Clinton voted for the damn war. We know she can't be trusted to do the right thing. It's a proven fact. It's the single biggest thing she was charged with and she caved, completely. The immoral, senseless, disasterous war. I don't see how anybody in good conscience can support her.

I don't understand how anyone can even consider voting for this woman. She voted for the war; the single biggest mistake in the history of this country. She can only be counted on to do the politically expedient thing, not the the right thing. She is not trustworthy. To those that say she only voted to give bush the power to leverage saddam hussein; well, if that's the case she's too stupid to be president. Everyone knew where the bush assholes were going with that authority. No one with a shred of a conscience can vote for clinton.

And was as intelligent and well spoken as he is, Clinton wouldn't even be in the conversation at this point. Her "Archie Bunker" base of blue collar democrats would have all defected by now. So all the folks that claim they're speaking "truth" when they say they agree with Ferraro's comments are full of it. And by the way, Edwards wasn't even close on the political talent scale so don't pretend that's relevant, (not to mention he showed very poor judgement on the single biggest decision he was called on to make, that of the war; same as Clinton).

It's pretty clear that Clinton's campaign is doing everything it can to remind it's "base" that Obama is black. Talk about shameful behavior. Playing on the fears of the ignorant.

Michelle told all African Americans they should vote for Barack

Isn't that playing the race card?

Isn't trying to make the Clintons racist playing the race card?

Isn't trying to make Geraldine Ferraro racist playing the race card?

Who's been trying to play the race card positively to their favor?

There's a difference between playing to peoples aspirations and playing to their fears. One is racist behavior and one is not. Figure it out fool.

This is a bullshit arguement of an article if i've ever seen one. I'm getting pretty disgusted with clinton apologists who want to rewrite the rules to suit their agenda. I tell you what, clinton cheats her way in there and she's going down in the general. People aren't going to put up with this crap from some political hack who didn't have the guts to stand against the war when it mattered.

I'm 52 years old. I barely made it through high school. I've been working in the construction industry since I was a teenager. My heritage is Irish, German, Austrian and Italian. I was born in Allentown Pennsylvania. I was born a catholic and went to catholic school, although I haven't attended church in years.

So, maybe I'm uniquely qualified to weigh in on this one issue. It sounded to me like what Obama was saying was that because working class folks, not unlike myself, don't believe politicians are going to do anything about their financial situation they vote on cultural issues. I think this is an accurate statement. Consequent to this fact, the people he's referring too consistently vote for folks who pander to those interests without considering that they are being used for totally unrelated purposes. I'm not that smart, but this doesn't take a genius to figure out.

By the way, I think people ought to dig a little deeper into what it is that they are actually doing when they lock on to issues like guns and religion and abortion. The general lack of self knowledge in this country is appalling. As a whole, we are a very shallow people.

Also, in response to Joan Walsh, who claims a working class Irish heritage in her last article, I'm not voting against Hillary Clinton because she's female. I'm voting against her because she has proven she can't be trusted to do the right thing regarding the most important matter of whether or not it's okay to start a war. Simple as that.

It always mystifies me when people equate losing to the entrenched democratic machine in democratic states with having anything at all to do with what happens in the general election. Of course the democratic nominee is going to win those states, whoever it is. If Clinton was a good candidate it should have never even been close. I guess people who are grasping at straws have to ignore reality.

What's really funny about all the argueing here at Salon and elsewhere is that this contest has been over for some time now. Clinton doesn't have a any chance at being the nominee. I guess all the jawing keeps people entertained though.

I think this extended primary process has been enormously beneficial for Obama. It's kept the donors interested enough to finance unbelievable amounts of "getting to know you" advertising in places he'll need to win in November. Not to mention the excitement has brought hordes of folks out to see him when that clearly would not have been the case had the race not been close and ongoing. Good news for Obama and the democratic party.

I really enjoyed reading this one as I enjoy all of your articles Gary. Are you sure mountain lions can get up to 250 pounds though? It was my understanding that 150 is a really big male. Not that that's much comfort when confronted by one.

I was surprised to hear that 4 out of 5 clinton supporters thought she actually had a chance of winning the nomination. She really doesn't get the smart people, does she? Probably the same folks who bought into the bush b.s. for so long. This whole thing is good for the media so they're playing it up. That's all that's going on here.