I am far from a fan of the clintons. However, this is a very classy and poignant article.

If fate ends the democratic primary you left the lady some dignity.

Hopefully when all is said and done and Hillary has a chance to sit back and think about her campaign she will see where it went wrong. Not the media. Not, as her supporters want to believe, women haters, and not the candidate herself in campaigning.

But, she made a fatal mistake. She refused to recognize that you do not put your pollster in the role of chief strategist. You put in a pro. Loyalty is great in friendships but, not for being the head of the most important run of your life.

Just because Hillary is a woman, does not mean that she will bring about a "sea change" in the United States of America. The women in this world who have become heads of state have either been daughters or widows of former heads of state as in the case of Benazir Bhutto, Indira Gandhi and Akino of the Phillipines. They were women but did jack on women's issues, poverty and education while in office. They got elected on name recognition - on dynastic appeal. Of the one woman who did get elected in her own steam was Maragaret Thatcher and her only fans are Republican right wingers and fascists around the world.

Hillary is also playing up her dynastic appeal - a sort of a successor to her husband's paltry legacy. That is not democracy is all about. I thought we did away with dynasties when monarchy was abolished in this country.

Until then, I don't trust her one little bit. She's not sad, she's definitely not a victim and her continued spin of reality scares the hell out of me.

Remember folks this is a high powered lawyer who once took apart a 12-year-old sex abuse victim on the stand so she could get her client off. I am not saying she wasn't doing her job but I'll be damned if I am going to go all weepy-eyed over her now.

And, if she's half the leader and woman she proclaims to be, she would agree with me.

I just finished reading the "politics" sections of all the major Ohio newspapers, and Hillary seems solid in Ohio. The economic misery in the state, 200+ foreclosures a day, might suggest a desire for change, but Senator Clinton's highly programatic, information-laden "solutions" campaign seem comforting to an electorate battered by waves of layoffs and job loss, and though this is a change election, the extraordinary economic changes in Ohio seem to have made the electorate a bit hesitant to embrace Senator Obama's full-scale banner of change. It is Thursday, early voting has begun, and the election is on Tuesday, which is quite a while in politics; meanwhile, a similar exercise in Texas has begun to show some momentum for Senator Obama. In the two New England states: RI for Clinton; Vermont for Obama.

to be leaders in our communities and elect them to public offices. In our country, we do have many such women who have not ridden on the coat tails of their husbands or fathers. Let us do away with nepotism and dynastic rule once and for all and open the playing field for all manner of women and men to participate democratically in the governance of our country.

The media that hates Hillary so much won't tell anyone this but barring some kind of complete grand theft of the nomination or Obama getting caught with a hooker, the math is just not there for Hillary.

To be viable she would have to win Ohio, Pennsylvania and texas all by 20 points or more. Then she would have get Florida and Michigan seated (and even if she did get MI seated she still only got half the votes) AND she would have to convince the super delegates to give her the nomination.

Or let me put it this way, if Hillary Clinton won every state from here on out by 100% she still wouldn't have the number of pledged delegates she would need to win.

All those people living in all those states that supposedly don't matter? Well, Hillary, they do and so do their votes. And every time the Clinton campaign tells those people that their votes don't count and they have just been the victims of some kind of cult movement, they drive a little deeper wedge into the democratic party.

An attempt to somehow get the nomination by unconventional means after March 5th (assuming she doesn't win all of the March 4th states by 20% or more) would be the final straw.

And if the democrats let her do it they would kill the party for the next 20 years.

They're basically even in Texas and she's winning Ohio (so far.) Seems like it's breaking Obama's way but it's too early to call it yet. The young people really need to get out in Texas and Ohio to help him win. Barack knows it, he said it himself today it's not over yet.

I don't think I'm the only one who doesn't fully appreciate the making history part of this presidential election cycle. Maybe if the economy was in better shape, maybe if we weren't bogged down in Iraq, maybe if housing prices weren't dropping like a rock - maybe if there weren't so many serious problems in this country, I would be dwelling a lot more on the historic ramifications of the next Democratic candidate.

I was never a big fan of the Clintons - I admit it. I don't hate them, either. I could have voted for Hillary if she was the nominee, but I'm very happy at the prospect of voting for Obama.

But for me, race and gender were never the issue. The distinction between the two of them has been someone who wants to continue to fight, or someone who wants to work together. I'm voting for the one who wants to work together. The problems are too big and affect all of us.