"A very special thanks to you, Glenn, for keeping a firm grip on objective reporting. By keeping your preferred candidate to yourself (if you even have one), and by peeling back the layers of the press-onion, for once I feel like I'm examining my own preferences. Thanks for that. It's a profoundly powerful gift."

I would like to second that, Glenn. You continue to help me to think through all this as well.

Is it "winner take all" sate-by-state? Or are delegates assigned proportionally? Some mixture thereof?

The Concord Monitor and the Manchester Union-Leader say Hillary won.

Let's put it to bed.

glad she won tonight even though I really like edwards better but it's good to see that the media didn't get their way. This still doesn't stop the fact that she will be demonized as long as she runs but tonight I'm glad for her.

I'm listening to the pundits trying to pass the blame off on the pollsters right now. You raise some good points and I think we are in a period where technology (cell phones, etc.)has jumped ahead of the art so polling and sampling need to catch up but its just not time to relegate the practice to the dustbin of history.

I like this site.

www.electoral-vote.com

An expat Computer Science geek and Ph.D. in Holland. All he does is collect (aggregate) all the data in one place. He's got a refreshing non-insider perspective. You can poke around and see if it suits you.

I've heard neither mentioned recently; however, I have suspected both from time to time in comments on a variety of subjects (not all political). Y'know, a sudden influx of new handles/tags, strangely detailed refutations of criticisms, and poof, they're gone ...

So, yes, when Hillary is criticized, her "minions" write letters ... when Edwards is overlooked, his "minions" write... and other minions write in to agree and/or disagree, as applicable with the article, the responses, etc. Am I a "bad person" to suspect people are using letters to advance their agendae; am I a "wet blanket" to suggest that we acknowledge the likelihood?

There's nothing wrong or illegal or even immoral about using the web and "comments" fora as free advertising (astroturf) or to share your genuine evangelical enthusiasm (love-bombing).

I think with good message control and great timing, a very small "web-savvy" team could create a tsumani. As far as I can tell, the MSM seems to ignore the idea that "partisan factions" are using the web.

It WOULD be both difficult and pointless to "prove" the existence of such organized campaigns, however, like the "which segment of the population is represented by those who actually answer the phone and agree to be polled?" asked earlier, I think it's a "consider the source" question deserving at least of a skeptical raised eyebrow... like those ersatz "trend" stories the MSM is so fond of covering.

Re "love-bombing": The Moonies (named for Rev. Moon) were reknown for "love-bombing" and it is an awesomely effective technique in an everythig-you-ever-wanted sort of way. I experienced it once briefly and found it spooky even though I anticipated it. It consists of sunny cheerful smiling appreciation that you are wonderful, gifted, extraordinary human being who, if you just opened yourself to it, would fit into the group perfectly. After a few days of this evangelical "love bombing," a suprising number of people (including an acquaintance)left their "old lives" behind to join up. The friends and families left behind, however, became a BIG problem (cough).

"I suspect, in the long run, most of us here prefer your candidate over HRC. But for the short term, we rather enjoy it when the chattering classes are revealed to be clueless.

Your posts have invited the same reaction for the same reason."

Good catch, Paul.

Thrasher is as one who is both classless - and - clueless.

http://thumbsnap.com/v/EUTKICyV.jpg

Que ferions-nous sans vous?

This is the colonel speaking. You are too damn important to all of us and your nation. Get your ass to a doctor or tell us why you can't. And listen to those who know more about drugs than you.

Is that clear!

I just got back from a Democratic meeting to learn about my precinct committeman duties, You have your duty and orders. Follow them or else.

We can't get this mission done without you. You are critical to the team's survival. Let me know if I can help in anyway.

Do I make myself clear Mr.?

this was her last stance in a white state which during our country's orgin was one of venues where the country's original illegal aliens (pilgrims & puritans) have a long history.

I have been an activist all of my being, I have mastered the arts of ducting,, spinning, twisting, bending, turning, revolving and reinventing myself to elevate pass the white pathologies in this land a place even after 3 centuries still clings to a system governed by whites but I have also witness the truth and Obama is that life altering truth not becuase he is a messiah but becuase he has created changed in white folks.

I know now at this moment of our country's history white folks know it is morally wrong and a naturally right move towards change. White voters know that old has been white only candidates like the GOP and Clinton types cannot take our country into the future given the global connected world we live in..

I am right about this and in truth everyone in here knows I am as well...

Just too damn stoopid to realize that caucuses and primaries occur in single states and Iowa and NH are hardly represntative of the nation at large.

Word.

I wish we had a primary that was a single-day event just like the genereal election (oops, the fyslexic dingers strike again - then again, 'genereal' is sorta suggestive of 'venereal', and the last 2 elections could be so termed, IMHO). Barring that, is it realy too much to realize that two states do not a victory make?

I'm feeling pissy tonight - but, of course, it's just the whoremoans. ;->

Glad you're back... I've missed your presence here today.

Was tied up with the family situation. Exhausting stuff. Have been playing catch-up for the past two days.