Really, this is the kind of attitude that rather got us killed in the last two elections. The reason why he won’t obliterate the republican candidate is because there are millions of Americans who simply do not share our preferences over electoral outcomes. They are in sufficient numbers that they cannot be ignored. Let’s keep our feet on the ground here.
Good point. It’s one of my personal flaws…I get excited when things look good.
Back to earth I go.
The Dems didn’t get “killed” in either of those elections. They won the popular vote in 2000 and then had the election stolen from them in FLA. They lost very narrowly under very suspicious circumstances in '04. Obama may finally give the Dems a wide enough margin to overcome the Republican Diebold advantage and racist voter suppression tactics or he may not, but there’s a better chance he wins by a wide margin than that he loses by one.
Quinnipiac: Hillary lead in PA down to 6%
One more reason for her to throw in the towel if Tuesday is a mixed result (or worse) for her: there’s no big win waiting for her in Pennsylvania after the six-week hiatus between primaries.
My birthday is a week from tomorrow. I’m betting Hillary concedes on my birthday, +/- a day. If she does, think I should send her a thank-you note? 
John Lewis makes it official: he’s switching from Hillary to Obama.
HAHA! I read that initially as " My birthday is a week from tomorrow, I’m letting Hillary conceed on my birthday"
BTW - My bet is the same, she throws the towel in after Tuesday.
To be honest, I don’t mind if Clinton strings this out a little–it’ll force BO to keep up his A-game (in case there was ever any risk he might get a little complacent), it’ll further motivate his supporters to organize in the states that have yet to hold a primary or caucus, and the more overwhelming her defeat, the less likely Hillary will be a phantom liability to his campaign (she won’t stump for him, but just go off and lick her wounds). That goes ditto for Bill.
Plus, a little humble pie will serve her well, because she can still be a strong and important ally to him in the Senate, but if her undoing is completely of her own making, I would like to think her ego will interfere less when it comes to occasional Exec vs. Leg faceoffs (if he takes the whole thing :fingers crossed: )
I just want to say - I’m new to the boards, and this thread has eliminated any doubts I may have had as to getting my $15 worth out of this community. The discussion has been great (for 23 pages!!), and you guys probably do the best job I’ve seen on any online community of keeping your Obama bias in check 
A lot of interesting points and pieces of information have been posted, and as one of those obnoxious college kids who just started really getting into politics with this campaign, it’s been extremely beneficial to me.
So, um, thanks! Sorry that I don’t have anything to contribute at this point, but I felt like saying something.
I think you will enjoy this CNN article.
It is looking good for Obama. Hopefully Tuesday goes very well.
I don’t know if you realize this, but you got me taking a serious look at Obama back in early January. I jumped into a thread to ask about all the hatred for HRC, and you and **Shayna ** directed me to some excellent websites. I had just given up on Rudy and I was now thinking of HRC as my next best choice.
I am much happier with Obama then anyone in years. I know I then persuaded at least a dozen people to vote for Obama on Feb 5th. (Of course I was still stuck as a Rep and I voted for McCain)
Jim
We accept you, one of us! Gooble Gobble!
…one of us…one of us…
Possibly an interesting little insight there: She should have said “wasting the money of my generous contributors,” yes?
just be sure to actually vote 
She seems to be relaying the statements of her detractors there. In other words, they were saying that she was wasting her time and her money.
If she had said something like “I would not have wasted my time and my money on a campaign in New York…” it would be different…
Edit to add… to me.
If no one has actually done so yet, rikc, Welcome! 
Good Times! 
This could get interesting in the next few weeks. I think when Obama is not battling HRC and he has a united front behind him and he knows it, he comes out with some really kick ass speeches. Listen up because it’s going to get interesting.
I miss IMHO lately. I’ve been spending so much time talking about and debating this campaign I haven’t been chilling out in IMHO lately…[sup]after march 4th…[/sup]
I really, really hope that this is all over on March 5. Obama needs to win Texas. I know that Hillary really needs to win both Texas and Ohio by a landslide, but given her bullshit so far, I’m expecting her to treat a thin lead as a massive victory that has changed everything.
Any way you slice it, it’s going to be interesting.
The following quote from the article got me thinking…
Now, living in upstate New York (and having thus voted for her twice), I think there is a certain amount of truth to this. She did come in and through hard work and her clear ability to master the issues facing the state better than her “downstate” (Long Island) opponent, manage to convince enough voters in New York state to win the Senate seat. But, let’s get real, she carried the state by what I believe was only a few percent in a race where Al Gore got more than 60% of the vote here while just barely carrying the popular vote nationwide. In my book, that doesn’t bode particularly well for her electability on the national scale. [Admittedly, she did win re-election by a wide margin, but that is with the considerable advantage of incumbency.]
This is all very true. Speaking as a downstater (NYC, not LI), Lazio was a truly weak candidate. I was surprised and a little disappointed that HRC did not win by a larger margin than she did.
I think it is fair to say that she probably would have lost to a strong candidate. Lazio was a short unknown with no time to build a campaign. He did well just on not being Hillary.
I seem to recall she was not doing well against Rudy. His cancer rescued her.
Jim