"Clinton vs Obama supporters

Most of the followers of both Hillary and Obama seem very hateful of the other person's opinion."

I like Obama. I hope he becomes the 45th president, but I will be happy to vote for whoever it is, Hillary or Obama, in November. For those who would like McCain over Hillary but not Obama, that is their right. They should vote for who they feel is their best interests to be the leader. But I have a hard time thinking that someone voting for McCain even though the positions they take are closer to Hillary's is a grownup. Also, anybody who thinks Barack is not guilty of all the things that they accuse Hillary of doing, simply is seeing the world with rose coloured glasses.

This worry about the snub is juvenile Maureen Dowd stuff.

Why are we paying attention to someone who has not matured past junior high?

This is further proof that Clinton is just going to be another dishonest hack if she becomes President. If she cannot follow the rules now how can we expect her to be honest about the reasons she sends our troops to Iran, or the wire taps she is going to place on American citizens, or whatever continuation of Bush's policies she is going to institute so she can prove to America that she can do the job.

I hope whoever is the smartest with the best cabinet and support wins. How can we know the latter until that announcement comes? Anyone have an idea of HRC's or BHO's choices yet? The gossip and sniping is all a waste of time because we have real work to do.

It does seem fairly absurd that states like Michigan and Florida--with large populations and tremendous economic and cultural importance--matter less in the Democratic primaries than small fry like Iowa, New Hamphsire, and even South Carolina.

Senator Obama has a larger problem than whether Florida's delegates will count, however. He's still trailing badly in the upcoming big contests in New York, New Jersey, California, etc. If he loses all of those-- and of today, he would-- the race is over.

Despite the spin that the media put on South Carolina, the real story there was the racial polarization of the Democratic vote and the increasing peception of Obama--rightfully or wrongfully--as an "identity politics" candidate chiefly interested in and supported by minority voters. 80% of blacks supported Obama. Over 75% of whites supported someone else. That's not good for our country, and its not good for Obama's chances from here on out.

Because he's such a brilliant, wise, JFK-like, political talent that he just had to help her solidify the pissed off female vote.

The Clinton team has come to bear a striking resemblance to the Machiavellian Republican strike force headed up by Karl Rove in '00 and '04, you know, the same bunch of guys that slimed John McCain in South Carolina in 2000 with rumors of a black love child.......the guys who got those "Defense of Marriage" initiatives on the ballots in 13 key states in '04. Remember how that brought out the mouth-breathing, Bible thumping friends of Jesus who felt their own marriages threatened by same-sex couples walking down the aisle?

So Hillary conveniently leaves her name on the Michigan and Florida ballots after the other candidates withdraw theirs.

Anything to gain an edge. Bill and Hillary have shown that they're really desperate to get back to the White House, where they can wallow in dynastic narcissism for another 8 years.

This Democratic contest is taking on the stark overtones of good vs. evil, isn't it?

You have misinformation. You state:

Hillary's name being on the ballot at all was the result of a bad faith political calculation, just in case things started to go bad for her (which they did).

If Hillary's name being on the ballot in Florida was a "bad faith political calculation," then I suppose that Barack's name being on the ballot was also a "bad faith political calculation." And the same could be said of John Edwards.

1. They were ALL on the ballot.

2. The only one who "campaigned" here was Obama, who ran an ad on CNN.

3. HRC had assured Florida voters the day before the primary that she wanted our votes to count (no doubt encouraged by her good polling number).

4. The name recognition of HRC and Obama is equal here. People have TVs here; they watch debates, read articles, and see the news. The only thing we were spared--thank God!--with the exception of Barack Obama's commercial (which broke the rules he had agreed to) was political ads. Once again, thank God.

Count our votes, for God's sake. The voters of Florida did nothing wrong and don't deserve to be punished.

So I was mistaken, apparently everyone's name was on the ballot in Florida. However, the fundamental I argument I was making still stands, which is that Hillary was the only candidate to treat Florida as if it mattered in this race and she did so as a political calculation with the obvious intention of changing the rules after the fact in order to favor her. If the candidates had campaigned in Florida or had stroked the Floridian's egos the way that Hillary did one would assume that this race might have turned out differently. Hillary's win in Florida means just a little more than nothing.

If she loses, she's toast, dead, buried, a has-been hack.

If she wins, it's a "beauty contest" and it "doesn't really count."

This whole thing seems to reveal a streak of misogyny as deep as the Marianas Trench, at least on the part of our corporate media. There's an almost-gleeful undertone when she struggles and a profound unwillingness to give her credit when she succeeds.

Hillary wasn't my first choice, by a long shot. I'd have preferred Gore or Clark. However, of those candidates in the race, she seems the most competent, the most experienced and the best able to deal with the Republican hate machine.

If Obama gets the nomination, I will certainly vote for him. I don't hate him. I'm concerned about the shortness of his resume and how he will or would deal when the full fervor of the Republican Hate Machine is unleashed at him - as they traditionally do on any Democrat.

Interesting times.