Other presidents have either not done it intentionally, or stopped when they realized they were doing it.

Actually, this isn't true, and it's important to understand. Republican presidents since Nixon have all regarded the Constitution as an unreasonable limitation on their power that needed to be removed. Bush just took it further than it had been taken before, and was only able to do that as a result of the efforts of his predecessors.

End of the day, on a conceptual and practical level, the Constitution is diametrically opposed to the GOP worldview.

Here's the result:

The Gallup Daily Tracking poll shows Obama maintaining his lead, with "a 51% to 40% margin in the April 12-14 average." The 11-point margin in the poll, taken in the midst of the media flare-up, "is the largest for Obama this year, and marks the ninth consecutive day in which Obama has led Clinton by a statistically significant margin."

I understand, you couldn't care less how much people prefer Obama to Clinton nationwide, or how he polls better than McCain versus how Clinton compares to McCain. You're happy for the Dems to lose, so long as you can cheer for Clinton. It's a self-destructive belief of yours that you can't expect many people to share.

First, I feel like I've caught a bit of lameness from watching that video. But it'll pass.

Second, just how excited are you supposed to get as a salesperson tasked with selling a product that conventional wisdom has declared a hopeless piece of crap? I work with loads of die-hard Windows users, and not one of them has chosen to upgrade to Vista. Many of them have managed to track down computer vendors who still sell PCs running XP.

So now, these poor salesmen are supposed to return to their customers and say, I know, I know, Vista sucked, but now it's better because we've got SP1!

Is that a selling point for Windows, that it only runs after you've installed the latest service pack and spent the afternoon getting it to work? Or is it a selling point for Apple, that runs as soon as you turn it on?

...one needs look no further than the posts by Notorious WES, which demonstrate precisely where the Clinton campaign is coming from.

Wes' arguments are about as intellectually bereft as it gets; he's opposed to Obama because (perhaps among other reasons) Wes is racist, as his comments demonstrate; in order to portray his candidate as superior he unfortunately can't say anything about her (because there's not much positive to say and all the same points can be made about Obama) but must instead use Karl Rove's fraudulent talking points against Obama (hanging out with the Weathermen, etc).

In short, watch Wes' posts for a slow-motion depiction of a campaign that has lost its way badly.

Look at the polls as the exist now.! As of this morning, McCain beats Obama--easily.

You specified "polls" (plural), however, the only example you can provide is one by Rassmussen, the Fox News of polling outfits. I assume that was the only poll you could dig up showing that McCain beats Obama, easily!

Of course, there are other polls that say different things:

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/04/18/america/NA-POL-US-Elections.php

"The poll comes on the heels of another AP-Yahoo poll this week showing that Republican John McCain has pulled even with Obama and Clinton..."

http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/2008/04/ap-ipsos-poll-m.html

AP-Ipsos Poll mirrors Gallup's: McCain & Dems basically tied

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/04/10/politics/horserace/entry4007052.shtml

Obama, McCain Tied Nationally

Curiously, you didn't mention those polls. Hmmmm.

Now, as far as why McCain even appears competitive by supporting policies which most Americans find repulsive, I assume this is because the Dems have by and large not started making their points about McCain. Once a critical mass of Americans realize that McCain = Bush (an easy point to make), then I expect no amount of "look over there" is going to win him the election.

The fact that the same person who advocates reprehensible policies of death and corruption also has the emotional maturity of a high school sophomore is completely unsurprising. I hope humanity can survive this blight of hideous rulers.

Obama lost New York big, California big, New Jersey big, Texas, Ohio big, he's getting ready to lose Pennsylvania, and Florida and Michigan didn't count..........What a breath-taking victory.

Okay, I know I'm engaging in folly by scrutnizing your comments, which, like Rudy Guliani, are profoundly single-minded, generally consisting of a noun, a verb, and "Obama sucks and Hillary is great." But here goes anyway.

If Obama's lead is so unimpressive to you, what exactly are you suggesting? Take another candidate who is further behind Obama in terms of votes and delegates, and give her the nomination? Can you provide a rationale for that?

(Didn't think so, but it's always nice to ask.)