad sign just like all of these other blowouts*! <br><br>AK: 75/25<br>CO: 67/32<br>D.C. 75/24<br>GA: 67/31<br>HI: 76/24<br>ID: 79/17<br>IL: 65/33<br>KS: 74/26<br>ME : 59/40<br>MD: 60/37<br>MN: 66/32<br>SC: 55/27<br>WY: 61/38<br><br><br>Tonight Clinton gained about 140K popular votes, I heard earlier they predicted over twice that amount (although delegates nominate, not poular vote). Also Clinton's 12 WV degate today turns into only a net of 2 with today's other obama SD pledges and 1 switched SD from Clinton to Obama.<br><br>But for some reason tonight WV (with a demographic of 95% white mostly blue-collar voters ) becomes the important demographic that's going to indicate where the General Election is headed ... and 30% of WV Democrats voted for Bush in 2004. <br><br><br><br>*all Obama wins . For some perspective, Obama netted more delegates from winning Idaho than Clinton did tonight in WV.

in North Carolina recently, McCain couldn't even get a full 3 out of 4 republican votes and he's the nominee. McCain has trouble heading into November. he's a weak candidate who does a poor job of speaking about the economy and has bad positions that most Americans don't like. that doesn't bode well. <br><br>Obama will choose his VP carefully. if he has to pick Hillary that will be unfortunate. if not, he'll pick someone who the poorer, white working class voters can relate to enough to keep their vote with the dems. on the other hand, Obama puts new states into play like Missouri, New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada, Iowa, North Carolina, etc. so he may not need West Virginia and Pennsylvania? i think the electoral map's history should be thrown out the window.<br><br><br>--<br>[color:red] Kansas Jayhawks -- 2008 National Champions </font color=red>

[color:blue]"Obama will choose his VP carefully."</font color=blue><br><br>I was just thinking about that. <br>It is extremely critical that Obama picks the right running mate. <br>I don't know who that would be (Edwards, Clinton, Clark) but he had better choose wisely.<br><br><br>

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>But the exit polling could be very telling.<p><hr></blockquote><p><br>The WV exit polls show 81% of Clinton's voters stated that "race is important" in their decision.<br><br><br>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21226014<br><br><br>