I happen to agree with Krugman that many Obama followers strike me as obsessive to the point of cultishness. But that is not to say many Clinton followers are not the same.

The point is, the only people who can defeat the Democrats in November are the Democrats - and if this keeps up, we will. Obama followers threatening to vote Republican or abstain, Clinton followers doing the same. It all ends up the same way: another four years of Republican rule.

It needs to stop - now.

Clinton supporters won't vote for Obama and Obama supporters won't vote for Clinton.

Let's see if they blame each other for putting Romney in the White House. Nah, they will blame Ralph Nader or Cynthia McKinney.

Republicans know how to work together and play together. Democrats know how to act like republicans - especially in regards to each other as democrats. They only act like democrats when they want to sucker some voters and then it is back to corporate america rules.

The only reason you should vote is for the high you get by picking the winner and identifying with victory. The issues do not matter and the personalities do not matter because either way, war is the only victor in this election.

According to a graphic I saw on MSNBC yesterday, we like each others candidates just fine, just not as much as our own.

According to the graphic, 84% of each candidate's supporters would support the others, compared to dismal numbers on the R side.

I was an Edwards guy, but I'll go with our candidate wholeheartedly, no matter who he is. ;-)

Cheers,

"You are the biggest fool to ever post on Salon! Oh, please, keep it up! You're hotter than a McCain meltdown. Come on panocha, give me the best you've got pendeja!"

Calling a latina Clinton supporter Spanish slang terms for pussy and pubic hair is sure to win her over, isn't it? Makes a nice impression. With friends like these, does Obama need enemies?

Should I list the things that make me regard her as bad news:

1. The Iraq authorization vote. I can forgive her for voting for it; what gets me POed is the way the perfect-in-her-own-mind Hillary cannot admit, even in retrospect that is was a godawful mistake, that she, at least now, regrets the way she voted. Hell she has a get out of jail free card, she believed the President, he lied, she regrets being mislead, she is now sadder but wiser.

2. The way she demonstrated that she had learned nothing in the infamous Iran as a terrorist state vote -- again giving the White House close to what she did the last time;

3. Her position on driving licenses for illegals, which is emblematic of her well polished disingenuousness -- first she fence sat, then when she worked out what sounded popular (to the debate moderators) by the second debate she said (with the smuggest expression) she was against, while Obama and Richardson took flack for trying to explain the issue, that denying driving licenses cause big problems (uninsured drivers etc.) and took damage for telling the truth;

4. For the dishonest way she played the Obama Illinois Senate "present" votes on abortion, to make it look like a strategy organised by Planned Parenthood and Chicago NOW to defeat the bill by creating cover for moderate Republicans and Dems from conservative areas to vote likewise (a present counts as a no vote in the Illinois) Senate was soft on the woman's right to choose, when she knew this was false (and she did it in a debate.)

5. The fuax scandal raising on her part with respect to Obama and her supporters inability to address the huge number of her campaign contributors in jail or with problems -- of which there are rather a lot, many who gave a multiple of what Rezko did. Obama has not shot back by asking her names?

6. The way some Hillary supporter stopped by my old room-mates house on Saturday night, to pull up his Obama lawn signs -- actually the general tone of all Hillary supporters, just plain nasty.

Amazingly, it is the Hillary supporter that have actually turned several women I know off Hillary. Their general stridency and nastiness has just sounded, well Rovian and Republican.

"Let's PRAY

THAT HILLARY, THE DRAGON LADY, DOESN'T EVEN GET THE NOMINATION. SHE IS AN ABOMINATION. She lies, obfucates, is disingenuous, and has no moral compass. She has no leadership qualities and no integrity. Need I say more?????"

Wow! Now who was saying that Clinton supporters are shrill? Nancianne, a true monument of the Obama supporter "I am going to hold my breath until I get what I want school" also says that she will never vote for Hillary Clinton. She sees nothing wrong with voting for the Republican should Hillary be nominated.

True Democrats should give in to threats from the right?

I don't disagree with a single thing you said. I am supporting Obama, and am working to get him nominated. I live in Michigan. We are pressing hard for a caucus re-vote.

All that said, if Hillary is the eventual nominee, I will vote for her. To me, the Supreme Court is in the balance, not just the Presidency. It's imperative that the next President be a Democrat because I do not want the Court to tack any further to the right. Undoing that could take generations and many many Presidential terms. Way too much to risk, in my opinion.

I live in the land of undecided. Most of my friends discuss the merits and demerits of the two Democratic contenders in a way that's rational as well as emotional. Some lean towards Clinton, some, like me, lean towards Obama. Some walked into the voting booths on Supertuesday planning to vote for one and walked out having voted for the other. Almost all of us feel that we on the left are in a lucky position, where we have two strong candidates whom we would be happy to support post-primary season.

Of course there are supporters who are going to do and say what they can to get their candidate ahead. That's the ugly nature of politics. But the truth is I think there are a lot more people like us, who would feel proud to see either Clinton or Obama get the candidacy, and who would do and say what we can to make sure that our Democratic candidate, whoever it is, gets into the Oval Office in January.

Articles like Krugman's do more to divide what should be a united Democratic party than campaign politics do.