Call me crazy, but maybe just once or twice before November I'd like John McCain to take a little heat, to have a meaningful attack hurled his way once or twice.

But no, this is more fun. Lets continue to draw out the nomination process so that the once-frontrunner can delay and delay and delay the inevitable in the hope that a picture of her opponent burning the flag while urinating on the constitution appears out of the wood work.

Why are the Republicans so good at lining up behind a candidate, even one they disagree with, while we Democrats tear each other apart because one candidate wants a mandate to buy health care while the other one does not.

The Democrats are throwing so much away by prolonging this. John McCain is the weakest Republican candidate since Dole, but he's in the sweetest position imaginable.

He's free to take shot after shot at the almost-certain Democratic nominee without fear of real retribution.

And even if Clinton does manage to wrangle the nomination away from Obama, he knows she has done much to weaken her support among younger voters, more liberal democrats, and black voters.

No Salon, I am very, very fatigued about all this. I'm tired of Democrats attacking each other. I want every day for the next seven months to be about the total failures of the Republicans to lead this country, not bickering over stupid comments or religious advisors.

To have a Democratic president who follows the same fine tradition of blatant fear mongering as our current one.

Myself, I hate the unpredictabilty that comes with electing new people. Personally, I'm looking for a presidential candidate who won't shake things up unnecessarily.

Except for the abortion issue...I really feel it's time to have a president who's slightly pro-choice after eight years of a president who's slightly pro-life.

That's why I'm voting for Hillary.

He's playing the "lets focus on issues" line over and over because it WORKS for him.

Clinton looked like an idiot last night. She harped on him over his "bitter" remarks, she chastized him for staying with his pastor, she even had the gall to suggest that his sitting on the same charity board as Ayers showed poor judgement!

And how does Obama respond. When answering the bittergate comment he deftly brings up Clinton's past "baking cookies" snip through the guise of sympathy.

When given the chance to hit her over the head for lieing about dodging sniper fire in Bosnia, he doesn't. He extends to her the courtesy she didn't extend to him by saying it was no big deal.

The only time Obama hit back, it was to throw in her face the hypocracy over her criticism of his (non) relationship with Ayers. And you know what...people who live in glass houses should not throw stones.

Judging from his performance in this debate, Obama knows fully that Hillary is at her strongest when she is attacked and is at her weakest when she attacking. It's a shame that Hillary hasn't figured that one out yet.

"Lori Moschella-Keller, a nurse's assistant, is a registered Democrat who plans to vote for Clinton. Part of the reason: "I have a real problem with Obama saying on the news that his country is so important to him, but he can't put his hand on his heart for the Pledge of Allegiance."

Seriously, what hope does our democracy ever have if people can

a) believe such baloney

b) make it their primary rationale when deciding who to vote for.

Oh well. I still have hope. And I'm still voting for Obama.

I mean come ON salon. What the hell is this piece of crap? It's full of hypotheticals of other hypothetical situations.

More to the point, the author argues that Obama is taking steps to disenfranchise Michigan and Florida. I'd just like to point out that Hillary Clinton AGREED to this disenfranchisement back in 2007 when it looked like the entire voting process was merely a formality to her coronation.

This is possibly the most Clinton-biased piece I have read in Salon yet. I'm all for pieces that both praise and criticize both candidates. But this was nothing more than a laughable attempt to spin Clinton's failures and massive delegate deficit into some sort of positivie message.

InfoUSA.

After years and years of Bush's policy of spying on anyone anytime, I can't see many Democrats being very comfortable with the Clinton's cozy relationship with a company that mines personal data and was caught once selling such data to fraudulent telemarketers!!!

Obama needs to keep Pennsylvania close, win North Carolina and win Oregon. Indiana would be a nice bonus. After that, it's a done deal. If he manages that, he'll essentially need 150 more Supers behind him to cinch it. I doubt it will be a problem for him to get those numbers.

Clinton is again Dean's proposal because she knwos the only way she can win is to create a major mess of the convention and hope she comes out on top. But it's not gonna happen. As long as Obama meets these expectations, the supers will soon make their voices heard and the race will be effectively terminated.

Sounds to me like Obama wouldn't kiss Edward's ass or offer a him juicy plum to get his endorsement. Good!

Katharine writes: "And yet ... is this scenario any more preposterous than the one that gave John McCain the Republican nomination?"

Yes Katharine, that is much more presposterous.