Given that Hillary will lose New York City without the support of African Americans the entire discussion is moot.

What? You say I am assuming too much not in evidence by saying African Americans will simply walk away from the Democratic Party if the popular African American candidate is driven from the campaign?

Well...ditto.

Hillary Clinton is no more likely to win any state that she won in the primaries in the general than Mc Cain is.

Although McCain didn't win Michigan this time around, a Republican did. Will Hillary's empty panders sway this very red blue state without the Democratic strong holds of Detroit, Lansing and Ann Arbor?

As I have said elsewhere, Senator Clinton is an intelegent capable politician, with more negatives than you can throw a dead cat at.

Senator Obama is likewise an intelegent capable politician, who likewise has negatives, but none worse than Senator Clinton has herself.

Both Candidates have won their constituants well, and both need to expand into the others camp to win the general election.

Let us not tear down, let us begin to build anew. This contest is ebbing to close, and bitterly clinging to this favorite candidate or another only hands the election to John McCain.

So, to every Hillary Clinton supporter out there who declares they will never support Barak Obama, ask your self this. Do you want the most Anti-Choice Senator in the Senate to serve as president for the next four years, replaceing the last few liberal apointees to the Supreme Court when their time to depart the stage is at hand?

Just something to think about.

Either Candidate can win, the way Democrats have won in the past with a strong coallition of city dwelling minorities and organized labor.

Obama can win Ohio, Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania etc. The same way Hillary Clinton won these states, and the same way the Senator McCain will compete hard for these states.

The real question is whether or not we are discussing a fair win or not.

Senator Obama, even with the seating of Michigan and Florida will have a lead in pledged Delegates. The popular vote issue is unknowable given that Obama wasn't on the ballot in Michigan, and the nature of the Caucus system, but let us say it is roughly tied just to quell the storm (or atleast to say that each candidate have had roughly equal numbers of people voting against them in these contests). If the win is seen a legitimate win, it can be argued that Hillary Clinton's supporters will come back to Barak Obama in the general election, since it was a fair win.

If however Hillary Clinton being behind in pledged delegates (again let's leave the issue of the popular vote aside for right now) wins the nomination not by popular will, but by back room deals with the super delegates, it is unlikely that those who have supported Barak Obama will see her as a legitimate Candidate.

If Hillary pulls ahead in pledged delegates, then her win is solid and fair, but if not, it's just more elitist powerbrokers telling Americans what's best for them.

We should all support the winner of these contests, regardless of our stance today, and regardless of how that winner is determined. But how bitter of a pill we will have to swallow to do so will have a great deal to do with the turn out in November.

Just because the rules allow for something doesn't mean that the people will accept the decision.

The rules allowed the Supreme Court to end the recount and declare G.W.B. president, that didn't cause everyone who disagreed to throw up their hands and say "oh well, rules are rules".

As to polling in Florida, given that Obama has not campaigned in Florida as yet, it doesn't surprise me that McCain is beating him in the polls. This is the central issue with regard to the extended period of the campaign. By forcing the Candidates to focus on each other, and primary battle grounds instead of the general election battle grounds, McCain receives the edge from this.

The bottom line is, Hillary Clinton's electability or unelectability is clearly not better or worse than Barak Obamas. If either was dramaticly more electable, we'd have a clear strong leader in this competition, and our debates would be moot.

As it is, we've got two hard campaigners struggleing to push into the others base with little luck, and neither will likely be able to do so until the other agrees the race is over, and begins the party healing process.

But neither is a better candidate really. Barak Obama's status as an "unkown" is no more of a hinderance to him than Hillary Clinton's "known" status is a hinderance to her.

Hillary Clinton is very unlikely to beat Barak Obama's pledged delegate count, even with a seating of Michigan and Florida, since Barak Obama will receive a number of those delegates as well.

If you check out the Slate.com delegate calculator it becomes clear that Senator Clinton needs to win all remaining primaries and caucuses by double digit leads to beat Senator Obama's pledged delegate lead, where as Senator Obama just needs to lose by less than ten points in the remaining contests.

Is it possible Senator Clinton will win all remaining primaries by that double digit lead? Sure, but unless she does so starting tomorrow, this race is at an end.