- i know as an American it is not pleasant to look into a mirror and I understand the rage of the very "thoughtful" Salonistas but actually McClelland has not gone far enough with his "simplification" - He should have gone all the way - way beyond gender politics - into the "cool vote" and remind us - that (again) it will be the "coolest" gal or guy we are voting for. If you dismiss this as a bunch of simplistic crap you might have to learn the hard way (like Hillary) - that depending on reason, logic - or discussing the issues in all its depth you will make you miss the "decisive issue".

Its like the difference between IQ and EQ and if you don't want to commit suicide in this country please always go first with your "EQ"!

America is not like Germany (thanks god) were voters will sit down and study the program of a party, like a laundry list and then vote. In America people get very emotional about their vote - their patriotism and all other "things" they "like" or "dislike".

I know - I know you don't belong to the "idiots", who need an "In anf Out-list to make decisions. But what about your kids - or your husband -or your spouse? When she/he tells you - it's just that special "thing" they need. It's what you learne in school - remember - there always are the "cool kids" the ones everybody likes and everybody wants to be -and they are the only ones, who truly know what's going on!

In a study we are conducting right now they are called the

Z-(eitgeist)spies and they are no kids. They are literate very well educated and tremendously good informed grown-ups, who have a much higher statistical chance to predict the outcome of certain strategies - then most of the so called experts we compared them too. There "secret" might their independence. Most of them are not interested in religious, liberal or conservative dogmas - they are truly independent thinkers who have the EQ to "smell" and "feel" a trend and where this trend is going.

Nearly all predicted Obamas success, because the "Zeitgeist" told them it was time for a candidate, who doesn't act like the typical Politician - Who is not divisive, and whose credo is always the "positive message". Hillary could have saved herself a lot of money in hiring one of these guys. He just would have tried to turn her into the same "cool kid" as Obama - And to show you, how the Z-guys think - most of them agreed - it would have been impossible with Hillary - not because she is woman, but the trends against "professional" politicians are so strong, that she will have to wait until

a so called amateur on the democrat side has crashed and burned.

That brings us to the last word to all the "anons" and "warriors" on this threads with their "facts" and insults -

Their "work" is completely useless! They will gain a few votes for their candidate, but always produce much more votes for the opposite side. That's the verdict of the "Zeitgeist" and probably the most positive outcome of the Bush years of lies. If you want to destroy your political enemy: The only way might be - to emulate his strength and "love" him to death. Let's hope the Republicans are not there yet - and they will keep on battling and destroying themselves!

If you don't stop bickering at each other you are going to be in trouble! There are already signs of people getting turned of by the democrats obsession with torturing themselves.

The positive message should not get lost: There are hardly any differences in policy between Hillary and Obama but they are both a world apart from McCain/Bush - Please repeat this after us - please -

is my "sick" "sick" brother!

- and I gladly would vote for Hillary - but if reality really counts your letter had to be adjusted to reality:

"Drudge and his right wing buddies know something that Clinton supporters are oblivious to. They know that a large part of the country prefers to go with feelings and idealism instead of substance and pragmatism. But the democratic party loves to get into endless discussions about "facts" and "logic". That's why we have lost 6 of the last 9 presidential elections. Pragmatism and substance is a wonderful thing, and if Hillary is nominated, we might be able to take comfort in it during the next 4 years of the McCain presidency.

by such a timeline -

lets try an easier version:

Barack Obama (BO) wins the Iowa caucus on the basis of lovely speeches about change and unifying America.

The media pronounces Hillary Clinton's (HC) campaign sunk.

Polls tell us she will lose in New Hampshire. Hillary shows Emotions (no value judgement)and wins the New Hampshire primary with a strong support from emotional women.

The Nevada caucuses goes the same with a strong support of very emotional Hispanics, who are not too excited about Obama,

(no value judgement)

The campaign moves on to South Carolina - attempting to counter Barack Obama’s claim that Hope and Change is more important then experience, the Clintons turn out very complicated "facts", which easy can be misunderstood. The "black" voters don't understand them and close to 80% of the emotional African-American vote goes to Barack Obama.

His momentum is restored, and across the nation, people celebrate his message of Hope and Change. And the Clintons finally kind of get it. Hillary goes "positive" - but it is too late - Hillary goes negative - but it's to late and

everything else you listed is background noice.

I would have loved to vote for Hillary but if somebody takes such a long time to get "the picture" and get's lost in all

these pesky facts and details it might prove that the more

experienced person is the one who stays on focus.