The real problem is the Democratic party's failure to attract white male voters and it's not because Sen. Obama is African-American because it's been happening for more than 40 years.

The last Democratic president to receive a majority of the white male vote was Lyndon Johnson and the last one to get more than 38 percent was Jimmy Carter. If Kerry had gotten 5 percent more of that vote, he would be in the White House, not Bush.

I keep hearing white male commentators discussing whether Hillary's voters are going for Palin, never mentioning that the group they belong to is the one least likely to vote for Obama and Biden.

While a few Clinton supporters, perhaps 25 percent, have not committed to Obama, the majority of the women switching to McCain/Palin in the latest poll were young mothers, not older women who tended to vote for Clinton in the primary.

I live in a small town and the people here who won't vote for Obama because he is an African-American would never have voted for a Democrat in the general election.

For some of his supporters to continually blame all of his problems on racism accomplishes nothing. No Democrat has won a majority of the white vote since LBJ, who said when he signed the Civil Rights Bill that he had lost the South for the Democratic party for a generation.

Obama and Biden need to focus on the voters they can win, and with the help of Bill and Hillary Clinton, I think they can reach many of those who are still on the fence, particularly women who will realize when they read more about her positions that Sarah Palin is not somebody we can identify with on the issues.

But please stop making it all about race because it isn't. If America was as bigoted as these people seem to think, he would never have become the nominee.

Excuse me, Hootowl, but when you tell me "Don't you dare blame them for your stupidity," I don't know what you're talking about. It must be because I am "tired and lame" as you so nicely put it.

I said thst it's incorrect to blame all of Obama's problems on racism and, in the remark that you quoted, that "in my small town, the people who won't vote for Obama because he is an African-American would never have voted for a Democrat in the general election."

The people I speak of who will not vote for Obama because of his race would never have voted for Hillary Clinton, the candidate I supported in the primaries. They didn't want a woman president any more than they want one who is African-American. They would have voted for McCain, Bob Barr, Ron Paul or stayed at home rather than vote for either Obama or Clinton.

For a long time, I doubted those who suggest that there are many Republicans on Salon working overtime to build up hatred between supporters of Obama and Clinton as their best shot at keeping the White House in November. But it's becoming obvious that the only way McCain will win is to attract Clinton's voters, particularly women.

That strategy is going to backfire because as angry as we Democrats get at each other, we still share far more in common than we could ever have with a party that nominates someone with Sarah Palin's ultra-conservative views as vice president.

As of today according to the Rasmussen Report, Pennsylvania is tied at 47 percent each. A week ago, Obama was up by 2 points after holding 5 percentage-point leads in July and August.

The commonwealth had been listed as "leans Democratic" by Rasmussen until today.

Hopefully the debates will bring some momentum back to the Democratic side

I'm like John McCain in that the economy is not my strong suit but I'd like to know who is going to be held responsible for this disaster.

Is anybody on Wall Street going to be punished for creating this economic fiasco? Or are they still going to get multimillion dollar bonuses while the government bails them out with tax money from people who are having trouble paying for their own housing, health care and gasoline?

When the GOP accuses Democrats of fiscal irresponsibility, saying our party always want to raise taxes and create new government programs, it seems that's only a problem when it benefits the lower and middle classes.

When millions of dollars go to big business, that's sound fiscal policy, Republican style.

Bill Clinton raised taxes on the wealthy, lowered them for the working class, and left office with a federal budget surplus estimated at $127 billion. Bush blew that surplus in his first year and now his policies have bankrupted our country, fiscally and morally.

I would like to hear more about the economic plans of Senators Obama and McCain and also to know about their advisers. Is Phil Gramm, who said "this is a mental recession" and that America has become a nation of whiners, still giving economic advice to McCain?

Do the Republicans still think deregulation, which got us into this mess, is going to get us out of it?

In the famous words of James Carville in 1992, "it's the economy, stupid."

Whoever can offer voters hope that he can keep the nation from total financial ruin will be the next president.

So few letters seem to question why this person is supporting his parents and instead talk about his not having the right to withhold his money because he doesn't like the way they vote.

His parents sound extremely hypocritical, if they object to his lifestyle, they should refuse his money.

It is the duty of parents to financially support their children, not a child's duty to pay for his parents.