Ironduke

In a huge comeback, Hillary Clinton has won the primaries in both Texas and Ohio, as well as Rhode Island. She won Ohio by a surprisingly large margin -- 58-42%. The vote in Texas, with the results still coming in, is much closer -- about 51-47%, but still wide enough to claim a clear victory in the popular vote, in what could amount to a moral victory with a delegate allocation system that may likely favor Barack Obama.

So the Clinton campaign continues on -- this race isn't going to be over for a long time, perhaps not until the convention in August. Pennsylvania is seven weeks away. Mississippi and Wyoming are a few days away, but they're not large states. Mississippi with its large Black population will no doubt go to Barack Obama, while Clinton is expected to begin campaigning in Wyoming tomorrow.

Who do you think will gain the momentum? Will this fight go all the way to the Democratic National Convention at the end of August? Will the victor emerge bloodied, or will the intense media coverage boost that candidate's campaign?

__________________
The Buck Stops Here

nizawa

As a John McCain Fan, I rather like to oppose Obama than Hillary.

Ironduke

49% of America views Clinton unfavorably. In a recent poll by Pew, 25% of Clinton supporters say they'd vote for McCain rather than Clinton, but I doubt this trend would continue looking forward. McCain has much, much more support among independents against Clinton than Obama as well. Furthermore the polls have given McCain a consistent lead over Clinton, whereas he's half and half with Obama.

JAD_333

Super delegates want a winner. Obama seemed unstoppable until today. But now? If he loses PA, which is very possible, and the delegate total isn't mathematically out of Clinton's reach with the super delegates, the convention will be the final battleground.

__________________
To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education. (Plato)

JAD_333

Typo? How can Clinton supporters say they'd vote for McCain rather than her. What kind of weird supporters does she have?

Ironduke

According to Pew Research, 25% of Clinton supporters would defect to McCain. They are probably mainly white working class voters...

Clinton supporters would defect

Plutodog

I'm not impressed with what Clinton was willing to do/say to get her comeback and I don't think she won enough delegates to continue on without continuing to throw dirt...as to how it ends, who can predict in theis election cycle? There's been some weird zig zags and conventional wisdom is subject to some deep undercurrents including the illegal immigration issue, war on Radical Islamic Terrorists, the misguided Iraq detour to that war, weather events and environmental issues, the first major female AND black candidate and the racism and sexism factors, the age factor with Mccain, the apparently newly active young voters, ficle voters. Anybody who can be sure is surely not all there, IMO.

reasonmclucus

At the very least Clinton's victories will slow Obama's band wagon and cause those who were anticipating a consensus about Obama to have second thoughts. If the situation is deadlocked at convention time, there would be a potential shift to a third candidate as occurred at the GOP convention in 1920.

__________________
There must be no barriers for freedom of inquiry. R. Oppenheimer

Ironduke

I don't think anything Hillary Clinton said or did gave her a "comeback" -- I think it was due to forces beyond her control. I think this NAFTAgate "scandal" that came out just before the primaries hurt Obama -- it damaged his credibility on the issue most important to Democrats. Rush Limbaugh launched a radio appeal urging Republicans to vote in the Democratic primary in Texas, hard to say what kind of effect that would have though.

Ironduke

Not sure how this would play out either -- I don't think either one wants to play second fiddle, and neither one is likely to concede.

SnowLeopard

Because how and when people vote can vary for the reason. Things are not crystal clear (on many subjects) as some might want to believe.

I voted for Clinton today in Texas not because I want to see her in the White House but because I didn't want to see Obama there. I supported her today because I'd rather see her get the nomination than Obama.

But come November, it is very unlikely that I will vote for her on that day.

Different day, different goals.
_________________________________________________
("Tyr! You Traitor! You said you were on my side!"--Prime Minister being gutted.
"Wrong, I said I was on the winning side!"--Tyr, doing the gutting, (w,stte), Andromeda "The Prince")

gunnut

I don't want to sound racist or accuse anyone of being racist, but Hill won TX probably due to large Hispanic vote. Bottom line, Hispanics don't like blacks. Technically Obama isn't black but African American. But the terms have merged together and he sold himself as "black." I said long ago, he's gonna lose more votes if he goes after the monolithic black vote.

Hill won Ohio because of the sagging economy. Residents there believe Hill can do more for them than Obama. Of course the NAFTA thing hurt Obama more than Clinton.

Even if Obama wins the nomination, he still faces 2 huge problems. First, some people simply will not vote for him because of his skin color. Period. Second, he relies too much on the "youth" vote. Sorry, but youths don't vote. They make lots of noise and party down and the complain about the establishment often. However they haven't turned out to be a reliable source of votes historically.

Thanks to a Saturday Night Live skit, which I can't seem to find, making fun of how the mainstream media gives Obama a free pass until now, the media is finally starting to focus a bit more on Obama. More dirty laundry will come out in the near future. We know about the Clintons and McCain already. We don't know much about this first term senator from Illinois. His likeability will decline as more crap about him comes out.

__________________
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

Adux

As an Indian, I rather have a John McCain or Hillary Clinton, Not Obama. He is too communist for my liking,.

Adux

Gunnut,

I saw the skit, From a foreign observer standpoint, I have to say it is right on the ball. Obama was given a free pass, the media made him somekind of rockstar when he had nothing concrete to offer

georgelpowell

Americans, in general, do not seem to take an interest in what is happening, it is a country where 60% of those interviewed cannot even point to England on the map. I hope most Americans know the issues at stake in these elections. OK, so I am English and miffed that our cousins do not even know where live.

Politics are notoriously difficult and can turn on a 'Where is the Meat' advert. Will the combatants get bloody? probably not. All the time this contest is strung out the less coverage the GOP get, so it is not all bad.
What worries me is that we know so little about Obama. He is a closed book, his facial expressions are learned, his oratory schooled, and his mannerisms artificial. Not to say he is not a great guy but we just do not know him. I find that scary.
Remember 'Maggy Thatcher'. Her public image was created and her articulation was so false that she had lost the ability to give normal nuances in her speech, nuances that let people know, for instance, when she was about to end a sentence or even stop talking.
Obama also is not natural. At the moment, he is playing the 'male dominance' role with Clinton because she cannot retaliate. He wants to be seen as assertive, a true leader but is this really him. Definitely not a WYSIWYG sort of guy.
I actually reckon nature hates true leaders. If it was a survival characteristic to have an IQ of 150 we would all have an IQ of 150. If it was a survival characteristic to be built like an ox then we would all be built like oxes. Nature prefers stability in a system. Leaders built like an OX with an IQ of 150 simply do not exist because nature will not allow it. So, Obama may not have the muscles but he is projecting assertiveness and seems smart. This is what we want to see, but is it all too good to be true?