First thoughts: Mr. Front-runner

Posted: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:13 AM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: First Thoughts

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, and Domenico Montanaro
*** The statistical front-runner: No matter how one slices the election results from last night, there's no denying that Obama is the statistical front-runner. He's got a 100-plus pledged delegate lead and even has the lead if you factor in superdelegates. Here's our math: The NBC News election unit hard count stands at 1078 to 969. If you factor in the unallocated pledged delegates, our estimate rises to approximately 1128 to 1009 in Obama's favor (margin of error +/- 5 delegates). Toss in the superdelegates and Obama's lead is 1306 to 1270 (again +/- 5 delegates). What does this mean? For Clinton to overtake Obama for the pledged delegate lead -- which we think is the single most important statistic for the superdelegates to decide their vote -- she'll have to win 55% of the remaining delegates. Assuming next week goes Obama's way in Wisconsin and Hawaii, that percentage rises to 57%. Toss in likely Obama victories in Vermont, Wyoming, Mississippi, Oregon, Montana, and South Dakota, then Clinton's percentage need tops 60% of the remaining delegates available. And this is simply for her to regain the pledged delegate lead…

VIDEO: NBC Political Director Chuck Todd offers his first read on Barack Obama taking a clear lead in the Democratic delegate count.

*** Staying on the statistical front: Check out these cumulative vote totals for primaries and caucuses to date:
States Awarding Delegates
                    Total Vote      %
Obama         9,373,334       50%
Clinton          8,674,779       46%
Others          726,095         4%

With Florida
                    Total Vote         %
Obama         9,942,375        49%
Clinton          9,531,987        46%
Others          984,236         4%

With Florida and Michigan
                     Total Vote         %
Obama         9,942,375        47%
Clinton          9,860,138        47%
Others        1,249,922         6%

*** Follow the leader: So no matter how you slice the total popular vote, Obama is the leader. He's at 50% in states that have awarded delegates; he's at 49% and leads Clinton by 3 points in states where both their names were on the ballot, and his lead is big enough that he leads even when you factor in Michigan where Obama's name wasn't on the ballot. Why does this popular vote total matter? Because it's yet another important talking point when wooing superdelegates. How many supers will be comfortable voting against the candidate who's leading in the pledged delegate count and the total vote count?

*** So now what? This Democratic race has two finish lines. One could be as early as March 4. An Obama victory in either of the big states would probably put the pledged delegate count out of reach for Clinton and would allow Obama to disprove the idea that he either can't win Latinos or blue-collar white Democrats. Should Clinton sweep those big March 4 states, the race goes on to the end and becomes a rhetorical fight over stats and polls. The stats being the ones we've cited above (the pledged delegate count and the national vote totals), as well as the Democratic candidates' standing against John McCain in the national polls. But one other thing to ponder: No one ever writes off a Clinton. How do we know? If Clinton were in the position Obama's in right now, how many folks would be writing Obama's obit?

*** The rhetorical front-runners: Watching all three post-Chesapeake Tuesday speeches last night, one could sense the two candidates who believed they were headed to the general election. Obama and McCain spoke back-to-back, and it was as close to a debate as two have had. Obama's speech was laced with more McCain references than any of his speeches to date. He regularly referred to "Bush-McCain" ideas. In response, McCain had some biting shots at Obama; McCain wordsmith Mark Salter, after all, knows how to take a poke at an opponent.

***

Hope vs. platitudes: Some choice McCain excerpts last night at Obama: "Hope, my friends, is a powerful thing. I can attest to that better than many, for I have seen men's hopes tested in hard and cruel ways that few will ever experience... To encourage a country with only rhetoric rather than sound and proven ideas that trust in the strength and courage of free people is not a promise of hope. It is a platitude… I do not seek the presidency on the presumption that I am blessed with such personal greatness that history has anointed me to save my country in its hour of need. I seek the presidency with the humility of a man who cannot forget that my country saved me." That last line was probably the most pointed. Of course, the Obama folks will point to the dramatic generational contrast that's being set up. McCain's backdrop last night? A couple of retiring and aging pols, joined by a crowd of 250. Obama's backdrop? Seventeen-thousand screaming believers of all ages, ethnicities, and backgrounds.

*** Dodge, duck, dip, dive, and dodge: As for McCain, he dodged a bullet in Virginia. Obama almost propelled Huckabee to an upset victory in the Old Dominion. How? Because Obama drew a bunch of independents and even a chunk of moderate Republicans, making the Virginia GOP electorate a lot more conservative than it was eight years ago. But McCain survived, and now the calendar gets a lot tougher for Huckabee. Wisconsin has similar rules as Virginia, meaning McCain could face a far more conservative electorate because of Obama's appeal to independents and Republicans, but the evangelical base in Wisconsin is not nearly as large as it is in Virginia. The numbers suggest McCain should officially secure the GOP nod on March 4.

*** Edwards watch: Did anyone else find this quote in today’s New York Times a bit interesting? "You can't make a judgment until Ohio and Texas," said Jonathan Prince, who was a senior adviser to John Edwards of North Carolina, who quit the race two weeks ago. "In this campaign, every time he has surged ahead, voters take a pause. If momentum keeps slamming into a wall, than you do have to come down to the numbers." Is this what Edwards is thinking about in an eventual endorsement?

*** Is it still 2006? Two incumbent members of Congress from Maryland -- Al Wynn (D) and Wayne Gilchrest (R) -- lost their primaries last night.

*** On the trail: Clinton is in South Texas, where she campaigns in McAllen (which, for the reporters covering her there, has the best Tex-Mex in the world), Robstown (home of famous Joe Cotton’s BBQ), and San Antonio; McCain is in DC, where he holds a media avail with GOP members of Congress and later raises money; and Obama is in Wisconsin, where he stumps in Janesville, Waukesha, and Racine.

Countdown to Hawaii and Wisconsin: 6 days
Countdown to the MSNBC debate in Ohio: 13
Countdown to Ohio and Texas: 20 days
Countdown to Election Day 2008: 265 days
Countdown to Inauguration Day 2009: 342 days

Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639 to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

I get the feeling that Hillary’s supporters still want to run the campaign we thought we were going to be running a year ago. We have to deal with the electorate that is actually out there today. Hillary’s self-portrayal as the seasoned political combat veteran is way off key this cycle. Most people have lost interest in fighting. Americans are waking up to the fact that we’re facing serious problems on many fronts, and we can’t get anywhere with the nation split down the middle.

The Clinton presidency, with the impeachment mess and subsequent election mess exemplifies the very worst of the Red/Blue divide for many voters. There’s no way for Hillary to escape that legacy, and in fact she’s implicitly running on it with her experience argument. Again, tone deaf. Where the kind of change Barack is talking about involves reaching across the divide to find common ground and actually get something done, to Hillary it apparently means little more than a gender change and more efficient management.

Hillary just isn’t the right candidate for this election cycle. It happens to politicians all the time, regardless of gender. The ceiling she’s hitting here is her 49% negative approval rating. For those of you who may be sincerely worried about Barack’s ability to do the job on day one, you can rest easy. This guy is more than up to the job.

We need to seize the moment. Hold your nose if you must. I’ve done it many times and it’s really not as hard as it might seem right now. If we all get on board we can roll this thing like a tidal wave. I’ve been on the receiving end of political tsunamis in the past and I’d like to see what it’s like to win a landslide for a change.

jaycee, Ventura, California (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:22 AM)

Texas is Hillary country ya'all!!

Dan Conners, Crawford TX (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:23 AM)

The Clintons have taken on the Republican Attack Machine….

AND FAILED EVERY TIME.

Healthcare Reform: A Massive Failure handing Congress to the Republicans for 14 years

Gay Rights: Bill Clinton caved and gave into the bigoted and hateful don’t ask don’t tell.

Genocide: Rwanda was a disgusting failure as the Clintons pandered to the Republicans afraid to make a mistake.

Iraq: Hillary Clinton caved into the Republican Drum beat to invade, and insane idea, she voted for it under political pressure to look tough. Perhaps a million people have died, been injured, or displaced.

Iran: See above, perhaps a million more might be afected

Bankruptcy: Hillary caved to the Corporate interest, although she was “glad the bill failed” she voted for it under political pressure from the right.

Time and time again, the Clintons are faced with Republican Political Pressure and they fail to stand up for what they claim to believe. Hillary has no moral courage, the defining quality that separates a leader from a politician.

Please step aside Mrs. Clinton, you are dividing and destroying a great Democratic Party.

adam/NYC (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:25 AM)

It was a great night for Senator Obama. David Axelrod may have done the impossible - run an almost perfect campaign thus far. Cheers to him. As well as to Senator Obama; he's an excellent, excellent candidate. It would be a shame if he were to lose and have to exit the national stage. Our country needs an uplifting message after all we've been through these last 8 years.

I wonder how Roger Clemens will do today.

Pat, Boston, MA (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:25 AM)

So, where are all the people that sited Hillary being way up in the national polls in the last couple of months? You guys/gals have anything more to add to those comments?

Ed Willers, Bronx NY (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:27 AM)

Nice Dodgeball reference boys.

Casey, Raymond, Maine (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:29 AM)

Buckle your seatbelt Senator Obama. It is about to get mean and nasty. The Clinton's have nothing to lose by going negative and no one does personal destruction politics better.

Stacy, Virginia (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:30 AM)

Didn't Hillary back in December say "This is the fun part." of the campaign? It doesn't look like she's having much fun though. Was she wrong?

Steve Myers, Lakeland FL (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:31 AM)

Any way you look at this media out and others have pumped obama up to where he is today. Anyway you look at it MI and FL will count Michigan has allocated their delegats according to the percentage of the vote, obama took his name off the ballot on his own free will, and he advertised in FL running ads on CNN & MSNBC and held fundraisers he still got stomped, TX, OH, PA and Super Delegates. How many rightwingers voted for Obama yesterday, so he would win then lose the General? http://robertbluey.com/blog/2008/02/12/why-i-voted-for-obama/
Super Delegates are going to decide this and if they care about this country they will vote for Hillary, obamas wins were known last night, however influenced by rightwingers, but his overall wins aren't going to win the general, and the racial divide in several states wont win the general.

The media needs to start doing their jobs in scrutinizing obamas rezko, exelon, lobbyist connections, his lies in advertisement claiming he has universal healthcare when he leaves out 15 mill. people, his lies and distortion of Hillarys record. DO your job MSNBC.

sarah, fountain, colorado (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:32 AM)

Obama does not need Edward endorsement if he is not ready to stand with him in tough time. What good does Edward endorsement means when he is hedging is bet? If he is a man of Principle, he should come out and endorse now.

The more he waits, the more irrelevant he becomes in this election. Obama is the man to beat at the moment and he has a huge base that is ready to stand with him come rain and sunshine. Edward indecision pretty much shows he doesn’t preach what he believes. If he is a man of Principle, he should come out now or forever remain silence

Bee (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:33 AM)

The Edwards endorsement will be a day late and a dollar short for Clinton, and not necessary for Obama. Edwards has almost become irrelevant. I remain a Hillary clinton supporter, and I just like Joe Scarborough's mom feels very sorry for her. ( he stated this morning on Morning Joe.

Lynette, NYC (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:34 AM)

JohnnyU, WA State (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:34 AM)

go obama

the truth (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:35 AM)

Sure Obama is on a roll now. His speaking ability is above par. But, what is his real message? CHANGE!! How can he keep that spin when he has the Kennedy factor behind him? Is not that old Washington? Give me a break. Start now, Mr. Obama and state what your exact "change" consists of. Start the debates now. A sign and speech does not cut it for me.

Cheri M Danbury WI (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:38 AM)

FALSE HOPE vs REAL PLATITUDES = THE CHOICE BETWEEN OMABARAMA vs MICKEE CANE. I WILL NOT VOTE FOR PRESIDENT FOR THE 1ST TIME IN MY LIFE.HOW PATHETIC HAS AMERICA BECOME. THE HISTORIC MESS BUSH INC HAVE LEFT US REQUIRES SOMEONE MORE QUALIFIED THAN THESE 2 SELF ABSORBED BAD ACTORS TO LEAD.

PM, Miami, FL (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:42 AM)

Chuck Todd- I agreed with your analysis last evening, and again this morning. Please do a total of all votes for DEM candidates vs. GOP candidates in jointly contested primaries and caucuses. I think the margin is nearly 2 to 1 DEM over GOP. I cannot believe these numbers will regress in the general election. I believe Senator Obama's total numbers will stay nearly the same against Senator McCain. I do think Senator Clinton's numbers will drop significantly against Senator McCain if she makes it that far (which doesn't look likely right now). If I am a DEM candiates for any office, federal, state or local, I want to be on Senator Obama's coattails; not HRC's. This should be a very convincing argument for super delegates to vote for Senator Obama.

On another note of interest to me, isn't it great that 2 of the biggest figures in the U.S. today are African-American...Tiger Woods and Barack Obama. And both have support across the widest spectrum in the land.

Steve, San Diego (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:42 AM)

I think this analysis is a little kind to Clinton. Considering the likelihood in Texas, due to the screwy semi-primary/semi-caucus system in place, that Obama and Clinton evenly split the state's delegates, it would mean Clinton would have to win an absolute overwhelming majority of votes in Ohio - and that's not going to happen.

And with regard to Edwards: Unless he thinks his endorsement is weighty enough to swing a significant number of voters (which it's not), a Clinton endorsement at this point is tantamount to hopping on a sinking ship. I don't think that's going to happen.

Ted, St. Louis, MO (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:42 AM)

MSNBC is exactly right -- superdelegates are much more focused on winning and electability than voters. They are likely to run like rats from a sinking ship if they see Obama or Clinton with a clear lead in regular delegates.

And that seems likely to happen. Perceived momentum after a five-state sweep is just as good as the real thing, in fact, it likely was responsible for Obama's wide margins in the three Potomac primaries. An eight-state sweep has turned any perceived momentum into the real thing.
http://nationalscold.blogspot.com

Gustavo Herrera, Baltimore MD (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:44 AM)

Please stop labeling one candidate the front runner on the Democratic side. This is more like watching a basketball game where the lead keeps changing hands.

Obama is still the challenger and if he is to win, he must deliver the a knock out blow to the Clinton machine.

The Clintons are still a very formidable candidate who has proven time & time again that they can come back.

Stay tuned....

Ivan, Washington, DC (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:44 AM)

Congrats to yesterday's winners on both sides of the aisle and to the voters as well. For more than the candidates, those who participate in the voting process are the days true winners.

Phred, NH (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:45 AM)

CHANGE at ANY COST?? ROLL THE DICE AMERICA. HOW SAD.

PM (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:45 AM)

The Obama campaign should hammer home to working class Democrats in the remaining primaries that Hillary Clinton speaks to their economic plight while refusing to release her income tax returns.

Ariel,Jupiter Florida (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:48 AM)

I'm a 59 year old professional woman in Columbia MO... with a 19 year old son. Obama's life/work experience in hands-on work for the poor and unemployed, and in policy-making positions in government in IL and DC, exceed Hillary's. She was a corporate lawyer at Rose Law Firm (defending major corporations against ordinary citizens) in AK from 1977 to 1994 -- 15 years of that "35 years of experience" she repeats ad infinitum. She worked on the Children's Defense Fund (how? That's never spelled out.), yet the Edelman's who built the CDF abhor the impacts of how Bill executed Welfare Reform to the detriment and additional misery of the poor; especially children. In this sense, if those working directly with the poor feel that the way Welfare Reform was done was brutal against the poor, then what weight does Hillary's "work" in that regard ultimately carry? Since 1994, she's was a First Lady without policy-making roles except for the failed though valiant attempt to secure health care reform. She wrote a book about pets of the White House. Ok, now it's around 2000 and she serves as a Senator. That, according to even elementary school math, is about 8-10 years of valid job experience that could prepare someone for the Presidency...and only 8 years of it was policy-making. We're being duped by repitition of an untruth. I worked in Advertising for 20 years, where we were taught and saw everyday that "repitition works." In time, people believe what they hear if it isn't challenged often and well. That's what the media isn't doing, sorry to say... Our massive media outlets do not simply put her real-life resume on the screen to show the facts. So it's overwhelming and wonderful to see that Obama, with his real-life experience for the people and in policy-making and opposition to the war
is leading the Democratic contest... and is in a great position to win the Presidency, and put his vast experience and good judgement to work for all of us... from Day One!

Joy F., Columbia, MO (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:50 AM)

Cheri M, if you are talking about Ted Kennedy then the "old Washington" factor is not even close to an issue. Ted is just a surrogate who's supporting Obama, and it's easy to keep the change spin -- I can write it myself: "even elements of the old Washington establishment have come to realize the time for CHANGE has come."

If you are talking about Obama evoking JFK from decades ago, again it's not about "old" Washington, it's comparing this new guy to another new, unproven senator who was younger than the opposition and ran on hope and inspiration.

One last point on the Edwards endorsement: MSNBC seems off here. His endorsement ONLY matters in the Democratic primary, as his supporters are torn between Clinton and Obama. If MSNBC's suggestion (that he won't endorse till it's clear who has a numbers advantage) is true, then he'll effectively waste his endorsement, using it past the expiration date. Of course he'll support whoever the Dem nominee is in the general election.
http://nationalscold.blogspot.com

Gustavo Herrera, Baltimore MD (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:51 AM)

Sarah from CO---that's ONE guy---ONLY one..and if you read the blog carefully you come away with the feeling that this republican blogger sort of thinks deep down that Obama does have a chance to unite the country like no other. I'm not so sure you're proving your point by citing this blog. I urge you to please do your research---The Chicago Tribune has researched this Rezko thing thoroughly..there's nothing there. Let's have a debate about the issues instead of trying to tear down one of our democratic candidates, OK?

Lewis, Cincinnati, Ohio (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:51 AM)

I am a single white working class woman who lives in Upstate NY. I am not a fan of Hillary, but I will not count her out until after TX & OH. I just hope that TX & OH keep it close for Obama. He will make a great President of the United States of America.

L- Utica NY (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:52 AM)

Do the math.

This First Read article is the best analysis I have seen. The numbers advantage for Obama is growing to the point where this race could be over as early as March 4th barring landslide victories for Clinton on that date.

The First Read article also correctly points out that popular vote and pledged delegates will decide this election. For any pundits or the Clinton campaign to suggest that Superdelegates will reverse the decision of the voters is pure nonsense ... such an occurrence would jeopardize the Democrats chances against McCain and could set back the Democratic party for a generation.

That is also true for seating the MI and FL delegation on the basis of the uncontested voting results. Seating them after a new caucus or on a proportional basis according to the national vote may be possible. I don't always agree with Sharpton, but his comments about this issue ring true.

Robert Holmen, Burtrum, MN (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:59 AM)

Gustavo - I think a lot of super delegates will be primarily concerned with holding onto the two houses of Congress. I'm guessing many have already made the observation that would be easier with Obama at the top of the ticket, but just haven't announced their preference until they're sure Clinton is beat.

Undoubtedly more of them have longer standing ties to the Clintons than to Obama. This is the only thing keeping her going right now. Think of it this way - given that institutional advantage the Clintons bring into the super delegate race, its amazing so many haven't voiced their preferences, and among those who have, its amazing Clinton only holds an advantage of 90.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:00 AM)

People will eventually find out that Obama is empty rhetoric - no one knows anything about what he has accomplished! His health care plan is right wing, he has strong ties to the criminal slumlandlord Rezko!

Hillary will win!!!

Martin (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:02 AM)

jaycee, ventura, ca....
Just to let you know; I am a lifelong Democrat and I would not vote for Barrack Obama if he were running for DOG CATCHER.
If he gets the nomination, I'll vote against him any way I can. There are local movments already under way to organize McCain Democrats. If the current primary trend continues, I'll be working with them to encourage a cross-over vote.
I'll "hold my nose" alright.
But, when I do it I'll be pulling the lever for John McCain.
In the end, Obama will LOSE the general election. I promise you.

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:03 AM)

Sarah Fountain, Colorado

The DNC tried to play "Hardball" with FL and MI. Well the two states did not capitulate. Edwards and Obama took their names of the ballot in MI because of the DNC's ruling

Pertaining to your remark about campaigning in FL.
As a Floridian let me enlighten you

Hillary Clinton DID campaign in FL. prior to the election

Here is the account from the Sun Sentinel newspaper

Hillary Clinton DID campaign in FL. on Sunday at the Lucky Strike Lanes, a bowling alley on South Beach. She spoke for 30 minutes at the Lucky Strike and stood outside the bowling alley holding a homemade sign that read in part "We want a president that can keep a promise." She then headed to a developer's house for a second fundraiser. End of SS article. Above was on 1/27/2008. Primary was on 1/29/2008

So much for Democrats not campaigning in FL. So it must depend on what the "Definition of IS (Campaigning) IS.
The Clinton's make up their own rules and definitions. Hillary pretends to abide by the DNC's decision but changes the rules to suit herself in the middle of the game.

Edwards and Obama abided by the DNC's request to their detriment.

What would have been the war cry from the Clinton campaign if Obama had won FL and wanted the delegates seated.

Lest you should ask I am an Independent and could not vote in the FL. primary because it is a closed primary and in addition I have not decided who I will vote for in the general election

Independent Voter, Stuart, FL. (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:03 AM)

Thank you Obama! At last the Republicans will have a chance to win the General election. Oh, how the young and progressive elite can't see beyond their own self worship.

Florida Republican (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:04 AM)

Martin (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:05 AM)

This is, BY FAR, the most exciting election of my 40 + years on this planet! I love the history of Obama versus Hillary. It won't be over until March 4th or later and I will be watching straight through. I'm looking forward to seeing how both campaigns bring their economic policies to Cheesehead and Buckeye country! And, I personally love seeing the Republicans implode. McCain... really?

hbbean, Albuquerque, NM (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:06 AM)

I support Obama, but the Clinton strategy has me very confused. She must be short of money and may not have the organization I thought she and Wild Bill had. If Obama wins in WI and HI, the whispers from her 'supporters' will increase and some of her marginal supporters will pull away. The money flow will also slow.

If Billary goes negative, it will come back to hurt her more than Obama.

In the meantime, Obama is going to get more specific in his positions and will more clearly define the differences between him and Billary. He is also going to be much harder nosed about her vote on the War and is going to link Billary to McCain. But his style and approach will not come off as going negative.

Wild Bill is in a very tough position. The SC mess he created has quieted him down and left him little room to move. I also suspect, his calls to Super Delegates are not being returned at the pace they were a few weeks ago.

Billary is in trouble.Her 49% negatives are coming back to to bite her - big time.

Paul McL, Winston-Salem, NC (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:08 AM)

I find it very interesting that Obama is attracting moderate Republicans. Does it occur to anyone else that there may be a method to their madness? The Republicans would prefer to face Obama in the general election.....so, cross over in the primary and vote for him to insure his nomination. And then clobber him come November. Sounds like a plausible plan to me.

Carol - Ohio (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:08 AM)

All of the people asking what Barack Obama is going to change? Open your eyes! He's -already- changed the game! You have record breaking fundraising happening all over the place, Republicans and independents swooning over a democrat, young people -actually- voting, people -actually- realizing that Washington doesn't have to be a big sessepool... he's got Hillary scared to death of going negative and he's got her fundraisers walking on eggshells.

Wanna know what he's going to change? Start listening to what he says! Your lack of education on the subject is growing tired. Nobody likes a broken record, especially when it's a bad track.

Ethics reform, iraq, governmental transparency, energy reform, health care, foreign policy, diplomacy, etc etc the list goes on and on. You Clintonites harp that he's all talk, and then turn around and criticize his ideas in the very next sentence. Grow up.

Ron, TX (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:10 AM)

I think it's very interesting how people don't seem to quite yet understand how much of a loser Hillary Clinton is.
She has repeatedly tried to dismiss Obama in every way she can. When the elections first started, she tried to smother him with the "no experience" stamp. That didn't worked out too well. She and her husband unfairly, very unfairly, tried to portray him as a minority candidate who would not be accepted nationwide. They even compared him to Jesse Jackson (unbelievable), despite his vigorous attempts to make his campaign about everything but race. Remember Hillary's smirk and claims that the rest of the country "including American Samoa" would be votin on Super Tuesday? It's kinda blown up in her face now, hasn't it? Most of those places have indisputedly proclaimed Obama their candidate. If it wasn't for California she would be out of this. If it wasn't for the Democratic Party's system of voting, she would be virtually non-existant.
Finally, with regards to this whole Michigan and Florida thing, I have to ask. Are the people who talk about those states crazy? The Democratic Party made an AGREEMENT to punish those states for moving up their elections. Obama and Edwards were both not on the ballot in Michigan. They were told not to campaign in Florida because it would not count. Talk about changing the rules. Talk about picking up a basketball in an NBA game and running all the way to the hoop to dunk it without even bouncing the ball. It's ludicrous.
By the way, how many times has Hillary Clinton changed her slogan or just basically copied Obama? First she had the experience to take back Washington, then she became the agent for change. Ridiculous. I am however quite shocked and in awe, quite frankly, that she's even still in the race.

Tim, Baltimore, MD (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:11 AM)

platitude: a flat, dull remark. McCain calling elements of Barack's speech platitudes?! Hilarious. I almost fell off the sofa when he said that. Hillary...is it my imagination or is she now copying Barack's articulate hand movements? Well, its obvious who is the natural leader, and who the wannabes are.

JohnnyU, WA State

Are they even platitudes? What Obama is preaching sounds more like what those corporate consultants do at those goofy team building seminars. There is really not much "there, there" for Obama.

Diane Ho, Canton OH (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:11 AM)

Jaycee, Ventura CA

I log on every day to read the comments you have written. As always I find them insightful and well written. Please keep up the good work

Independent Voter, Stuart, FL. (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:12 AM)

I agree with the poster who said that the media has been hyping Obama and skating on "dishing" anything Clinton. (The most egregious remark put the reporter off the air). So, yes, MSNBC, do your job. I think Obama would be great next cycle, but now, to me he's "all flash and no photo".

Susan, Las Vegas NV (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:13 AM)

I prefer to put it this way: voters asking for change in Washington and in the way we conduct foreign policy are the front-runners, and voters asking for experience but the same politics are next to the front runners. The fact that over 95% of voters last night voted for Hillary on the basis of change tells me that Americans even don't know what "change" really means. They don't recognize that many of their representatives in Cognress have more years in politics than the Clintons, yet they are the ones engaging in fierce partisan wars.
I assume Hillary's "experience voters" have voted for Bush before and will probably vote for McCain since he has the long experience in policymaking than her. But remember Obam has more legislative experience than Hillry.

Ron Allen (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:14 AM)

OMG!!

Hope VS Platitudes,

Yes I think John McCain summed it up nicely.... It's almost exactly what millions of us are thinking....

As to the screaming fans, again, Rock Stars types, don't impress me, I like music too, I even play guitar, but... and again there are millions of us

In a rare moment of weakness Tucker Carlson, who has had an acid tongued critique of Hillary Clinton since the beginning of the campaign. While he was talking to Chris Matthews, last night Carlson said, "we need to find out who Obama is, we don't know this guy."

This is in direct contrast to Tucker Carlson's normal praise of Obama. For the last couple of months Tucker's praise for Obama has been so high, you'd have thought they were sleeping together. But for a moment Tucker was honest, unusual for msnbc, but it happens. Seems he has been caught up in the hype too....

Well may the best man win, but I'll take substance over rhetoric any day. Even if it's John McCain. Obama needs to start talking details, he already has all the "Blind Lemmings." of whom rhetoric means everything and deeds means nothing. But the Lemmings won't get him elected. He's going to need people like me, so he can "change" his talk and start talking specifics....

Unless of course he chooses to lead himself and his Lemmings over the cliff....

Anti Reaganess Big Talkers, Columbus Georgia. (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:14 AM)

I am really excited about the uplifiting campaign that Senator Obama has run. He is truly reaping what he has sown.

Obama '08

Nashville_fan (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:14 AM)

Put a fork in Hillary....she's done! It is quickly becoming mathematically impossible for her to continue,....and she's NOT going to even win Ohio,...she'll carry Texas, but not by the landslide numbers that are necessary....she'll win texas by about 55-45 and that's not enough....she's going to lose Ohio and maybe by alot and as far as Pennsylvania that's going obama's way at this point and even if it turns for hillary come election day 4/29, she'll barely pull it out...like 52-48 and that's just not enough....obama wins landslide victories in every other state from here on out

the sad part is that obama no longer needs to address direct questions about the issues he can coast from here on out...he doesn't even have to address hillary anymore he can start going after mccainn that's how bad it is for hillary.....and as far as the tuff questions during the ohio debate?? there won't be any for obama because MSNBC is running the debate and they are still spending 58 minutes of every hour fondling his genitils so they're certainly not going to ask him any tuff questions;.. in fact they'll go one step further and see to it that hillary doesn't get the opportunity to answer any good issue type questions as every question will be geared toward making her defend herself on an alleged alegation,...and thats really not how a debate is supposed to work but after all this is MSNBC and its there time to shine,...and gloat that they were able to predict the winner and they were able to influence decisions through media coverages...the love-in during last nite's returns was sickening...they were like little girls giggling in the schoolyard over a box of chocolates.....UGHH!!!

justanotherdummycrat (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:14 AM)

THe contrast with Obama and McCain came home to me last night.....my husband stated he'd stick with McCain over Obama, but when he saw the "crowd" with McCain's speech last night, contrasting with Obama's speech and his crowd, he was stripped of words. I'm tellin you ladies and gentlemen, this is it. Are you to choose a new chapter, a new leader, a new outlook, a new way? Or are we to stick to a choice that is palatable but not optimum, safe but not new, and familiar but not all inclusive? OBAMA '08.

Sherri, Charleston WV (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:16 AM)

If you are confused as to what Mr. Obama stands for, Cheri, try directing your AOL browser to his website located here: http://www.barackobama.com/issues/

Quite frankly, it really doesn't matter what his position is or what his goals are, as he won't be legislating as President. If you want a President that the world respects as a leader, that will restore our rights and liberties (and continue to add to those who may still not be equal), and that will not abuse the Executive office on senseless war, I believe Mr. Obama is the best choice.

Kevin, Wash, DC (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:16 AM)

one of the major themes of the Clinton campaign has been that the New York Senator is "battle-tested" and better prepared to take on McCain and the right wing attacks. But that has been turned on its head by the fact that a junior Senator from Illinois has ended up putting the Clinton campaign on the ropes. It's hard to argue that you can demolish John McCain when you can't decisively defeat an opponent who came from nowhere, with no national name recognition, in your own party's primary. That is just common sense.

Eyong,lawrenceville,GA (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:17 AM)

Congratulations to Barack Obama! Our nation has sorely needed his message of hope for a long time. This is democracy at its finest, and I applaud the voters in this country who have come out in the rain, sleet, snow or whatever to exercise their right to vote. We are the real winners in this election. We all know that no one person can change the problems we face that seem insurmountable alone. "We The People" united have the ability and the power to attack our problems, to change and solve them. We have brilliant minds within our nation; economists, ecologists, administators, educators etc., to come up with workable plans for change. It's time we laid the groundwork for the future of our children and grandchildren. We need to pass the baton of knowledge while we can and are still alive. We need to think beyond today, because by 2050 most of us will gone. The world is watching us, and they're on the edge of their seats. Let's follow the ray of hope we've been given.

Bonnie Crawford (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:17 AM)

I am sure the corporate owned media is gleeful this morning, as their 24/7 months long HIT JOB on Hillary Clinton is working. I have never witnessed such a blatant, shameless attack machine on a Presidential candidate. Hillary Clinton is clearly the most qualified candidate in the race of any party. The Dems are lucky to have her and foolish if they squander their best chance for victory in November. Rock on Hillary, you are coming to Ohio and OHIO LOVES HILLARY!!!!

John and Jen (Sent Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:17 AM)

Next >>

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

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

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=661146