Seconded! Ever since the SotU, I’ve been hoping she would win the spot.
There is also this:
…and just recently this:
Factors in handicapping the democratic race to the White House post Super Tuesday? How about these. . .
Omaha Mayor Mike Fahey on Wednesday endorsed Illinois Sen. Barack Obama for president
The Seattle Times endorses Sen. Barack Obama for the Democratic nomination for president
Seattle’s oldest daily, the Post-Intelligencer endorsed Barack Obama, saying, “In this history-making race, Sen. Barack Obama is the better choice over his worthy rival, Sen. Hillary Clinton, because of the real prospects he offers for change in domestic policy, the tone of government in Washington, D.C., and the conduct of foreign affairs”
How’re those for factors? 
Oh, and let’s factor in Obama’s amazing grass roots fund raising. . .
Thanks to you, we have raised more than $3 million since the polls closed on February 5th.
$3 million in less than 24 hours!
But he hardly needs help in Kansas. I was a big fan of Richardson, but his chance has come and gone. Now I’ve jumped on Phil Bredesen’s wagon. (I forget who first brought him up, but it’s not my idea, I just think it’s a great one.)
Compatible on the issues. Fiscally responsible. Strong on education, healthcare, and the environment. Popular Southern White male governor.
That is so telling. Heck my wife and I matched $500 with our cousins in Boston this morning This whole race is about to flop in Obama’s favor…Clinton was expected to grab the states and delegates she did- now is the time for Obama to make his run. Let’s watch and see.
It’s not disputed that she borrowed 5 million dollars of her moneyto stay in the race.
That article posted before I saw the admission break. In fact, I think I posted about it right after 
The numbers people are talking about - $3 million or $5 million-plus or whatever in a day - are just incredible. Over the next few days I think the press will start doing more stories about Obama’s momentum.
As of Thursday morning, Obama’s site is saying $7m since Tuesday.
Bah - $3 million, $5 million - that’s a drop in the bucket. It’s over $7 million dollars this morning. :eek:
$7,067,270
I guess another factor in handicapping this race will turn out to be a potentially BIG problem in the still-too-close-to-call New Mexico.
Wanna know who those votes ended up favoring?
Big Sigh…What a sham. I’ll need to look into this and read more about it.
All the problems that New Mexico has had can be squarely placed on the incompetence of the New Mexico Democratic Party. They were the ones running this primary, not the state. Some of the problems:
- Overconsolidation of precincts. The worst was Rio Rancho (a suburb of Albuquerque), where they tried to stick 45 precincts into one high school.
- Unrealistic expectations. The party chair expected a high of 40,000 voters (after more than 100,000 had voted in 2004.) So besides overconsolidation, that also means they ran out of printed ballots.
- Shorter hours. State-run elections have the polling places open from 7 to 7; the party had their hours from noon to 7.
- Out-of-date party rolls (which they should have gotten from the county clerks or the Secretary of State.) That, along with the crowding, explains why there are 17,000 provisional ballots. Again, though, the date for changing voter registration to Democrat was January 4th, and the state offices did their part in getting their rolls up-to-date in time.
So the party has only itself to blame.
I received this e-mail today from an attorney poll-watching organization I belong to:
That kind of stuff probably balances out in the end, but it is still a good show of how messed up the process is. I heard California was terrible.
There WAS a huge blizzard in Rio Ariba county just prior to Tuesday. Road closures and such lead to a lot of improvising. Also, this “caucus” was funded by the state democratic party, and not government run. I won’t rule out shenanigans, but some of the irregularities are explainable.
!!! That should be interesting! Florida has always been a primary state – we would need out-of-state advisors just to teach us how to run a caucus!
Let’s play out a few scenerios …
Obama does well, quite well, in the next series, and HRC does well in OH and TX. Leaves them still neck and neck and they stay neck and neck. The election is decided by either superdelegates deciding without a clear mandate or by seating delegates from FL and MI or in a brokered convention. (Even new caucuses there would be enough to make some upset at a perceived change of the rules mid-game.)
Democrats lose to McCain either way. The levels of disaffection with the process would be very hard to offset.
Obama does just as well in the next series and pulls off an upset in either TX or OH or minimally a virtual tie in each.
Superdelegates start to flock to Obama and the pressure builds for HRC to drop. She does.
HRC pulls off keeping the next few as even or she goes ahead and she takes TX and OH as expected.
HRC wins in a similar process.
In short, Obama needs to both do well in these next several and upset in either TX or OH to really win, and HRC needs to stop his momentum in the next several states and take both of those to really win. Anything other than those options will let one get the nomination but very likely lose the general.
I don’t think that really matters that much in the general. It’s determined by who can best appeal to the swing voters, who mostly will have observed the parties’ nominating processes with detachment.
It just occurred to me . . . If Obama and Clinton are still running neck-and-neck after Texas, and the Michigan and Florida parties decide to run caucuses . . . then Florida and Michigan Dems suddenly become real important! The whole primary campaigning season passed us by . . . it was rather boring . . . but that would change. The nation’s attention would be (briefly) focused on these states, especially delegate-rich Florida.
Fun, fun, fun!
Already pre-pandered to delegate rich Florida.