Obama is winning in because he has a very well managed campaign, and the voting n public wants NEW ideas, not more of the same.

Hillary would be much easier to defeat in the general election than Obama. Many conservative republican will sit out the general because McCain is a pretty moderate republican. However if Hillary is the candidate right wing conservatives will come out in droves to vote for McCain because they hate the Clintons. Hillary supporters, must not remember the 90s. Also many progressive Democrats won't vote for Hillary either as she is a centrist. I know Democrats who would vote for McCain over Hillary and I know republicans who have told me that if Obama is the candidate they will vote for Obama over McCain in the general election, but they will not vote for Hillary. Also Independents will vote for Obama, but not Hillary. Besides he has brought millions of new voters into this election and he will bring them along to the general election.

If Hillary keeps up the negative attacks she will be considered even more divisive, and her campaign is advising her to do this.She is losing super delegates everyday to Obama.

If Obama wins TX and Oh, Hillary should bow out graciously. Unfortunately nobody thinks she will be that gracious.

the people that are advising her areliving in the past and giving her bad advice.

Hillary doe snot have as much legislative or grassroots oganizing experience as Obama, He camaping is mismanaged, telling me her white house may be the same.

Funny how the mdia does not do their homework. I know all of this as a voter, because too the time to look it Obama' record. Besides all all this is included in his 64 page Blue Print for America, which has been available since January on his web site.

The votes from U.S. citizen voting abroad are in and Obama won 65% of those votes. I think this is pretty telling. I am sure that U.A. citizen living abroad most likely have some sense of how Obama is viewed in the foreign country where they live.

Obama has a very different foreign policy view of the world. He has studied past mistakes very carefully,has a keen knowlege of history, and understands the importance of diplomacy over fear. We will be more secure with him as president, as he values diplomacy. However not the kind of diplomacy that forces our views on others, but diplomacy that respects other cultures and strives to understand their needs and views.

I read the entire article in the NY Times. I thought it was very balanced and not very damaging to McCain. IN fact I thought it pretty much cleared thing ups. Has anyone considered that the RIGHT MEDIA is giving this legs on purpose. They have been opposing McCain. What better way to make him look bad and at the same time blame the NYT.

Oh shock. It's not an issue because Hillary and her advisers and plagiarize Obama a daily basis. I guess I was to too concerned as the words they both used have been used over and over again,and everyone knows where these quotes came from originally. Besides before Obama spoke, when the Lt Gov. of WI introduced Hillary she said 'Hillary has a "blue print for change" a direct steal from Obama policy plan that has been available before January 2008. The week before the Sat night speech Hillary was speaking to a crowd yelling at the top of her lungs "Yes We Will!. She shouted it over and over again and no one in her audience even responded or joined in.

The truth is Obama has a keen intelligence, is a great orator, and has substantive positions on issues. The Clinton campaign can't shake him up with their down and dirty tricks and everyone is just trying to find faults with him in the stupidest ways. Hillary continues to use the once the "tried an true attack politics" she has engaged in her entire life, defending Bill. These tactics are just not cutting it this time around,and that this very frustrating for her and her advisers. The mismanaged Clinton campaign is just desperate.

I'm glad I have watched all the debates because I come away with a different take than the pundits. I thought Obam looked very presidential. Frankly I thought Obama out smarted Clinton in may ways in this debate. She cannot rattle him. Yes they agree on much, but Obama did an excellent job distinguishing himself in many ways and at last talked bout his experience in relation to the issues discussed.

Clinton was thrown by the audience booed after presenting her camapaign advisers line on plagiarism. Obama cam back with his dry sense of humor which really is a knife twister.

I'm still puzlled by Hillary's dramatic, sob story at the end.

I disagree wit was her best moment in the debate. On one hand is seemed, my god, she is conceding the race to Obama, on the other hand it seemed like a NH moment... tearing up trying to elicit sympathy.I suspect it was a ploy of the latter.

Not only are the debates much of the same, so are our posts.

I really do not care if he had an affair. In fact it is ratehr sexist to assume the only way a woman lobbyist can have infuence is through an affair. This is an old sexist tactic. What we really should be looking at is the influence of the lobbyist, on a candidate who claims ethics reform.

If you are really interested in seeing the influence on each candidate, go to > www.thehill.com> . There you can see what K street lobbyist have endorsed each candidate.

Besides I did not know republicans had sex.