Re: "No they don't. That's the point of a nationally run primary. Does anyone seriously believe that all of a sudden, if Obama wins the candidacy, that states like New York or California are going to go Republican?"

If Obama is the nominee, all of the Western states are in play. That's where McCain is from. Time and money will have to spent there, and that takes time and money away from other regions.

If Hillary is the nominee, the Democratic base in the West, Northeast, Arkansas and Florida will vote for her that frees her up to campaign in other parts of the country.

How dare you be telling people what to write --or think.

That's all, just act like an American, would you?

We've been lifelong Democrats, but if Hillary doesn't get the nomination we're voting McCain.

Enjoy your Hillary-hating. The silent majority still exists.

exactly:

We can choose what's been done before, we can choose the status quo, or we can risk it all on clear-eyed, selfless service of the people

Do you mean 'we can choose [to do again what's been done before other than what led to the status quo], we can choose [to do again what led to] the status quo?

Are you talking about electing a puppy? I know one very pretty, 'clear-eyed' puppy who selflessly serves the owner. I can ask if they will be willing.

And I will be willing to 'risk it on' only when I am over 92, or in the later stages of some incurable disease.

"I used to know the name of the guy that got Hillary into futures trading. She made a little money in that and got out before the market went south."

James Blair. He was hooked up with a dude with the colorful name "Red" Bone.

Clinton bet $1,000 and ended up with $100,000 less than a year later when she stopped playing. As I recall, she was down as much as $100K, but never had to pay out.

100 to 1 return, now that's luck. Or maybe not.

AJCALHOUN:

You are obviously the type of person who listens to sound bytes. If you read what I wrote in full detail I never told anyone they could not write something.

I stated: KNOW WHAT YOU WRITE, BEFORE YOU WRITE IT.

Re: "We are in the process of electing a President. That is to say, we are in the process of hiring a head of state, a guide, not someone who will actually "do" much of anything, but who will steer us toward certain goals, and who will also try and sell us on the desireability of those goals."

So you think the President is nothing but a salesman? This is scary. I hate to break this to you, but successful Presidents actually DO things. It takes knowledge and experience to get legislation passed and to deal with foreign leaders. All of these people will realize on day one that Obama is an amateur. No speech will help him then.

This is what happens when people are bombarded with advertising their whole lives. They become conditioned to respond emotionally, not logically. They can't tell the difference between voting for President or voting for American Idol.

You'll find that many of the Clinton and Obama positions are similar, if very less detailed on their respective websites. A case in point:

The Clinton statement on Comprehensive Government Reform: "Americans are ready for a government that puts competency ahead of cronyism. For the past six years, we've had an administration that has contempt for government. And because they view it with contempt, they treat it with contempt. We need a return to transparency and a system of checks and balances, and a 21st century government to meet our 21st century challenges".

Here's Obama's statement on Ethics which takes up this whole page:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/ethics/

This article from August, discusses the difference in the candidates regarding money in politics: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/21/AR2007082101420.html?nav=rss_opinions

"On this issue, Obama leads the pack -- I'd say PAC, but he (and Edwards) don't take their checks, either. He helped pass a far-reaching ethics and campaign finance bill in the Illinois state Senate and made the issue a priority on arriving in Washington. Much to the displeasure of his colleagues, Obama promoted an outside commission to handle Senate ethics complaints. He co-authored the lobbying reform bill awaiting President Bush's signature and pushed -- again to the dismay of some colleagues -- to include a provision requiring lawmakers to report the names of their lobbyist-bundlers.

He has co-sponsored bills to overhaul the presidential public financing system and public financing of Senate campaigns. It's nice to hear Clinton talk about how "we've got to move toward public financing" -- Edwards backs it, too -- but I don't see her name on those measures.

Obama readily agreed to identify his bundlers. Unlike Clinton and Edwards, he has released his income tax returns. Perhaps most important, Obama has pledged to take public financing for the general election if he is the Democratic nominee and his Republican opponent will do the same."

Clinton said she'd "consider it" but why hesitate?

When it comes to campaign finance reform, it's clear who here has the specifics and the passion. If you think, as I do, that money in politics is an important issue, than Obama has the record that Clinton lacks.

@Anonymous, my feelings exactly. We're in the same frame of mind. In fact, we'll go one step further. If Hillary doesn't get nominated we will switch allegiances and ACTIVELY campaign for McCain among family, friends and neighbors. The economic and political challenges to this country, both foreign and domestic, are too great to allow us the luxury of four years of dreamy-eyed navel-gazing.

The Democrats are really their own worst enemies.

sunnylo1 wrote: "I don't understand how anyone can even consider voting for this woman. She voted for the war; the single biggest mistake in the history of this country. She can only be counted on to do the politically expedient thing, not the the right thing. She is not trustworthy. To those that say she only voted to give bush the power to leverage saddam hussein; well, if that's the case she's too stupid to be president. Everyone knew where the bush assholes were going with that authority. No one with a shred of a conscience can vote for clinton."

This bears repeating. Hillary Clinton blew the single most important vote of her Senate service. This says volumes about her leadership.