It's hard to know yet whether Oregon will matter. The Clintons keep moving the goalposts. Their challenge now is, "Meet me in Pennsylvania." But Wyoming and Mississippi don't matter. Will Oregon matter? Maybe not... especially if the Clintons expect to lose. She might not even campaign here. The Clintons are betting on the superdelegates and don't care about the pledged delegates now so Oregon probably doesn't matter.

If Obama is the candidate, Oregon will probably not be a swing state as it will reliably go for Obama. As well, Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, and New Mexico will also probably not be swing states... they will go for McCain.

The Clintons keep moving the goal posts? Huh??

Peter,

You base that assumption on what? Clinton-itis? You seem to be making a case that Clinton supporters won't vote Obama? Maybe you should look over the demographics of her support base before making such bald-faced statements.

There might well be an argument that a piece of Obama's support won't go Clinton, I don't think it's real strong. What you won't see is the level of enthusiasm and activism from them. A large chunk of that is probably very candidate specific.

The results of BushCo are going to drive the vote in November. You seem very willing to ignore all the polling that shows Obama significantly ahead in ability to whack John McBush. You may think Hillary is something special, and you're welcome to that idea (wrong as it is), but your blatant BS is tiresome.

I don't like Hillary Clinton and I don't like her for very specific reasons and I don't make up junk about it. You might try that. I don't claim to be soft spoken, so what? Real is still real.

i truly hope oregon does not matter this year. the only way hillary can win now is with more of the fear based attacks she has been leveling against obama, combined with some serious super-delegate strong arming, and then a nasty credentials committee fight. her only path to the nomination is a path that would seriously hurt the legitimacy of the eventual democratic nominee.

obama still has the opportunity to win without that extra baggage, so he must. hillary will not (and should not) bow out. i've been a very tentative obama supporter, but i think it might be time to get off the sidelines. that ball is in our court.

oh, and do you really blog in a suit??

Chuck, What is the polling that shows Obama significantly ahead in his ability to beat McCain? The PEW poll I saw showed that 25% of Clinton supporters would vote for McCain in a general in gets the nomination w/10% of Obama supporters defecting. Again, I'm may just be confused.

I base it on opinion and also polling that shows that in a McCain-Obama match up, Obama will lose: New Jersey, Michigan, Florida, Rhode Island...

Correction, polling shows that he will lose: New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Florida, West Virginia... (was looking at wrong map).

Again, I don't necessarily put a lot of stock in polls right now, simply because there is a huge Obama bias with his recent attention.

But the fact that polls show him losing NJ, Penn, and WV suggests that he has a serious blue collar problem that will likely only get worse.

I'd just like to say for the record that I haven't seen one single nasty or harsh comment from Kari, Charlie or Jeff (I'm not sure of all the editors at BO, I'm just listing the ones I know of). I've only read positive comments or comments defending their candidate coming from those who represent this site. A few other people however...WOW.

More on matchups with McCain:

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/03/05/both_democrats_lead_mccain.html

Both Democrats Lead McCain A new Washington Post/ABC News poll shows both Democratic presidential candidates ahead of Sen. John McCain in general election match ups.

Sen. Barack Obama leads McCain, 52% to 40%, while Sen. Hillary Clinton is ahead, 50% to 44%.

Key finding: "Another obstacle for McCain may be his age. More than a quarter of those polled said they are less inclined to support McCain because he would be the oldest person ever to become president. The percentage discouraged by McCain's age is more than double that of people who would be less enthusiastic about supporting Obama because he is African American or Clinton because she is a woman."

March 5, 2008 | Related News

On another thread, Peter said "Polls mean very little when conducted in March, after a media coronation of Obama." However, the polls I am talking about above were all conducted in February

Then they are even less reliable than ones conducted in March.

Peter, didn't you also predict the defeat of Measure 49? All I'm saying is maybe you're underestimating voters here too.

For those touting polls in early 2008 as somehow predictive of the final outcome, here's a good lesson to remember. In September polls might be more meaningful!

Yes, I predicted that... based on polling. So I hopefully learned that early polling often correlates little with eventual outcomes!

A few other people however...WOW

:wave:

Watch this video then tell me why I should support her. She'll draft my sons in one of her New York minutes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYATbsu2cP8

Get off the cross, Katy. As TA insightfully pointed out, you haven't posted a single comment with substance -- just incessant whining.Your victims complex is really ruining our discussions on the issues.

On the other hand, I disagree with Peter's suppositions, but he is on the issues so he is positvely contributing.

There might well be an argument that a piece of Obama's support won't go Clinton, I don't think it's real strong. What you won't see is the level of enthusiasm and activism from them. A large chunk of that is probably very candidate specific.

I'm supporting Obama, not with the starry-eyed enthusiasm of some of his supporters, but on the slim chance that he can make a difference. I'm also an independent (NAV) so I don't feel any obligation to go for any Democrat the voters choose. It is too early to say what I'll do in November, but I could just as well write in someone other than Hillary or McCain. Chances are many other, though certainly not all, independents will feel the same way. My anti-Hillary hostility is not the result of right-wing propaganda as some people might like to think or have suggested. Events I have observed in her and Slick Willy's past have stuck with me, and they are mostly negative.

I work every day to try and get positive words out about Hillary for this reason. Even if she doesn't win Oregon, if she is the nominee all progressive Oregonians should want her to prevail here, and that will be harder if fellow democrats are constantly reinforcing negative talking-points that the right-wing foisted on her a decade ago - points that are not borne out by her very progressive Senate record.

I seem to recall Hillary and her campaign recently making negative statements about Obama that the right-wing could use against him if he is the nominee. John McCain would be better than Obama on security when McCain is prepared to expand the war in Iraq to Iran? Come on. Get real.

If Josh Kardon's post, follow-up remarks, and failure to respond to challenges are representative of his future performance as Clinton point man in Oregon, I don't think Obama has much to worry about in this state. If, as seems likely, Hillary goes for dirty tricks will JK be a loyal cohort leader?

Did Josh ever get back to us on when Hillary is going to release her tax returns like Barack has done?

I would also like Josh to explain to us why Hillary did not read the NIE report before she voted to invade Iraq, and why she echoed Bush-Cheney's "stay the course" position for so so long.

I'm curious about the story of Obama refusing to have his picture taken w/Gavin Newsom. It was told my Willy Brown and Newson and memebers of his staff all say that it happened. People keep asking about Clinton's vote on Iraq (something that Obama never had to vote on so we have no way of knowing how he would have voted)and why she should be trusted - so why should Obama be trusted w/the lgbt community? I'd like to ask the Obama supporters if this doesn't make you a little uncomfortable?

i say this as a weak obama supporter, but are you really saying that not getting ones photo taken with gavin newson means that you're not down with the lgtbq community?

if i were going after obama on that issue i would mention donnie mclurkin. but seeing as obama supports the full repeal of doma, and hillary only wants a partial roll back, and he's been speaking out at black churches against homophobia, i'd say that's a wash at the very least.

It was smack dab in the middle of Newson's turmoil over his decision to allow gay marriage in SF. Seems to me, at the very least, something like this shows that Obama is very much capable of the calculating political moves that people keep accusing Clinton's campaign of doing. At worst it shows he's a flip-flopper, a hyprocrite.

I guess if we're being honest we'd agree that every candidate isn't perfect and that yes, this is a rather uncomfortable story.

Actually, no. I'm asking if this story makes any Obama supporters uncomfortable? Last time I checked Bill Clinton isn't running for President?

Great reach-out by Josh Kardon, Hit and run! If he really thinks Hillary has a shot at winning with any legitimacy, why does he support her scorched earth campaign. Yesterday she spent the day endorsing John McCain and trashing Obama. In the event of a stolen nomination, is there some notion that Obama or his supporters would support Hillary, or that the party would even survive? If there is a real dialogue here, the Clinton campaign needs to make the case that it can actually unite the party around her candidacy and win a legitimate nomination contest. Right now it's just total war and people aren't giving money to a party they think is in cahoots with Clinton to rig the nomination. The DNC are calling people left and right and are running out of cash, thanks to these kind of tactics. When Clinton goes around making sound bites for John McCain, then the prospects for the fall look pretty grim and candidates down-ticket are going to suffer as well. So what words of wisdom, Josh Kardon, or is this just a drive-by BS??

katy,

i am not obamanaut. i am equally prepared to be disappointed by either obama or hillary when they inevitably employ the kick-the-base strategy to appease the conservative establishment after election.

so if you provide a reference for that story, i'll happily read it, and if it passes the smell test, i'll attach it to my list of things to be disappointed about. since newsom and brown are in the clinton camp, the claim doesn't have much merritt without a ref.

in the spirit of agreement, though, i am happy to admit that obama is equally capable of calculating political moves as hillary, and that no candidate is perfect. (though right now clinton is perfectly aligned with mcain in her liebermanesque attacks on obama)

So what words of wisdom, Josh Kardon, or is this just a drive-by BS??

My vote gores for drive-by bullshit. I challenged him on some points on an earlier thread. No response. He has been challenged on this thread and, poof, Josh is gone.

My vote gores for drive-by bullshit. I challenged him on some points on an earlier thread. No response. He has been challenged on this thread and, poof, Josh is gone.

On the other hand, maybe Hillary has him too busy digging up dirt on Obama to fuel her scorched earth policy.

I'm sure we'll be hearing endless variations on this theme from your guys in the unlikely event that Obama's krew has the guts to keep pushing for fair play in the Israel/Palestine arena.

Other than a few politicians - Kucinich, Gravel, Ron Paul - and Ralph Nader none has had the integrity to demand a fair and just settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian problem. Those who consider this to be political suicide may be right, but the inescapable consequence is that it demonstrates our national hypocrisy and encourages enmity among many Arabs (semites) and Muslims. If I recall correctly the maltreatment of Arabs in Palestine and Iraq was part of the motivation for 9/11.

Again, I don't necessarily put a lot of stock in polls right now, simply because there is a huge Obama bias with his recent attention.

But the fact that polls show him losing NJ, Penn, and WV suggests that he has a serious blue collar problem that will likely only get worse.

I had not previously realized that working-class voters were restricted to a few states. Thanks for the correction.