Oh, come on, Oprah has little to do with it. She may try to convince others to vote for him, but the law limits how much you can contribute to a campaign so her wealth can't help him.

Most of Obama's money comes from small contributions, and most of Hillary's come from large contributions. Hillary has tapped her people out (because there is a maximum you can give) and Obama's people can still keep sending $25 a month or so for a long time.

Obama raised $32 million in January -- a new record -- compared to Hillary's $13 million. Hillary then lent her campaign $5 million.

Obama raised $5.8 million on Wednesday. He raised more money in one day than Hillary lent her campaign.

So yeah, this means that Hillary will flounder, but I wouldn't count her out just yet.

He probably should be looked at more critically, lets get any and all skeletons out of the closet before the general election. I disagree on your belief that endorsements and Oprah are what put him in contention.

Hillary is in an interesting position and I just have no idea what will happen. On the one hand, I don't see her ever giving up. On the other hand the DNC chair Dean said that if this thing is still stalemated 5 or 6 weeks from now, the candidates will need to sit down and work out an arrangement or deal to avoid a brokered convention.

Would she accept the number 2 spot? Seems doubtful. Would he? Not if he's winning by even a little. So what kind of arrangement would they come to?

There are important cabinet positions she could fill -- Secretary of something or other.

I don't see her going from the Senate to Cabinet. If she is losing and has no hope of winning the nomination, I suppose Dean could push her out. The next month will be key into what happens.

Actually, lots of Senators have gone on to cabinet positions, usually late in their careers.

Instead of just being 1 of 100, they are in charge of an entire bureaucracy, meet with the President often, and have a lot more power. Of course, it's all over in 4 - 8 years, but it's not a bad way to end your career before retiring.

I guess that's the new attack strategy. I heard it on the radio as well. "The last thing we want are Oprah and Jesse Jackson running the White House." Pathetic.

Yet another reason to support Obama. If that's the best they've got against him, then bring it on.

Jesse Jackson has had hardly anything to do with Obama's campaign, although I do remember him campaigning for the Clintons in the past.

Oh, wait! I get it -- Obama will listen to Jesse Jackson beause they are of the same race, right? Of course, how obvious to me now... of course he will, ignoring all the other people of all races who have been advising him so far.

What a bunch of racist horseshit.

Yes, that is the biggest worry -- that the best candidate will once again not be the nominee, against the wishes of the actual voters.

If Obama gets more delegates through the primaries and Clinton gets the nomination because of Super Delegates, it will cause a huge amount of bad feelings.

Bloomberg might just run then, and many Obama supporters may jump ship just to teach the Democrats a lesson.

This could turn from being our year to a terrible blow out all because of the damn Clintons and their lust for power.

from polls bloomberg takes more votes from republicans than democrats.

I don't think that's fair at all. More than half of the people are voting for her, so I would say if you are going to blame anyone, it should be them.

That's because Republicans aren't happy at all with their choices.

If Hillary gets the nod even though Obama got more delgates, then all those young idealistic voters will be so pissed they will look for a 3rd party to support. I know, because that is what I and a lot of other young voters did in 1980, supporting John Anderson against Carter and Reagain.

There's little merit in blaming voters. Most people don't have the time to research and figure things out on their own. This goes both ways as well -- Clinton supporters that don't realize Hillary's claims to "35 years" of experience are questionable, and Obama supporters that don't know anything about their candidate's record period.

My comment was based not on her winning more delegates... If she wins fair and square, I think people will support her.

My comment was based on the scenario where (as I said before) Obama gets more elected delegates but then loses the nomination due to unelected "superdelegates" then it will feel like the will of the people had been thwarted by insiders (who are mostly loyal to the Clintons) and that will cause the scene I imagined.

Ah, gotcha. That would make sense.

Then you have the ones who will switch from him to McCain if he doesn't end up getting the nod. Many of my friends who are Obama backers have said they will vote for McCain over Hillary if she gets the nomination. Granted, I don't think they have any basis behind that, just like I'm sure they don't really know the issues very well. They just see Obama as a fresh face and someone who will be good for the country, which he would be, don't get me wrong about that. I guess those kinds of people are more moderate anyway, because any self-proclaimd liberal who would vote McCain over Hillary is not a liberal at all.

I would hope that whichever candidate drops out supporters will vote for the candidate chosen. Hillary cares too much about her image to look like a sore loser I feel, especially if she plans to run again in 2012 if barack loses.

the problem is quite simply, shes running out of supporters who havent donated 2,500 yet. Shes made 5 million since tuesday-too bad all of that is going straight to her own personal bank account to pay back the "loan"-barack just raised 33 million lats month and has appearently already passed the 10 million mark for Febuary.

the schedule also heavily favors obama, and it will force clinton play Guilianis way and focus on the 2 biggies-texas and ohio and eventually pennsylvania-the prob. is at that point obama coulsimply have too much money, too many states, too many votes, too many delegates, and flat out too much momemtum for hillary to slow him down even if she does win the states, because theyd probably be close anyways.

if hillary wants the nomination, shell have to pull more than a few upsets in febuary because of the remaining 10 states in febuary, only 2 favor hillary right now.

That's absurd. Some of us put principle and country above party if we feel, as I do with Hillary, that our party's candidate just isn't up to snuff. I don't agree with McCain on everything but I do feel that he has principles (a sliding scale to be sure) and has shown in the past that he can work with Dems. I don't think Hillary has any core principles (except herself and winning), and I'm not going to vote for her just because there's a D next to her name.

And I am a self-proclaimed liberal and I doubt anyone here would disagree with that.

Well, I'll vote for Hillary over McCain.

Well, your daughters and sisters can thank you when they have to arrange dates in back alleys with coat hangers. And all your complaining about senators who said they voted to stay in Iraq but are not at least saying they want to pull out quickly? You must not care too much about it if you're gonna vote for a man who wants to pump more money and more eighteen-year-olds into the country.

I'm with Chris on this one. There's a large part of the country likes to think they're independant, but in the end, if they're not voting on the isuues than they're voting on celebrity status, and that's not liberal, that's just silly and people who like to stroke their own egos. I find it hard someone could be "undecided" about being pro or anti-choice.

And if you were voting for someone based purely on charisma and personality, and standing up for what they believe in, why not Huckabee? I'm pretty sure he means it when he says homosexuality is a sin that needs to be eliminated. In fact, I'm sure he's quite 'principled' about it.

You know, for someone whose voting for the candidate running on a mantra of unification and extending a hand, you're not even making half an attempt to unify with half, yes half (Hillary did get slightly more of the popular vote on Super Tuesday) of your fellow democrats. That's some brand of unity you've got going there that I must have missed the definition of under the listing for the word in the dictionary.

I like Obama, and I think if Hillary wins she should definately take him as a VP. He'll still be young eight years from now and then between the two they can have 16 years of very strong, continuous, long-term policy and visions (afterall, the mess we're in now doesn't have a quick-fix...it'll take years of mopping). If he wins, great! I'll vote for him.

But some of his followers - especially those who pride themselves in being able to jump ship on the democratic platform - are definately conservatives to begin with if they are okay with alot of McCain's policies. Either that or they are so into hating a candidate's personality that they will literally screw over every gay person or woman they know, continue burning down half of civilian Iraq and traumatizing young, undertrained soldiers for the rest of their lives, and ruin the last bits of funding for public infrastructure (school, public transportation, levees, public health programs).

Obama's "We Must Do It Together" message must sure be falling on some deaf ears, too.

Wow, demogogue much? No one is ending the right to choose any time soon. Not even Huckabee could pull that one off. And one of the reasons I can tolerate McCain is that he is no social crusader.



If you think Hillary, who VOTED FOR THIS WAR, is going to get us out of Iraq any faster than McCain, then you're an idiot.



Now you're outright lying? I said the exact OPPOSITE of what you just accused me of saying. In a race between Hillary and McCain, I said I'd vote for the candidate that I thought was the most principled.



This is utter nonsense. There is no way that voting against Hillary is a vote against unity, unless, as I said before, your worldview is defined entirely by what's good for Democrats. Which apparently, yours is. Voting for Hillary will do nothing for uniting the country. In fact, that's about the least valid reason to vote for her.



Again, demagoguery and nonsense. First of all, I don't agree with McCain on everything. Second, he will be facing a Democratic Congress, and believing for one second that rights to abortion are going away, that every gay person will get screwed over, and half of the Iraq civilian population will burn down (whatever that means) is putting absolutely zero stock in your precious Dems to do anything to stop him.

And finally, the Iraqis and gays have already been fucked over by the Clintons - him and his DOMA and flip-flop on DODT, and her when she voted for this fucking war in the first place. Why don't I just demagogue about how you're supporting a woman who helped get us into this mess, who refuses to admit it's a mistake, and who lacked the judgment even to see through BUSH'S lies.

accusing Obama of being a Jesse JAckson type is stupid.

Obama has attacked his own community (in a fair way).