From TPM today:

A new Zogby poll shows that Barack Obama is the most electable of the top three Democratic candidates, followed by John Edwards and Hillary Clinton.

Of the three Dems, Obama is the only one to beat five Republicans in all match-ups. Hillary loses to Mike Huckabee, Rudy Giuliani and John McCain, while Edwards can beat Huckabee but loses to Giuliani and McCain.

Obama (D) 53%, Romney (R) 35%

Obama (D) 47%, Huckabee (R) 42%

Obama (D) 48%, Giuliani (R) 39%

Obama (D) 47%, McCain (R) 43%

Obama (D) 52%, Thompson (R) 36%

Clinton (D) 46%, Romney (R) 44%

Huckabee (R) 48%, Clinton (D) 43%

Giuliani (R) 46%, Clinton (D) 42%

McCain (R) 49%, Clinton (D) 42%

Clinton (D) 48%, Thompson (R) 42%

Edwards (D) 50%, Romney (R) 38%

Edwards (D) 47%, Huckabee (R) 41%

Giuliani (R) 45%, Edwards (D) 44%

McCain (R) 46%, Edwards (D) 42%

Edwards (D) 51%, Thompson (R) 35%

Obama's "politics of hope" can actually be translated like this: he knows how not to get sucked into psychodramas that play to neocon talking points. he rises above the petty issues, and finds common ground. but ... not with insane people, k?

the reaons why the right wants clinton as the candidate is two fold: 1) they have the best chance at the white house with her there, and 2) they know exactly how to goad and prod her into drowning in her own paranoia & "fight" response. this second point is otherwise known as "politics as usual" ... and MOST AMERICANS (as the poll above shows) are sick of it.

what is up with the goofy picture of obama? why not just paint some wrinkles on it, salon editors, and rename the site the Drudge Report.

yes ... thanks brother/sister. :) i intended no snark with my last note.

the truth is, i agree with you that was a mistake. i don't agree with you that he "sold out the gays."

i also think it was a mistake for obama to not filibuster with dodd on the telecom immunuity issue. overall, though, i trust obama more than any other politician i've seen.

this was his statement on the issue of mccurkin:

I have clearly stated my belief that gays and lesbians are our brothers and sisters and should be provided the respect, dignity, and rights of all other citizens. I have consistently spoken directly to African-American religious leaders about the need to overcome the homophobia that persists in some parts our community so that we can confront issues like HIV/AIDS and broaden the reach of equal rights in this country. I strongly believe that African Americans and the LGBT community must stand together in the fight for equal rights. And so I strongly disagree with Reverend McClurkin’s views and will continue to fight for these rights as President of the United States to ensure that America is a country that spreads tolerance instead of division.

you look so lonely in that car all by yourself, walter. thanks for the good coverage, though. :)

Many of y'all have some strong opinions. Interesting that you're not brave enough to state them overtly, and have a record of such opinions. I take your points less seriously as a result.

You write:

Anyway, if Obama gets the democratic nomination, I'll vote for him, same as I would on any of the democrats running, but it'd sure be good if more democrats would not do the republicans bidding by tearing into HIllary so much. She'd definitely be a gigantic improvement over what we've had for the last 8 years. Do you really think she'd start a war with Iran, or keep the Iraq war going endlessly? If so, I think you've been suckered by the right-wing and their minions in the media, including the mainstream media.

Hilary's record:

- Votes to authorize Iraq War

- Does not state this is a mistake, reframes the issue by claiming she voted for diplomacy

- Votes for Kyl/Lieberman to pave way for war with Iran

- States this was a vote for diplomacy; states she is not in favor of a rush to war with Iran.

These things happened, and I am paying attention. I am not being duped by the media. Are you?

i appreciate that you use your talents to change what you think needs changing. i think there is no nobler pursuit.

may we all have peace on earth.

hi salon ...

what do you want to be when you grow up?

1) an independent voice in investigative journalism?

2) a Sedaris-worshiping purveyor of sardonic wit?

3) part of the problem?

let me know, ok

nulla ... it's hard to tell from your post what you mean ... and i don't have much interest in debating you on this.

let's just say i am voting for salon to emerge /more/ as what i want it to be. and, i'll speak up when it isn't. that happens to be something they do right around here.

while it's no authority, wikipedia authors write this on "investigative journalism"

Investigative journalism is when reporters deeply investigate a topic of interest, sometimes involving crime, political corruption, or some other scandal, but also looking into systemic problems in government, business and other sectors.

De Burgh (2000) states that: "An investigative journalist is a man or woman whose profession it is to discover the truth and to identify lapses from it in whatever media may be available. The act of doing this generally is called investigative journalism and is distinct from apparently similar work done by police, lawyers, auditors and regulatory bodies in that it is not limited as to target, not legally founded and closely connected to publicity".

Greenwald consistantly does this. Shapiro does sometimes. So does Grieve. You're right about many other folks here ... writing opinion pieces. Sometimes on completely useless subjects.