In my Iowa district:

Obama: 5

Edwards: 2

Clinton: 0

So, again: yay!

Clinton???

I think not.

This really is the t-shirt of the Democratic campaign. Enough is enough!

In the coming days before NH - the Clintonites will mistakenly roll out Bubba (who can't help but overshadow his "wife") - in what will only serve to re-remind the Primary voters how patently unlikeable and more importantly 'unelectable' the 'Missus' is.

Barack Obama is for real and now is proven as such.

Game. Set. Match.

Only thing left to decide is the running mate. I vote Dodd in recognition in his continuing principled stand against retroactive immunity for telecoms. The REAL lead story in January!!!

Feb 5th is almost a moot point at this point!

-Drew Rodgers

Obama/Edwards has a nice ring to it. I may just print up the bumper stickers now!

Will Salon.com ever cease to shill for Hillary Clinton? The lead sentence of the article caption:

The Illinois senator with magnetic appeal still faces a formidable foe in Hillary Clinton.

The last sentence of the article:

But Hillary Clinton may soon be reminding voters that one candidate managed to make it to the White House despite losing both the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary -- and that late bloomer was none other than Bill Clinton in 1992.

Thanks for bracketing the story with your true bias in this election.

Why would America want a second helping of a Clinton presidency? We're not a monarchy nor do we want dynasties. Her catchphrase ("demand, hope, work for change") is trite and condescending; a wishful diversion from the fact that she doesn't have the judgment necessary to lead this country out of the political morass both parties have gotten us into.

Only an idiot would keep on repeating the same behavior and expect different results. Nominating Sen. Clinton would only bring us back to the days of Lewinsky and what the meaning of "is" is. If Sen. Clinton had worked a bit harder for change during those dark, lonely days, maybe the primaries this cycle would be about who'd replace Vice President Lieberman as POTUS.

A Western democracy with a female head of state is nothing new. A black head of state of a Western democracy would be an historic event, one that would truly restore US of A's stature as a beacon on a hill.

I see Michael Scherer left his political hack hat for Mr. Shapiro to don. Iowa caucuses are to democracy as "Plan 9 From Outer Space" is to cinematography.

Is it not bad enough the field is now cut to 3 after a couple hundred thousand white farmers have stood around yammering in each others' living rooms -- on what authority does Mr. Shapiro claim to make it a race between Obama and Clinton alone?

If journalists would spend more time learning about and reporting on the candidates' actual ideas for doing the jobs we elect them to instead of obsessing over how much money they've raised, perhaps the people with the best ideas would have a better chance of defeating the ones with the deepest pockets.

Now that kid Obama trounced the former first lady (and former front runner) in a most unlikely context, can we finally put to bed the nasty meme that Americans are too racist to elect a black president? This country and my fellow citizens are better than that, and they just proved it.

I think it's well put, here in this article. After all, it was, in part, Hillary's "inevitability" that just kinda makes you want to resist her. I think Obama gets it. His victory speech encapsulated the moment, with an excited but calm approach, and just a hint, toward the end, of the fire to come. She's not going to go down easy, by any means, especially considering the bit at the end of this article!

It is by no means a bias in favor of Hillary point out that Obama still has his work cut out for him! Like a good general, or sportsman, I'm sure Barack knows this.

I wish it were true that Obama was anti-establishment, a progressive, but his voting record, ties to lobbyists, rhetoric ("bipartisanship"), and recent history of pissing off the liberal blogosphere shows someone who will scold us and compromise with Republicans.

He'll definitely change the face of American politics--permanently--but I don't see him actually changing the political status quo. I fear he may be no better than Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi, in effect. With his massive popular appeal, he doesn't need progressives; we need him. He knows that.

This has to be on purpose, right? This pro-HRC schtick? Why don't you just ask Rove for some more code words for calling Democratic men "women"? He has a whole list as a macro on his pc.

Walter here might believe in Clinton like a Peter Pan audience believes in fairies, but believing is not going to make it so. Clinton has no growth potential. She is a known quantity and her support is topped out. Democrats who want to retake the WH need to drop her like second period French class.

GO-bama!

Your choices for president are:

Elitists, or elitist's pets.

Your cola beverage choices are:

Carbonated sugar water with cola flavoring.

Salon looks like every other corporate whore, push the bullshit horse race paradigm, don't question this obvious subversion of true democracy... media outlet. Change the masthead to Washington Post and leave the front page content the same, and you wouldn't be able to tell the difference today.

I'm starting to get really freakin' annoyed at all you Obama people getting offended every time someone mentions That Woman's name. She has the money, she has the DNC, she has the Bill, and she could still win pretty easily despite this decisive trouncing. I think that's pathetic. But it's REALITY. If Shapiro failed to say those things, he would be a deluded Obama cheerleader. I'm sure that would feel real nice, but it's not journalism.

can you PLEASE stop repeating that stupid word "hope-mongers"? I think it came out of Obama's mouth originally, but it was self-deprecating. When a journalist applies it to a group of supporters, it sounds nasty.