No. But to pile up a big enough lead in and around Philly to balance out your losses in the rest of the state is a time-honored PA Democratic approach to winning statewide elections.
Exactly, 40% of democratic voters are from in and around Philly - in the burbs, and that’s where he’s at now and where he’s beein doing really well. The other 60% of the state, Obama’s problem demographic, he only needs get a percentage of them to go his way…and he’ll do well.
For some reason this reminds of Pauline Kael’s comment after Nixon swamped McGovern in the '72 election, where she wondered how that was possible since everyone she knew had voted for McGovern. 
I wouldn’t be surprised to see HRC win by about 12%, though Obama might keep the margin down to the high single digits.
Ummm, I don’t think you read Kos much. He openly bashes corrupt and entrenched Dems (see Murtha, Jefferson) and supports primary challenges against Dems that he has issues with. Sure, he calls off the dogs if primary bids fail, but he doesn’t throw support behind Dem candidates he doesn’t like.
Honestly, I don’t see how what you wrote in any way contradicts what I wrote. Supporting primary challenges is not inconsistent with being a partisan Democrat. As you yourself said, he “calls off the dogs” once the primary bid fails. Heck, half the time his issue with Democrats in office is that they’re not partisan enough, not that they’re not ideological enough.
Edited to add:
Meanwhile, while the RealClearPolitics poll of polls shows further tightening, mainly as a result of the revered SUSA’s bringing their call much tighter, the wider read CNN is declaring her lead expanding to 7. This is good for Obama.
Elvis yes, for me to say it is a real Clinton win, meaning enough to keep her way longshot at all alive, she needs a 20 point win. Still over a 10 point win for her and I’d be disappointed because that would be enough to keep alive possibly beyond NC and IN. Single digits and she’s out by after that. A straight up loss and I don’t know if she makes it even that far. But that is only slightly less as unlikely as her winning by 20 plus.
If I am going in for a delicate operation and I tell the doctor that I would rather he use a scalpel as opposed to a chainsaw, that doesn’t mean that I am asking him not to perform the surgery at all does it?
Exactly. MoveOn didn’t want to “kill people oppressed by the Taliban dictatorship”. That is not a difficult phrase to parse.
Yes, but that interpretation does not make MoveOn.org sound like a bunch of naive idiots- so it never would have worked for Hillary in that instance.
Jeezum crow, it’s like you guys have never run for president before.
Hillary is now running adverts with Osama Bin Laden in them.
I shit you fucking not.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/04/21/clinton-uses-pearl-harbor-bin-laden-images-in-new-ad/
Hahahahahahaa!!! She just doesn’t get it. :smack: Why doesn’t she just switch parties now and get it over with? She certainly has the republican game down.
I put this in the Ed Rendell thread when I saw it. She’s a loser plain and simple. I personally don’t care how much she wins in PA if at all, I just agev again to Obama for the umpteenth time. Her Rove-like behaviour is despicable, and that’s being nice.
I know my bet is down for an about 10% Clinton win, but what with SUSA’s sudden move up, and the fact that this last bit of negativity is so dang cloddish that it has to backfire on her, I see some very small hope that I am very wrong and that Obama could pull an out and out victory off here!
I love the Obama campaign’s response. In addition to a new 30-second television spot of their own, they sent a flier out invoking a Bill Clinton quote from 1994, “If one candidate’s appealing to your fears and the other one’s appealing to your hopes, you better vote for the person who wants you to think and hope.” And there’s a copy of the Clinton/Gore campaign flier from '92 titled: VOTE YOUR HOPES NOT YOUR FEARS.
I really HOPE this hypocrisy comes back to bite them in the ass.
Obama’s campaign responded to the ad by circulating an image of a 1992 Clinton-Gore campaign poster that states, “Vote your hopes, not your fears.” The campaign also released a counter-ad later in the day that asks the questions, “Who has what it takes to really bring change?” and "Who in times of challenge will unite us - not use fear and calculation to divide us.”
Shrewd campaign response, if I do say so myself.
I wonder what impact the quakers will have. There aren’t very many of them, but they are very politically active, and oppose the war. My hubby is a quaker, and I lean that way myself, so this is of interest to me, and I thought I’d share it here.
Obama will probably get most of the quaker vote this time. And quakers tend to turn out to vote, at least the ones I’ve known. What impact they will have, I don’t know, but they will be voting in droves tomorrow, I’m sure. 
Guess he’ll be feeling his oats tomorrow.
Machine Politics
Ok so I don´t have a vote up there and my only claim to having a dog in this fight is having to live on the same planet, but could you spare some time to answer a couple of questions for me promted from the following article here
Now how in the name of holy bear having a bm in the woods does this work? It is the Guardian so I have set my ´conclusion concocted from vapour filters´ to double front there are these comments
´´In many of the city’s poorer wards, the recipients look forward to these bonuses from Democratic officials - a hangover from the days of the party’s old-fashioned machine politics - even though the amounts are relatively small, ranging from $50 to $400.´´
Do they just wonder around handing out cash, and how do the rules for the democratic election compare to the presidential election. Can you give someone 50 bucks and ask them to vote for Mc´Baminton or can it only be spent on free bus rides with complementary audio entertainment and other services.
*“The committee people and the ward leaders have to buy lunch for hundreds of people, otherwise they won’t have good workers. They have to buy coffee, orange juice and doughnuts. That’s just the way it is.”
*
Are these valid quantifiable expenses for beer and pizza? Seriously, if a business just dropped 400,000 out of the petty cash someone would be asking some questions. Can the money just evaporate into the ward bosses pockets?
which is preceeded by this, which I take to be a threat,
´´Carol Ann Campbell, an integral part of the city machine, said she expected Obama to win the city, but his failure to pay could cost him the crucial margin needed to force Clinton out of the race for the presidential nomination.´´
I have had the joy of interfacing with various unions and political people who thoughtfully brought some large chaps to stand by the door to ensure the meeting was not interrupted, and even they managed to be more subtle that this.
Does the same machine politics rule other states, have the players paid in past primaries/caucuses, does the republican system follow similar methods in the same states?
Oh and finally , will this bullshit (the payments or lack thereof) affect the result tomrrow?
Sorry for the random questions but the whole article had me going WTF, political monkeys flinging poo in the less salubrious parts of the world I can understand, but this is full on sentinent adult political scat porn. Let me know if my filters need recalibration or replacement.
Fuckin’ brilliant!
[Nitpick]Clinton quote was 2004, not 1994.[/Nitpick]
I was happy to see the quakers coming out for Barack, it’s something I have been hearing alot about today.
**I’d like to mention one thing to all those folks panning on voting for Obama, and even a few of you Clinton people out there. **
Voting for Obama means you are voting for a movement, and it’s the movement that is more important than the man. I hope you can wrap your head around that. That is the real clear reason this democrat is voting Obama - because I believe in the movement of change this country needs, and the inspiration that Obama has brought to light is real, and not some contrived BS to get into the white house.