P.S.  Beatrice, this isn't your cell phone.  Learn how to spell out the words
*************************************************
Tiffany, like the other Clinton operatives obviously has a difficult time relating to younger voters.

Of course Obama did not give a concession speech in Nevada - he won the most delegates. Only losers give concession speeches

fair is fair,

I am still trying to decide who I want to vote for, but I am in total agreement, the bias of MSNBC is so obvious it stinks the place up.  I just can't understand why Obama gets a free pass on everything, I mean if we are really ready to move on in this country shouldn't we be able to question the candidate that just happens to be black as much as we question the candidate that just happens to be a woman without being labeled racist?

And by the way, would someone please give me a list of the CODE words, I don't want to unintentionally offend anyone.  

Obama is done after Florida. Hillary will crush him here, and it won't be because she's the black candidate that blacks are rallying behind in small South Carolina, and delegate or not, momentum will be hers. Then on to Super Tuesday where she will crush him in California, Arkansas, etc. Most Super Tuesday states are not heavily african american. He's the candidate of change--over and over, the mantra goes. We're still waiting to hear what he'll change. Obama people you have 2 days and then Florida is a coming. And MSNBC can you please put a muzzle on the anti-Hillary screaming Joe? Actually all your commentators but for Pat Buchanan can't stand the Clintons and don't hide it. Can we get a more balanced panel next time?

Why is everyone just assuming that the whites who didn't vote for Obama would not vote for Obama because he's black, so would never vote for a black candidate?    It ever occur to any of you that they might just have preferred Hillary or Edwards for other reasons, but could support Obama if things changed?  
Here's a reality check for you.  Anyone who would not vote for a person because of their race WILL NOT VOTE FOR ANY DEMOCRAT.  EVER.
Look, 24% of the white vote is great in a three way race.  Without Edwards in the race, and assuming his white votes would split equally, then Obama would've gotten another 20%, and would have gotten 45% of the white vote.  And its a real big assumption that Edwards supporters wouldn't have favored Obama over Hillary.
Again, 24% of the white vote is good in a three way race.  I bet you can find tons of elections (in the south especially) where a white candidates didn't get 24% of the white vote and still won.

All the yip yap about Obama's poor showing with Caucasian voters omits one telling statistic - in that group of voters age 18 - 35 he won 50% of that vote. Can you spell generational?

The pathetic "color" spin by the media is really getting lame. Let's drop the childish identifiers of white black red yellow and just discuss the issues.

To It's all in the numbers

"hate to tell you, but even 80% of blacks will never win nationally against 76% of whites and 75% of latinos (who alone outclipse the black vote)."

Sorry, but you forget that's 76% of white votes in South Carolina, not across the nation.  The fact that he got almost a quarter of the white vote, more than a quarter of white men and 50% of white voters under 30 is pretty respectable in a three way race including a white native son.    

Have you already forgotten that he won in almost all white Iowa  and won two to one among independents.  In almost all white New Hampshire he only lost by 3 points and he won the independent vote there,too?

In a general election it's highly unlikely that ANY Dem will win most southern states so who cares if whites trend against Obama there.  He has demonstrated that he has NO trouble winning white votes in states that are at all likely to go for a Dem in the general.  

And it's not as if Hillary Clinton is going to take southern red states either.  The last time S. Carolina went for a Dem President was when they went for Jimmy Carter so it's not as if we Dems are counting on their vote in 2008. We  don't need hard red states.  We need swing states and a good showing in the west.  

He has also demonstrated that he is unbeatable among young voters and independents, at least in Dem or swing states.  He is clearly FAR more electable than Hillary Clinton who loses big among independents.  They will elect the next President, not the old Clinton/DLC coalition of separate interest groups that never get out of the high 40% range.

All the noise Bill Clinton is making, even jeopardizing his standing with African Americans who have been such loyal supporters, is to take attention away from the elephant in the room:  The growing percentage of independents and Obama's strength with them.

The Clintons may be willing to tear the party apart, pitting whites and Hispanics against blacks because, to them, anything is worth giving Hillary a shot at th White House.  Well it's not worth it to me. And if they get her nominated by causing a Dem party break-up to rival the Republican melt down and Hillary loses? The chance to turn this country around will be lost for the foreseeable future if not forever.  GObama!

fair is fair, you are right about msnbc, but they have been trending to the right for a while now. remember it was them that even gave michael savage a try. scarborough(nobody owns me but btw, democrats are satan), mathews(calls himself a moderate republican),tucker(mitt is the salvation) carlson, tim(what ever the big bosses want) russert, all let their biases come through. but all the news media is pandering to the right. did you notice cnn had bill bennet as a political"expert"?

I could agree that 40% and 36% might be considered close enough to be deemed a split (depending on MOE), but I can in no way see how 24% can also be put into the mix and also be called part of the same "near split."  You have a margin of 16% over and 12% over.  In no way is that possibly an even split or near split!  The only split would be in the sense that all the votes were split amongst three people, so long as you don't try to quantify the percentages.  

I find it somewhat amusing that Obama supporters are accusing me of downplaying his victory, which I am not trying to do.  He won and it was expected as the polls for over the last month have shown him with double digit leads.  My quibble is with the spin placed on the data by the article and continued by the Obama supporters.  I am betting if Clinton was the one getting the 24% as opposed to Obama it would be HUGE news with his supporters and they would be all over what a big spread it was with a bit of "haha" attitude thrown in for good measure.  But, apparently since Obama has the short end of the stick on this data, it's really just a tiny little difference anyway.  

You can't have it both ways.  Facts are facts.  You can project all the opinions you want onto and around the facts, but it still doesn't change what is there and concrete.  

I just get horribly annoyed when the reporters inject their own opinions into the stories they cover.  It tends to color the facts when that should not be the case (unless their position is to write op-ed pieces).  Their job is to present facts in as neutral and balanced a way as possible, which I don't really see happening anymore.  

All this spin from the media and the bickering and alleged bickering between the campaigns is making it more and more difficult for anyone to focus on issues and the different positions the candidates have taken on them.  I am still trying to decide which candidate to support as one of my choices has dropped out, I have become more than a little disappointed and disillusioned in another the more I learn about them, which actually leaves me with one out of the three I started out with.  However, I need to do more issues-based comparisons and evaluations of the remaining candidates as opposed to just their media-spun attitudes and fight tactics.  

stop playing loose with the numbers 24% of the White vote isn't a bad thing for Obama considering who is is up against.A native son who happens to be White and carried the state last time and by the way thanks to Blacks and not so experienced Billary. You negative White folks are afraid of your own shadows coming up with all kind of stupid rationalizations about the results because they don't suit you. Unlike the Latinos our support for our party is unwavering and can be counted on. So why are fellow Democrates acting this way? We all knew from the start that close to 50% of the American people won't vote for Billary so stop acting so suprised. You narrow minded folks just care about who's President. I want a big Democrate majority so we can finally get things . accomplished. This is something Billary can't deliver
Denial is not a river in Egypt.

OBAMA SUPPORTERS   YOU NEED TO GET PEOPLE WATCHING CLINTONS CHRONICLES.COM  FREE VIDEO THERE  THEIR DRUG CARTEL  THE PROTECTED MURDERS   THE SEX PARTIES   THE DRUG USE    NEEDS TO COME OUT BY THE 5 TH   THE MEDIA COVERED THIS UP FOR YEARS FOR THE CLINTONS

So much for James Carville and his belief that Senator Obama is a whiner.
The folks from Hillaryland are the ones that most fit the bill now.
For Shoney's Bill and his assertion that Senator Obama is less ready to lead the democratic party than he was or J.F.K. we have learned that a vast plurality of the democratic voters in South Carolina have a very different view of the situation.
The Clinton's are the past.  Obama is the future.
Indeed.
The 2008 South Carolina primary will also be remembered as the point in time when the world witnessed the regression of the first black president to the person who is most reminiscent of Governor Wallace in 1968.
One can and always has been able to discern the magnitude of a Clinton defeat by the way in which the Clinton's and their surrogates react to it.  Both prior to, during and after the event.  
The amazing thing about the political animals that are the Clinton's is their ability to sense what is going to happen before it does.  Along with this is their complete inability to recognize a recent historical fact for what it is.
I am sure that over the remainder of their lives the Clinton's and their surrogates will be reliving and rewriting this turning point in their political lives.  
Usually this ability to recognize trends has held them in great sted, but this time it blew up in their faces.  Blew up very badly and quite publicly.
In the case of the 2008 South Carolina primary what the voters there, throughout the nation and indeed throughout the world witnessed was nothing less than the complete abdication of what the Financial Times in London referred to loosely as the farewell of "Davos Bill", (read Former president William Jefferson Clinton) and hello Shoney's Bill, (read the red faced, orange tie wearing old guy that appeared to have lost his facilities) and his shell shocked spouse who is in obvious denial that after a lifetime of Shoney's Bill her entitlement was lost on the 5 year maximum rule.
What we also witnessed is the realization that this is not a campaign of Hillary Clinton for the presidency, it is a campaign of the Clinton's for a third term in office.
Hillary has also demonstrated her complete willingness to not only leave the politics to Bill, but has appeared, politically inept without his strong backing & support.
In essence.  What we witnessed in South Carolina is the realization that it is Hillary herself who is quite unfit to lead from day one, alone.  
The amazing thing is I suspect that Shoney's Bill is, and always has been quite unable to lead without Hillary close by.
In this the Clinton's are truly not only a two for one, they are none for one.

Let me see, Edwards gets 40% of the white vote and Obama gets 24%, hmmm that's a 16% spread, and you consider that pretty close.  Using that logic I suppose one could say Obama's victory really wasn't as wide as it appeared, after all he only had a 10% victory margin overall, and with Clinton and Edwards splitting 76% of the white vote and Obama getting 80% of the black vote it would appear the overall outcome was indeed split pretty much along racial lines.

Congrats to Senator Obama, He needed this win and he worked hard for it.
But please don't start opening the 'bubley' yet, super tuesday is coming and the both of them have different stategies to win, SC is not a microcosm of how the country is, the racial demographics are much different in each of the states on this tuesday coming up.
Now that they each have two wins under their belts can we go back to arguing points instead of name calling, just a wish and the possibility that we can stop this silliness, I have been caught up too in the emotional nature of politics, it always happens, but i must say that I blame the media more than anything, they love this kind of stuff, just blaming politicans and Washington misses the point that the information providers are just at fault.
GOOOOOO DEMS, another thing, if Senator Clinton gets the nomination and you independets sit this out you will give us another republican, do you really want to be blamed again for that?

OBAMA WON BECAUSE HE IS RUNNING AGAINST THE CLINTONS, THE MOST DESPISED PEOPLE ON EARTH, THE DEMS NOW SEE WHAT THE REPUBS HAVE SEEN WITH THEM, OBAMA IS NOT HATED, THE CLINTONS ARE

The shameless Clintons may have succeeded in painting Obama as the 'black candidate' to cripple him in predominately white states,but they may also have sealed their fate by elevating John Edwards as the viable alternative to the shameless Clintons. John Edwards vision of change is simular to that of Obama and his character is above reproach unlike that of both the Clintons...take the ball and run with it John, work with Obama to end the Clinton dynasty.

If Obama won in NV, as some have suggested, why didn't he give a victory speech?

I'm female, white, liberal (independent) and the same age as hillary (60) if she gets the dem nom I WILL VOTE REPUBLICAN AGAINST HER not green as I usually do. I can't see her changing anything.  She may a woman but she's too much of a 'Good Ole Boy Washington insider' for me to even consider her.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):