HILLARY IS DESTROYING THE PARTY.

Hard for me to see how record numbers of repubs switching registration just to vote for HRC in PA in order to drag out the bloodbath is going to help in November when they vote for McCain. The sooner Obama can be rid of the Clinton hate machine, the better for him and our nation's future.

A fair piece, Joan, but the conclusion seems a little unsound:

""Unless the Obama-Clinton contest turns far nastier than it has already, or ends in a way that seems demonstrably unfair to a portion of the Democratic electorate, the Democrats should benefit from this competition.""

Is there any reason to believe it won't turn far nastier?

Clinton's "kitchen sink" has been wratcheted up to "knee-capping" and "back-breaking," right?

Is there any reason not to presume that Clinton will not, in fact, become even nastier?

I see the primary season transforming the very nature of presidential elections. I have been thinking this for quite some time; it doesn't seem to have hurt the democrats one bit, and both candidates have been able to take much needed breaks from the campaign. The only way McCain can pull this off in the general is if he comes up with a Hail Mary on Iraq, exactly what he's trying and failing to do on his whirlwind tour.

By the way, it keeps Nader out of the fray too.

they know he is the easier candidate to beat so thats why the right wing has been encouraging republicans to vote for him.

I guess it is a good thing. That is if the permanent and total destruction of the Clinton legacy and machine is a good thing. I think it is.

Remember those surreal press conferences where Rummy claimed chaos was good sign for Iraqi democracy?

The point at which the contest helped strengthen the party is past. Clinton can't win without undermining the legitimate candidate and the democratic process.

Next up: Walsh promotes a "light footprint" in the general election!

obama's support is coming from high income earners and white males.

hillary's support is coming from middle/low income earners and women.

which do you think are more likely to be republicans?

hint: it's not the middle/low income voters

It was Karl Rove who famously claimed a long, negative primary would end up helping the Democratic nominee. Instead, we now have McCain neck-and-neck in the polls with both Clinton and Obama. Instead, we now have McCain scoring 67% positive approval ratings among the electorate, far ahead of either Clinton or Obama. Instead, we now see preposterous gaffes committed by McCain go by with barely a mention, when we know full-well that had Obama or Clinton spoken similarly, they would have been laughed off the national stage. Instead, we now have McCain touring the Middle East and European capitals at taxpayer expense, burnishing his foreign policy credentials and appearing oh-so-presidential. Instead, we're now spending enormous amounts of precious fundraising dollars to destroy other Democrats rather than Republicans.

Can't we put the lie to this Rovian talking point? We're stuck with a long, debilitating campaign, but there's no purpose in pretending it's doing us any good. It's the height of folly to suggest otherwise. Naively whistling by the graveyard. I am astonished anyone could buy into it.

and also identifying the people who will vote for McCain when their candidate doesn't get the Dem. nomination.

I've said it before, I'll say it again: Hillary trainwreck.

I'm starting to believe what I assumed was impossible for all of 07. A republican might win this thing. Feel free to look at my old letters to identify when I say that would be the largest ever failing of the democratic party. It's looking like a real possibility.

Good day all. I'm going to sprint to lunch with my head down wearing kevlar during a raid - I hear there are snipers in these building. This is no time for poetry.

I suggest you want to believe this will not hurt the eventual Democratic nominee because you still want to believe Hillary can be that nominee. We all rationalize but you are becoming a master!

I do not see how this helps Obama. And the serial lying--at least five times--should be all she wrote for Hillary. If she does not see the reality of her postition why do you think her "fighting on" will do anything but give words and pictures to the Republicans to use against Obama?

Clinton can only win by a protracted campaign in which she goes so negative, the super delegates get scared and overturn the will of the primary and caucus voters. Any honest and knowledgeable political observer will concede this point.

So big surprise that Joan thinks a long battle is good; it's the only battle that leaves the door open for her candidate. Based on her past posts, I cannot possibly imagine this same piece coming from Joan if Clinton had an insurmountable lead in pledged delegates and Obama was tarring her relentlessly.

republicans crossing over to vote in the democratic primary is NOT a good thing.

they vote for the weakest candidate in the democratic primary and then vote for their own republican candidate in the real presidential election.

This Primary has brought excitement to the race, more then an election in the Autumn against Boring John McCain.

Still for the sake of democracy we need to continue until the States have voted and their votes counted.

Ya, but you'll keep showing up anyway...

OH you mean like when Hillary started the democratic primary with a huge lead in the polls until Edwards and Obama smeared her for 6 months?

So Sad ?

Not really. It would be if you had never heard of the Clintons. I would call this situation: So expected.

@ WES - what's this tune you're singing? I haven't been in this forum for a long time, but I remember you riding Joey in that 'monster's pouch. What happened?

"compare and contrast

obama's support is coming from high income earners and white males.

hillary's support is coming from middle/low income earners and women.

which do you think are more likely to be republicans?

hint: it's not the middle/low income voters

-- sonofloud "

What states do those voters come from?

Hint: it doesn't freakin' matter what "class" you belong to

Newsflash...middle/low income voters did NOT vote Democratic in Da South, in TX, or in many other states over the last few election cycles...who the hell do you think put (and KEPT) Reagan in the Whitehouse? And high income folks in the those states didn't vote Democratic either...

Again, nice try...Clinton Gadfly