First thoughts: Michigan re-vote mo'

Posted: Friday, March 14, 2008 9:07 AM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: First Thoughts

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, and Domenico Montanaro
*** 'So You're Tellin' Me There's A Chance…': While the idea of a Florida re-vote seems to be fading after yesterday, there’s a lot of momentum in Michigan for a June 3 re-vote, according to informed sources in the state. There are a couple of hurdles, including who pays for the primary. The state would pass a law that would appropriate the money to run this special primary election; not a mail-in, but a full bore in-person 100% open primary. The state, in turn, would be reimbursed by the Democratic Party or potentially other entities or even seeing if it's possible for donors to contribute to the state directly. Everyone seems to be on board in the state Democratic world of Michigan, including the governor, the Dingells, Carl Levin, the Kilpatricks and the UAW. For those that follow Michigan Democratic politics closely, you'll know getting all those folks in agreement isn't easy. The only thing that could stop this primary logistically is if the state party is told -- legally -- they can't raise the large soft money contributions they would need to raise in order to come up with the $10-12 million.

*** Terms for a settlement? The momentum for a revote in Michigan might actually expedite the negotiations between Clinton and Obama on what to do with Florida and Michigan delegates. There are some competing proposals out there. Obama's camp isn't interested in extending the campaign primary schedule, and Clinton's camp isn't interested in losing its argument that it already won Michigan and Florida. So some seating of a, say, 52-48 split on delegates with supers voting how they want, could be more possible as this revote stuff makes its way through the Michigan legislature. So the most interesting thing to could come out of this Michigan re-vote momentum is that negotiations for seating these delegates gets more serious.

*** The speaker speaks: For the second time in the past week, Nancy Pelosi yesterday shot down the idea of a Clinton-Obama or Obama-Clinton “dream ticket.” "Take it from me, that won't be the ticket," she said, per NBC's Mike Viqueira. If this isn’t yet another sign that Pelosi is pretty much in Obama’s corner -- knocking down the idea that you can still get Obama if you vote Clinton -- we don’t know what is. Most of her House kitchen cabinet is behind Obama, and this just seems like another signal. No doubt the Clinton folks know this, which means it could make Pelosi's hope of playing elder stateswoman who can settle this at the end a bit harder.

*** Mother's Day: As disciples of presidential historian James David Barber will tell you, some of the greatest influences on modern American presidents have been their mothers. After reading today’s front-page New York Times profile of Obama’s late mother, we are pretty sure of this: If Obama goes on to win the White House, Ann Dunham Soetoro -- who was born in Kansas, moved to Hawaii, married a man from African, then married a man from Indonesia, and became an anthropologist -- could very well be the most fascinating presidential mother in this country’s history.

*** Just when you thought you were out…: ...Iowa pulls you right back in. Under the radar, but coming up on Saturday are the Iowa county conventions, where delegates actually RE-caucus -- viability, threshold and all. Why does this matter? All those Edwards delegates (14 in total). Remember, Edwards finished second with 30% of the vote or 4,046 (out of 13,485) delegates to the county conventions. Where will they go? Do they go to Obama because of Clinton’s dissing of caucuses since Iowa? Do they go to Clinton? Or do these fiercely loyal delegates stick to Edwards, so they can wield more influence at the state convention? In a race for delegates, this normally mundane exercise is worth watching this weekend…

*** Clinton's TOO strong in Pennsylvania? If Clinton scores the endorsements that are rumored in Pittsburgh today, it will underscore the strength she has in this state. The establishment in Pennsylvania is not split at all. It's 95% behind Clinton, making a victory in the state all but assured this far out. And yet, is it good for Clinton to be this strong in the state this early? Will it spook Obama out of the state? Will it spook the media where they won't value a Clinton victory as much as they did in Ohio? Clinton is locking down this state early; Obama's headed to Indiana this weekend. The Pennsylvania race will inevitably close, but it does seem Clinton has a distinct advantage. She just doesn't want to get too far ahead, devaluing a potential victory.

*** On the trail: Clinton stumps in Pittsburgh (where she may lock up more key endorsements); McCain holds a media avail and town hall in Springfield, PA before heading to Chicago to raise money; and Obama is down in Chicago.

Countdown to Pennsylvania: 39 days
Countdown to North Carolina, Indiana: 53 days
Countdown to Election Day 2008: 235 days
Countdown to Inauguration Day 2009: 312 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

Superdelegates, you do know the rock has been lifted and we can all see you now, right? There’s no more cover to scurry under. You’re out in the broad daylight, and now you have to choose. We’re degrading our own assets out here as we speak, and all so you can put off a decision that will only get tougher the longer you let this divisive and utterly pointless primary fight go on.

Look; at the moment I’m furious with Hillary and think she’s a disloyal, graceless, status quo politician in a pants-suit. But she’s our status quo pol, or at least she was until she grew desperate enough to stab her brother in the back and vouch for McCain. Your inaction allowed this debacle to unfold, and we’re just getting started. By the time she’s emptied the kitchen sink her usefulness to us will have ended along with our chances in the general. Let’s stop the madness. What independent voter in their right mind is going to want to join the Bickersons?

And please, no noble-sounding nonsense about democracy and letting all the voters have a say. That’s great for the general election, but I don’t have to tell the old hands that it always portends disaster when we have to go this deep in the primaries. It means the party is fractured and late in making a decision, which can only spell big trouble. No, it isn’t good for the candidates or the party or the nation or the gutless wonders who told us they were going to be leaders and are now trying to hide behind a flimsy handkerchief of neutrality.

What good is staying neutral for the convention if there aren’t enough pieces left to pick up by then? Why are we wasting all our resources trashing each other? Why are we even discussing re-dos in Florida and Michigan? Let’s just pick a nominee already and then seat their delegations. Get off your sorry butts and take charge of the situation. That’s what leaders do. MOVE!!!!!!!!!!

jaycee, Ventura, California (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:14 AM)

Hey Democratic Leaders.......
OBAMA IS NOT ELECTABLE IN NOVEMBER.
Check the "silent voter"
The "silent voter" can be a democrat,independent,or republican......

TEXAN (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:20 AM)

I just knew Pelosi was behind Obama. She is being a wimp by not coming out for him and putting this three ring circus to an end. As a Leader and a woman she should be so disgusted by HRC that she will use her power and influence to stop this now b/4 it goes to far. And Edwards too needs to come out and support Obama. After all the mud he slung at Clinton during the debates I would think that he would urge his delgates into BO corner. Who knows lets just get this show over.

Kris STL (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:21 AM)

Sorry, Hillary: You've crossed the line
Full story: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2004280786_plunkhaun14.html

By Charles Pluckhahn
Special to The Times

Hillary Clinton, you sure don't make it easy.

Since 2005, I've written $7,100 worth of checks to the person I considered most qualified to be the junior senator from New York and, later, president of the United States. In February, I was elected a Clinton delegate in the neighborhood-level caucuses, and looked forward to trying to be appointed a delegate to the Democratic National Convention.

It would have been my second Democratic Convention. In 1992, as the volunteer press secretary to the Wisconsin delegation, I led a march of happy cheeseheads up Fifth Avenue in Manhattan to the National Republican Women's Club. We stood and chanted slogans at a Republican "truth squad" that had set up camp there. It was great, goofy fun, and the Daily News thought so, too.

I remember well the feeling on the last day of that convention, which nominated your husband and Al Gore. "I think we're actually going to win this election," I told my old friend, who as head of the state delegation had invited me to New York. "I don't know if I'm ready to be on the winning side!"

Oh, what times those were! And given what success your husband produced, and your impressive record in New York, it wasn't exactly hard for me to support you. My sister-in-law, a grocery clerk whom I brought to a fundraiser here in Seattle and who sat and chatted with you, is still in your corner. She'll be crushed when she reads this column.

Sen. Clinton, I can no longer count myself in your ranks. I've decided that, barring some stunning revelation, Barack Obama has earned the Democratic nomination, fair and square. More importantly, I've decided that your campaign's tactics have crossed a line that should never be crossed. I no longer want to be associated with your effort to become the Democratic nominee.

One of your surrogates, Geraldine Ferraro, has said that Obama wouldn't be where he is in the Democratic contest if he were white. When combined with your rejection of Obama's qualifications to be commander in chief, and your husband's disrespect for Obama's effort, I see an ugly undercurrent.

I grew up in white Milwaukee, which was very white indeed. But most of my heroes were black: Martin Luther King Jr., Hank Aaron, Bill Cosby, Ralph Ellison, Miles Davis and John Coltrane. When a kid, the sight of black people being mowed down with water hoses in Alabama made a Democrat out of me before I knew what a Democrat was.

Woe betide the politician, and especially the Democratic politician, who makes a racist appeal, no matter how artfully they think they've constructed it. When George Bush's campaign did it to Michael Dukakis in 1988, I expected it. That's what Republicans do.

When your campaign race-baits and disrespects Barack Obama in 2008, you can count me out. Democrats don't do that. We are better.

I fully realize that political campaigns are rough. The fact that you're a fighter is one of the reasons I've supported you. "Just wait until she goes up against the Republicans," I have told friends. "They are going to regret the day they ever used the B-word on that woman."

You've been attacked in the worst possible ways, and I've very much admired you for the way you've handled those attacks. Lesser people, myself included, would have long since crept away by now. I still consider you qualified to be president, and should you happen to win the Democratic nomination, you'd have my vote in November.

But I don't think it's going to happen that way. Instead, I think Obama might win Pennsylvania. At the end of the day, I think he will emerge with the most popular votes, the most states, and the most pledged delegates. If the so-called superdelegates should then deny him the nomination, you'll have won the most tarnished of prizes.

Sen. Clinton, you still have time to salvage your dignity and your reputation. Geraldine Ferraro's resignation from her fundraising role is a start, but it's only a start. You should fully apologize to Sen. Obama for the stream of insults that has come from your campaign, and then you should step aside. If you do that, then I'll know my money and my time were well spent.Charles Pluckhahn is a former journalist and retired securities analyst who lives in Seattle.

Kaye,NC (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:21 AM)

Obama should do well in Michigan. He polls well with the Muslim demographic which is well represented in the state.

Leon Dunham, Big Rapids MI (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:22 AM)

Great Moments from the Political Jokesters Hall of Fame:
“Mission Accomplished”
“The Insurgency is in its last throes”
“We have destroyed their shovels and driven them back. They’re coming to surrender.”
“They will be burnt. We are going to tackle them." (Two choice references from Baghdad Bob, the former Iraqi Information of Defense. The second came after American missiles had destroyed his office and forced him to hold press conferences in the street.)

And…yesterday’s 2 latest additions courtesy of the Clinton campaign:
1) “It’s all Obama’s fault. He’s just doing this to hurt Hillary.” --Geraldine Ferraro

2) “Look there are different polls explaining different things.”
--Clinton campaign Spinmaster-In-Chief Howard Wolfson attempting to answer a question from a reporter that had just refuted his entire argument. Wolfson had scheduled the March 12 conference call to lay the groundwork that if Obama lost in Pennsylvania, Hillary should be the nominee because Obama “could not win in Pennsylvania.” To bolster the Clinton campaign’s case, he noted that she was “up by 18 points” in a recent survey. The aforementioned reporter then pointed out that an equally recent poll showed Obama BEATING McCain in Pennsylvania while McCain beat Hillary. This led to Wolfson’s comments above as he was seen wriggling nervously in his chair after having been strangled yet again by his own spin.

The Museum Curators (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:24 AM)

She's already devalued a potential victory. She's ahead 20%. After Obama campaigns there, he will close this gap anywhere from 5-10%, as he always does wherever he actually campaigns (hence the problem seating Florida and Michigan as they voted with no campaigning). If he closes it any more than 5-10%, then it is an Obama victory. Closing it only 5-10%, i.e. Obama losing by 10-15%, isn't a big deal. She still can't get the delegates necessary to swing the pledged delegate count her way.

Her big state schtick is absolutely rediculous and disproven by nearly every one of the past 4 general elections. I mean, she's obviously finished unless she pulls some kind of disgusting trick. Ironically, that is the only reason she hasn't been ruled out yet. EVERYONE knows that if its one thing the Clintons can do, it's pull disgusting tricks.

Ron, TX (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:27 AM)

PENNSYLVANIA IS HILLARY COUNTRY! YOU GO GIRL!!! WE LOVE HILLARY!!!

g.eglesias`nepa~ (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:28 AM)

I JUST DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY THE DNC CAN NOT DO THE LIKE THEY DID IN IRAQ.THEY HELD THE SAME KIND OF VOTING HERE IN AMERICA WHERE THE ELECTION WERE HELD OVER IN IRAQ.OPEN VOTING STATIONS,PAPER BALLOTS,DROP BOXS.END OF STORY.

RENEA PLYMOUTH,MI (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:33 AM)

Hey jaycee, why do you post the same cut and paste diatribe everyday? Don't you have something more important to do, like watch Oprah?

Jersey Joe (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:33 AM)

go hillary go
get those delegates from Edwards and knock that only racist running for President off his throne!!!!

loretta,hamilton,oh (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:36 AM)

Pennsylvania matters but so do the forty-nine other states. Its fine that Clinton has strength there but I truly believe that Obama has plenty of supporters there even in spite of the traditional party politics supporting Clinton. Remember he is the "change" candidate. And not all of the demographic groups there favor Clinton. But clearly that is a state she should do well in. I hope he continues to treat the state as "in play" as he has done in so many other states and I hope we can talk about economic issues there as people are suffering there as they are everywhere. Maybe that is a good role for PA to play in terms of both campaigns.

The NY Times article is must reading for Dem supporters who truly seek to understand where Obama is coming from, she is truly an inspirational woman and what a life she had. She seems truly admirable.

I am frustrated so much by Mich. and FLA. How on earth does the DNC retain any credibility through this? I don't think I shoud have to pay for redos in these states as regular people like us didn't break rules and didn't have any influence on the matters prior to this point. But clearly one doesn't want to be on the side of not wanting these votes to count. So someone has to ante up. Clearly full-blown primaries again are the most fair way to go, so I guess that's the way we must go. I do think though that after redos, we'll pretty much be where we are now though. But that's not a good enough reason not to have the redos as you have to let people vote (even if a result seems pre-determined people still need to be given the opportunity, that is the democratic way).

Can you feel Pelosi's frustration, I really have to say I can totally identify with her. That feels interesting. Also interesting as what will happen in Iowa. As a former Edwards supporter (well, still a supporter if you know what I mean), I'm OK with his delegates staying with him. But if they choose between Clinton and Obama, I hope they go more to Obama, because of all the reasons I support him and to denounce Hillary's negative and inconsistent campaign tactics.

Woman for Obama 08

Lisa, New Britain, CT (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:38 AM)

I'm going to have to stop watching Morning Joe if he doesn't stop OPENLY stumping for Hillary Clinton. Clearly, his claim about how "nobody owns him" is patently FALSE.

It's pretty obvious that he is salivating over the prospect of Hillary Clinton's taking the Democratic nomination and ENSURING a McCain Win.

M, CA (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:42 AM)

Real change inspires people!!!

www.barackobama.com

Dante (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:42 AM)

Pennsylvania is not the Democratic Super Bowl that Hillary campaign says it is. After PA there are some nine more primaries totaling "408 elected delegates," the majority of which Obama is expected to win.

P.S. --- Hilliary PA Lie @ 1:

“... no candidate has won the Democratic nomination without winning Pennsylvania since 1972.”

Demonstrably false. Ted Kennedy beat Jimmy Carter in the 1980 Pennsylvania primary, but it was Carter who won the nomination.

E. Held, Sun City, AZ (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:44 AM)

G Eglesias 'nepa in Pennsylvania:
And you love her, why? Because she's has foreign policy experience? Ok, her resume buffing on that front has been proven false the past few days. You love her because of her domestic policy experience? Well, as today's Boston Globe points out, the one thing she points to in domestic policy (SCHIP, the children's vaccine program), is also a lie. She supported it but as today's Boston Globe points out, she was not responsible for the legislation.

It's Time for Voters to Think Instead of voting for "Their Girl" (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:45 AM)

But wait, Chuck... I thought you media types were about how "endorsements don't matter."

PA will be a tight race, Obama may even pull ahead. The kitchen sink will return with full-on bawling, mascara streaming down her face. I wouldn't be surprised if she shows up with a Tayreton fake black eye, claiming she'd "rather fight than" quit.

Jade7243 Hussein (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:46 AM)

I BELIEVE FLORIDA'S VOTES SHOULD STAY AS IS. HILLARY WON. MICH. SHOULD BE DONE OVER EVEN THO I SEE HILLARYS POINT OF VIEW.
I THINK HILLARY WOULD STILL DO WELL IN MICHIGAN.
I THINK THE BLUE COLAR WORKER KNOWS SHE WILL NOT LET THEM DOWN. I THINK SHE MEANS WHAT SHE SAYS. L DON'T LIKE TO BRING RELIGION INTO THE MIX. BUT IT SEEMS LIKE OTHERS LIKE TO COMPARE RELIGIONS. THIS I KNOW ABOUT THE METHODIST CHURCH, THAT SHE HAS BELONGED TO ALL OF HER LIFE, AS FAR AS I KNOW. THEY ARE DEDICATED TO HELPING OTHER PEOPLE WHO ARE IN NEED.
THEY CAN BE IN NEED OF MANY THINGS. SUCH AS FIXING NAFTA, OR HEALTHCARE OR EVEN SOME WHO HAVE BEEN INJURED IN IRAQ BUT ARE NOT GETTING THE CARE THEY NEED AND DESERVE. SHE HAS ALWAYS WORKED FOR PEOPLE OF ALL RACES, ALL BACK GROWNDS, BEER DRINKERS AND WINE DRINKERS AND EVEN US ICE TEA DRINKERS.
HILLARY'S PLANS ARE BEST FOR MICHIGAN AND BEST FOR AMERICA!!!

HILLARY IS OUR GIRL!!!!!

SHIRLEY AR. (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:46 AM)

Hey Jersey Joe,
Get off Jaycee's back. If you were able to READ the posts, you'd realize that not only are they different each day, but they're insightful. Why don't you put up something similar for your candidate?

A Jaycee Fan (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:47 AM)

I am one of those Obama supportes who voted "Uncommitted" in the first Michigan primary. Voters at that time had to opt for a Democrat or Republican ballot. I understand that some voters may have opted for a Republican ballot at that time because their candidate was not on the Democrat slate, but that was a choice they made. Assuming that Michigan will not re-do the Republican primary, and I have not heard or seen anything to indicate they will, it is patently unfair for those who opted for a Republican ballot the first time around to now VOTE AGAIN in the Democrat primary. What happened to one person, one vote? I certainly hope this is addressed, but I do not hold out much hope, given the manner in which the Michigan party offcials screwed the primary up the first time around. By the way, it was those Michigan party leaders, and no one else, who disenfranchised Michigan voters by violating the clearly established DNC rules. Lets hope that this mistake is not compounded by SUPERENFRANCHISING some Michigan Republicans and Independents out to do mischief.

Erroll, Haslett, Michigan (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:48 AM)

Kitchen sink attack: failed
Failed to douse my hope!
I'm fired up!
Yes We Can!
Obama '08

JohnnyU, WA State (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:48 AM)

If the Dems have any chance in winning in 2012, or more likely 2016, we need to change the primary/caucus system to 100% primaries, closed only to Democrats, with winner takes all, and NO superdelegates. This will ensure a nominee at the earliest stages, and no more infighting like we are currently having under the current failed system. PS - we lost this year, again, because of the failed system.

Pat Huntington NY (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:50 AM)

M in CA.

Gotta agree with you on Morning Joe. I agree with you 100% and salivating is precisely the word I would use. ITs coming through loud and clear, I thought the same thing this morning and I mentioned it also in comments yesterday.

Not only is he not impartial but it clearly shows in the coverage.

Obama 08

Lisa, New Britain, CT (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:50 AM)

Look, folks, I admit it: I'm a moron.

patty,sd,ca (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:51 AM)

Well said,jaycee. I have trouble understanding why any of the leadership in the Democratic Party think that Clinton's statement of support for the Republican candidate is acceptable.

Seems a simple choice to me, time for the leadership to put an end to this farce. If a large group of the superdelegates would state their support for Senator Obama, we could move on to the General Election.

Senator Clinton has shown herself to be unworthy of the office that she seeks with the tactics that she employs.

sotiredofignorance (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:52 AM)

Let's see now, I guess this will get buried somehwere underneath jaycee ventura's daily rant.
If Hillary kicks in Obama's teeth in Pennsylvania, why wouldn't the press cover it?
Especially after you three morons (and your network) have spent the last few weeks trying to convince everyone that Obama has a birth right to the nomination.
Also, The New York Times story about Obama's mother was totally unnecessary, and I'm not sure I get the point of it.
We all have mothers whom we revere, and cherish. I'm sure Obama's reverence for his mother is no different than anyone else's, just as I'm sure that deep down inside she was a well intended person.
However, in reading this thing I see someone who was a bit "flighty," and somewhat disconnected from the reality of personal responsibility. I don't see what makes her anymore "fascinating" than anybody else's mother, except that you try to make everything Obama says and does into a history-making event.
Hey, First Read, how about a little coverage of all the SCUM BAGS who are in some way or another connected to Obama?
Rezko, Farakhan, and now the minister who married him, and baptized his kids, Jeremiah Wright...who says we should sing "God Damn America" instead of God Bless America, and that the bible says so.
Get a clue folks, because THIS is who influences the man some of you clowns want to put in the White House.
He won't wear a flag on his lapel, he doesn't respect the proper protocols during the National Anthem, and you wonder where he gets it from?
Obama supporters need to close their mouths, and open their eyes!
True Americans, those who love their country and anyone who ever wore the uniform to defend it, could never ever vote for this man.

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:52 AM)

RENEA,
I HAVE WONDERED THE SAME THING.
WHY OF ALL THINGS DO WE IN AMERICA NOT HAVE THE COMMON SENSE TO DO SOMETHING AS SIMPLE AS THAT.
THE STATE HAS THE NAMES OF VOTERS. THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO SHOW I.D AND WRITE A NAME DOWN.

WE HAVE SHOWN BY THE TEXAS CAUSUS THAT THIS IS NOT THE WAY TO GO AND I HOPE THAT UNDEMOCRATIC WAY OF VOTING IS DONE AWAY WITH.

SHIRLEY AR. (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:53 AM)

"...in 1997, I joined forces with members of Congress and we passed the State Children's Health Insurance Program [SCHIP]."
-Hillary Clinton

“But the Clinton White House, while supportive of the idea of expanding children's health, fought the first SCHIP effort, spearheaded by Senators Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, and Orrin G. Hatch, Republican of Utah, because of fears that it would derail a bigger budget bill. And several current and former lawmakers and staff said Hillary Clinton had no role in helping to write the congressional legislation, which grew out of a similar program approved in Massachusetts in 1996."
-Boston Globe

Hillary Clinton: Her Words. Somebody Else's Solutions.

CitizenJ (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:54 AM)

Clinton should do the right thing, drop out of the race and take her best shot at undoing some of the damage she's done.

But she won't.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:55 AM)

As a resident of Michigan and independent voter I am against another vote here. Since when do we change the rules after the contest has begun?

Believe me...I want my vote to count.

I will gladly wait to vote for President Obama in November.

48 yr. old white male, some college, 50k yr.

Obama/Webb 08'

Chris, Dorr, MI (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:57 AM)

Let Hillary have Pennsylvania. Obama will still come out of the PA primary with some deleagtes and will be able to make up for any net gains by Hillary in PA in later contests. On to North Carolina and Indiana and the rest of the primaries.

PENNSYLVANIA MAY BE HILLARY COUNTRY BUT THE UNITED STATES IS OBAMA COUNTRY.

C A, Tuscaloosa, AL (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:57 AM)

The NYT piece on Obama's mother is amazing.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23623222/

Obama's mother was free thinking powerful woman, much ahead of her time. Her impact on him cannot be denied.

Read what Obama's most treasured possession is.

A Charles, LA, CA (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:58 AM)

"...And please, no noble-sounding nonsense about democracy and letting all the voters have a say."...jaycee, Ventura, California (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:14 AM)

There ya' go folks...there it is.
The attitude, mind-set, agenda, and the political ideology of Obama and his supporters, all rolled into one sentence.
A little more food for thought, you Super Delegates!

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:59 AM)

hillary monster "George Wallace" clinton is an ingorant racist pig. hillary monster "George Wallace" clinton may have an advantage in PA but that doesn't mean she wins the state and surely doesn't mean she wins by a large margin. hillary monster "George Wallace" clinton has permanently damaged the Democratic party and we are seeing the beginning of its full destruction. hillary monster "George Wallace" clinton's big state argument is the stupidest argument ever. To think that Obama won't win liberal CA or NY is just utterly ignorant. hillary monster "George Wallace" clinton may win PA in the primary but she has absolutely zero chance of winning the general election. hillary monster "George Wallace" clinton CAN'T win the general election which is why the supers will support Obama.

Patrick, Indianapolis (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 10:02 AM)

"“... no candidate has won the Democratic nomination without winning Pennsylvania since 1972.”
Demonstrably false. Ted Kennedy beat Jimmy Carter in the 1980 Pennsylvania primary, but it was Carter who won the nomination."..... E. Held, Sun City, AZ (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 9:44 AM)

.....and then Carter (an incumbant President, by the way) went on to get his fanny kicked by Ronald Reagan in The General Election.
So what's your point?

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 10:05 AM)

Hey Chuck.

How about posting a copy of the "Pledge" that all Dem candidates signed where they agreeed not to campaign or "particpate" in the Michigan and Florida primaries.

Olbermann had a copy of the pledge on his show last night. You need to post one as part of one of your threads so the Hillary supporters here can see just what she signed and agreed not to do before the Michigan and Florida primaries.

C A, Tuscaloosa, AL (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 10:07 AM)

Change, as the last 7+ years has shown, can be good and can be bad! Be very careful what you wish for as you may just get it! We certainly did with GW Bush! I hope the people who are still to vote in these primaries take a very good look at Senator Obama and his association for the last 20 years with the Rev J Wright. Can you really attend a church for 20 years which has a minister spewing hate of your country, racism, separatism, and not be influenced by it? Do you call this man your spiritual adviser and mentor? Check out the Rev Wright. This is the man who helped influence Senator Obama over the last 20 years! Even if he should repudiate the man now, what about the last 20 years?

Michiel W So. Beloit, IL (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 10:07 AM)

http://twocanpete.blogspot.com
Get ready to rumble! You got to wonder what the good Rev. Wright will have to say if they steal this thing from Obama. That Youtube video looked more like a Black Panther rally from 1968 then church.

twocanpete (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 10:10 AM)

What kind of super moron still believes there is any connection between Obama, and Muslims? It's a wonder they can even read to be that stupid. What about the pictures of Bush in african costume when he visits there? Does that mean he aligns with tribal war and genocide? Come on, read the news, try and learn something, in spite of your limitations.

dumdum2 (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 10:10 AM)

If this entire nominating process does not end soon I fear this party will be split up to the general election and McCain will be our next President. I am even beginning to despise Hillary. Thought I could vote either way but she just doesn't know when to quit. She is ruthless, cold, and far too calculating. I am tired of her, Bill, and the whole Clinton brand. Enough already.

Matt, Rogers, Ark. (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 10:10 AM)

Chris, Dorr, MI (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 10:10 AM)

I have to believe that Hillary herself is repulsed buy the words that are coming out of her own mouth. There are examples to numerous to mention, but here I am specifically referring to her comments that it would be fair to seat Michigan as is because no one made Obama take his name off the ballot. Just how low is she willing to go? Apparently there is no bottom for her. How sad.

Tesse, Portland, ME (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 10:11 AM)

Jaycee: As usual, right on! I am a registered Independent and really liked Biden or Edwards. I would have been fine with Hillary or Barack until the McCain incident. That just did it for me. I cannot support a candidate that has no problem insulting a fellow Democrat at the expressed benefit of a Republican. I have been totally ticked off ever since at her.

Pam OC,CA (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 10:14 AM)

None of this matters if Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi do not address the upcoming fraud trial of the Clintons. Before anyone spends a dime, Sen Clinton should be called out and asked, at the very least, to disclose the appeal of this case. The next hearing date is April 24, just TWO DAYS AFTER the Pennsylvaia Primary, to SET A TRIAL DATE!

Maybe Nancy Pelosi has called her on it. Maybe that is why she is sceptical about an Obama Clinton ticket. Sen Clinton was quick to jump on the bandwagon and try to associate Sen Obama with Tony Rezko's wrong-doing when he is not a named defendant. She and Pres Clinton are named defendants in their case.

Take care of this before people spend all of this money on re-do's. By the way look at who is asking for the re-do's. Sen Clinton doesn't want to play by the rules and it looks bad.

Kathy Frustrated Democrat Michigan (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 10:15 AM)

This sounds eerily familiar. I think that they said the same thing in SC. Clinton has the establishment LOCKED UP. In SC they said if you get the elected officials and the preachers, the people will follow. Sounds like folk have been saying the same thing about PA.

We shall see.

Robyn, Greensboro, NC (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 10:17 AM)

I'm still beside myself that we are even having this discussion...even more that the Democratic Party is having this discussion. It's all because one candidate, who knew the rules going into this and that Florida and Michigan wouldn't count is now kicking and screaming like a toddler who just slid half-way down the board in a game of chutes and ladders and now wants a do-over.

Give me a break, Dems, and get a backbone!!!

Jaime, Lantana, FL (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 10:18 AM)

Clinton should do the right thing, drop out of the race and take her best shot at undoing some of the damage she's done.

But she won't.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA

____________________

Does anyone think Hillary would run as an Independant?

Sue Watters, San Francisco CA (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 10:21 AM)

I think that this is a good proposal for Michigan. If the campaigns could put up some of the money as well, that would be even better. In the rush to be first, Michigan (and Florida) ignored the rules and had no regards for the possible actions afterward. I hope that this teaches all the states to understand the rules that the parties have for their nomination contests.

Besides, moving all of these contests closer to the beginning of the year only forces people to make up their mind too early. Let the press and the campaigns get out their information and their secrets. I hope that it would weed out some of the lessor candidates without them being on a debate.

I hope that Florida gets their act together for this. They should just do what ever they are going to do on June 3rd like Michigan.

S.B. Stein E.B. NJ (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 10:21 AM)

Hillary SHOULD WIN PA. She is EXPECTED to win PA. She leads by 18 POINTS in PA. But here is the question - how will the media and the Clintonian spinners SPIN this win if her margin of victory plummets in the next six weeks? Will they - shock and awe - be FAIR and say that Hillary COULD NOT HOLD ONTO HER 18 POINT LEAD??? OR - will they say that Obama could not "close the sale?" If she has practically ALL of the state's bigwigs behind her - and it is a state that "fits her demographics" as has been pointed out repeatedly by the pundits, then WHY should she not WIN BY the 18 point margin - or even better? Obama has won many of his states by 20 to 30 points - Virginia for example, which was not supposed to be that much of a blowout. So why should Hillary not be EXPECTED to win PA by a BLOWOUT if all of these factors are in her favor? Will be very interesting to see if this "double standard" in the media persists in "expectations."

JB, NC (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 10:22 AM)

I AM A LIFE-LONG DEMOCRAT(AGE=63)LIVING OUTSIDE PITTSBURGH......I WILL NOT VOTE FOR CLINTON, AND I KNOW CO-WORKERS, NEIGHBORS, FRIENDS AND FAMILY, WHO ABHOR HER AND WILL NEVER VOTE FOR THIS DIVISIVE FIGURE. THE POLITICAL ESTABLISHMENT HERE AND ELSEWHERE IN THE STATE IS NOT AS HIGHLY REGARDED AS YOU OUTSIDERS MAY BELIEVE, ESPECIALLY WITH THIS ENDORSEMENT NONSENSE.

TOM TYSKIEWICZ, FOREST HILLS, PA (Sent Friday, March 14, 2008 10:23 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=769247