Clinton, Obama look to next big-delegate states

Hillary's got a steep hill to climb. How much of it is because she's a woman, plain and simple? Susan Milligan writes about this in the Globe today. It's a great article. http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/02/19/clintons_struggle_vexes_feminists/

Another interesting perspective is in a blog post called "My Day With The Eel Pouters" about how Hillary plays among red-meat American men. You may want to check it out at: http://reclaimingthefword.typepad.com/reclaiming_the_f_word/2008/02/my-day-with-the.html

Obama as a lawyer should be more careful and precise in using others' intellectual property. This shows his immaturity. I cannot trust him as a manager of this country.

Obama as a lawyer should be more careful and precise in using others' intellectual property. This shows his immaturity. I cannot trust him as a manager of this country.

Did you perhaps forget that Hillary promised not to go after the Florida and Michigan delegates, too? But then she changed and didn't even blink.

You trust that sort of person though, right?

Figures.

hey ernie razon

the words he used were by permission. deval patrick was on the air this morning; they are friends. lets not be idiotic.

Hillary is a lawyer as well, using your argument, Earnest, the fact that she has used quite a few of Obama's own campaign saying make her immature as well? Makes her unfit to lead? Hmmm, you have a intellectual dilemma there, Earnest!

The national press continues to trivialize this election. Here is Clinton repeating every catch phase used by Obama and the dumb press are repeating all the junk from Clinton's people and never holding to the same standards they are setting out for Barack.

How can you be on the trail every day for months on end, and always say something original. Give the guy a break!

I was apalled at the shallowness of the gender piece this morning. It's central premise is fallacious - it's not at all clear that one may accurately extrapolate from the experience of a single candidate any worthwhile lessons about the challenges facing all candidates of her gender.
Still, if you're going to try to write a trend story with only a single example, it's worth considering alternative explanations:
Is it possible, for example, that any candidate running against Barack Obama this year would find the experience dispiriting? Well, actually, yes. Ask Joe Biden about the pitfalls of running on experience against Obama. Or Bill Richardson. By any standard, they were the most experienced Democrats in the race, and they failed miserably.
So perhaps it's just that in 2008, message is more important than experience? Well, clearly not. John Edwards spouted much the same message as Obama, but fared even more poorly than Hillary. Clearly, her experience mattered to voters, who repeatedly cited it in choosing her over her rivals.

In fact, by any reasonable standard, Hillary's performance in this cycle ought to put to rest many longstanding concerns about the viability of female candidates. What afflicts Hillary is that she has, after great effort, convinced voters that her gender is inconsequential - that it should not obscure her experience, her policy positions, and her fitness to command. In 2004, that would likely have been enough to win, when coupled with her considerable personal charm, her familial connections, and her careful groundwork. The problem is that she spent eight years framing herself as the inevitable, establishment candidate, only to find herself in the middle of a race about change.

That's why, if you look at the polling we've had so far this cycle, you'll observe an interesting pattern. Obama has consistently done extremely well with younger women, in most states winning women under the age of 35, and not infrequently those under the age of 45. It turns out that, when the two collide, generation matters much, much more than gender. The percentage of women supporting Hillary rises with each age bracket, reaching dizzying heights among female voters over the age of 65. These are women who struggled to succeed in their own professional lives, who tend to regard gender as the defining feature of their own careers, and whose support for Hillary is nothing short of passionate. Younger women take a different view - they see Hillary as locked in struggles that have little relevance to their own lives, and tend to see achieving transformational change in the political system as the overriding imperative.

If you want to write a trend story, how about focusing on the generational rift? Why aren't women voters of different ages (who are actually splitting their votes) subjected to anything approaching the same degree of scrutiny as black women (who have, in recent contests, generally voted for Obama in higher proportions than black men)? This isn't about voters being unwilling to accept a woman as commander in chief. On most of the crucial questions, particularly in the early stages of the race, Hillary outperformed Obama in the exit polls even as she lost at the ballot box - voters found her more experienced, more competent, and better prepared to lead. She enjoys all the advantages that institutional candidates generally enjoy. She represents a watershed moment - the female candidate has finally arrived!

And that's the punchline. When a woman can be every bit as much an establishment candidate as any man, then she can lose just as decisively to a candidate embodying change as all the men in the race already have.

I promise you, Hillary Clinton does not write her own speeches. Is that plagiarism
on her part. No. But does she acknowledge the speechwriter? No. It all seems very disengenuous on her part, looking for any advantage to exploit. She precisely
plays the politics of old that we are all so weary of.

Obama says he did not campaign in Florida, but he ran ads during and up to the Primary. He also had his ground force making call to Florida voters for campaign contributions. But he lost.

The votes in Florida should and will count.

I understand Bill Clinton is already in Texas campaigning, and well... I just don't know. Am I the only one to think so, or is Bill Clinton losing it? And I don't just mean the loose canon, finger-pointing, red-in-the-face infamous temper, here (though, I suppose, that too is relevant to some degree considering Hillary Clinton just mentioned that she would send him abroad to "mend" our foreign policy), but I am talking about all the nonsensical rambling (or is he just grasping at straws?): Continuing his swing through eastern Texas last night, Bill Clinton continued to slam Obama's discounting of "fights" of the past (?!), and said that Obama's argument can be blamed for the elimination of Democratic candidates who have already dropped out of the race (??!)
I quote: ..."It has already taken four candidates out, four good candidates out," he said. "And it would have taken Hillary out if she didn't have so much grassroots support and so much guts in the face of a lot of what has happened here. "

... Say what?...

This plagiarism threat is right up there with the accusation of Obama writing an “essay” in kindergarten about wanting to be President someday. What is wrong with her?

Obama has more experience than Hillary as an elected official:
Obama: Illinois Senate: 1997-2004; U.S. Senate: 2004-2008
Hillary has only been in the U.S. Senate since 2001.

Obama opposed the war from the start, opposed the bankruptcy law Hillary voted for, and opposed the bill that could have been interpreted as giving the Bush Administration permission to attack Iran — all of which Hillary voted for.

Her well-funded, branded name and campaign is a sham. How can she run a country when she can’t run even a campaign?

I’m a 50/50 and I am afraid Hillary is just starting to look stupid with her grasping at straws in making lame accusations against Obama and his campaign. She had such a great opportunity and it has slipped away as she has let Bill overshadow her and say dumb things. She has squandered a brand name, a huge war chest and just is beginning to look increasingly desperate. This is no way to support feminism.

I would love a woman as President, just not this one. I am so afraid she will continue down the path of self-destruction and take our causes down with her.

Attacking Obama about his speeches does not change the fact that he is a good candidate with solid ideas as to how to get our country back on its feet. Hilary has made her fair share of mistakes on the campaign trail too. And as another poster said, Obama got the OK from Deval Patrick to reinterpret and reuse his speech. If you listen to a side-by-side comparison, they are definitely different in their own ways. Musical artists sample songs, why can't politicians sample past speeches? Barack Obama was obviously moved by Deval's words. I think it is flattering (to Deval) that he wants to restate them (in his own way).

I, for one, am not going to let something as insignificant as that change my feelings about Barack as a candidate. I strongly believe he is the best candidate for President in the running and I will continue to support him through the election and his Presidency...

If Obama is one of my student and used the "just words" comments WITHOUT mentioning the original speaker, he deserves a failing grade.

I am worried about what kind of message Obama is sending to the children by dismissing this problem as trivial.

Funny how Hillary's own rhetoric is exactly what Obama means to change. It is her own politics that need to be changed and the exact reason while I will be voting for Barrack in our caucus in June.

As a Canadian, one used to having an election called within 30 days, I watch the primaries with absolute fascination. Especially the Democrats....

If I were voting... it would be Clinton all the way..... you might not like her, but she works, has the experience, etc. etc. and she never gives up.. like a dog with a bone.. I would want her to represent me,, with no qualms

Barak Hussein Obama reminds me of a very old commercial which goes something like this.... Promise her the world.... but give her Arpege....

If her were promising Arpege, I would be a lot more comfortable