In my previous diary [a HUGE loss for Obama is not a problem] I explained how a 30+ loss in WV will be viewed by voters in the rest of the nation: they will see it as a problem with the people who live in that state rather than with Obama.

That is what disturbs me about hillary's condescending analysis of "hard-working, white" voters, who must only live in WV and KY, but certainly not in Oregon, Montana or North Dakota, where Obama will eat her lunch.  hillary presents the problem in racial terms [making her, by definition, a racist], when the reality is starkly different.

For the majority of people living in Appalachia who have a problem with Obama, the reluctance to vote for him is cultural, not racial.  The issue is CHANGE.

Say Obama loses WV 66-33 or even 69-30.  Sounds bad, right?  yeah, maybe.

Say it's even worse: 72-28 [ouch!].  This PROVES hillary's line that whites are racists and won't vote for Obama, right?

Wake up.  All hillary is doing is making a laughing stock out of West Virginians!  Do you think voters in NY, NJ, CA, CT, NC, IN, etc. care what WV voters think?  Obama is polling better in almost every blue state than hillary.  She's losing her grasp on many who voted for her months ago, before they really saw Obama--OR hillary--for what they are.

Think Lil' Abner.  Think Beverly Hillbillies.  This is how America will see the voters in WV [probably KY too] because of the lopsided scores in those states for hillary.  

Personally, I feel bad for the people there; they don't deserve to be used by the clintons this way.

The race is closing in North Carolina!  Obama's once-insurmountable lead there is down to single digits!  The Clintons are triple tag-teaming him in large and small NC towns, riding the crest of a Wright-induced wave across the rural south!

Oh, and lest I forget: The British are coming!  The British are coming!

Obama will win NC by no less than 10pts, probably 12, possibly 14 [my prediction].  I base this estimate on polling data, demographics, early voting trends, and my guts.  Certainly he wins by no less than 8.

But hillary has gone all out in NC [or so it seems], and she has the pundits pulling their punches on the point spread; giving oxygen to the concept that Obama is SO DAMAGED w/ white voters that he is unelectable.  Indeed, if Tuesday turned out a close NC and BLOWOUT Indiana, many Obama supporters would believe it!

Here's the reason why it won't.

In response to the recent endorsements from 2 former DNC Chairs, the clinton camp today announces the endorsement of 7--count them--7, former DNC Chairs.  Some of the names are obvious [Terry Mc Auliffe, who is paid by clinton, Ed Rendell, who is paid by..anyone who'll pay], but the one, most notable name is of a clinton-era supporter, former cabinet secretary and DNC Chairman, Ron Brown.

Brown, as you might recall, died in a tragic airplane crash in Europe while on a mission for Bill Clinton.  The Scaife-funded Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy [which now supports clinton] spent millions of dollars making a case that Brown was assassinated in order to prevent him from disclosing damaging information about the clintons' illicit dealings.

Here's the endorsement on CNN:

I'm increasingly more impressed w/ the emotional maturity and wisdom of Barack Obama.  Let's face it: it would be easy to destroy hillary clinton by rerunning ad infinitum her traipse across the Tuzla airport.  His campaign wouldn't even have to change the footage to beat her up over every one of her stupid, dishonest ideas: they'd just run the footage of her and Chelsea and the little girl handing her flowers to whatever topic they'd want to paint hillary on as a liar--gas tax, health care, trade, war, experience, etc.

If hillary had such a film SHE sure as hell would be running it.  But instead, all she has is the media running Obama's former preacher as he says dumb things.  That is her campaign: slander and pander.

This is what the status quo looks like folks--do you think it's worth changing?

This new construct--that she will win the War--has been seamlessly inserted into the Clinton narrative on the heels of her obliterate-Iran threats.  Is anyone paying attention?

It doesn't seem so on DKos today, since we all seem to be nursing our bruised egos, justifying why Obama didn't 'win' a state that was unwinnable, even though he achieved MUCH strategically in the way he conducted his campaign.  As for Clinton, she is back in full neo-con mode, trying to out-gun McCain and out-man Obama, while reserving the right to play victim should circumstances demand that.

The question must be asked: why is she shifting gears at this point?  Why no more 'promises' to extricate us from Iraq, but now pledging to 'win'there?  The answer plays right into where this campaign is headed.

It's been a busy few weeks! but I wanted to share my [largely] positive experience at our Dem County Convention April 12 here in WA State.  My county, Clallam, is rural, moderate [barely Red but trending Bluer each year], and went 70% for Obama in our caucuses.

At those caucuses, while I was in the bathroom, I was voted Obama delegate [w/ my Edwards button on!] since I spoke so emphatically for Barack and against the War.  So there I was on the 12th, standing up for Obama again.

Obama's camp phoned me and asked if I'd call delegates and alternates to ensure that we'd have all slots filled, so I did.  It was a lot of work, but a lot more fun than cold-calling anonymous voters on Obama's website--I mistakenly reached a few Clinton delegates, but I treated them no differently than Obama people, giving them any info they needed about time/place/what to expect, etc.  I went out of my way to be nice.

Chris "Tweety-bird" Matthews listened to that impeccable political oracle, his gut, and it told him 14%, the margin by which hillary wins in PA next week.  Survey USA, prior to Tweety's gut [which is distrusted by some, hated by others] also predicted a 14% margin.  Other pollsters predict a tighter race, from 6% [Quinniapac], 3% [Rasmussen], to +3% [PPP].

Kossacks parse these polls, dismissing some heralding others, in an effort to raise their hopes [PPP] or lower their expectations [SUSA], proving, like the old Billy Joel song, that so many of us vaccilate from sadness to euphoria, spending very little time in between the 2 extremes.

As someone who has studied polling and statistics, AND who has conducted professional polls on a massive scale, I will say right now:  it is quite possible that all of the PA polls [minus Tweety] are correct about the 4/22 primary, odd as that may seem.

You can bet that hillary will beat up on Obama in Saturday's debate on the subject of health care, using Elizabeth Edwards' 'endorsement' of her plan, as a club.  Obama usually retreats from joining this battle during debates and I believe he is making a huge mistake in doing so.

Elizabeth is half wrong in her assessment of Clinton's plan because the mandate in the plan will only serve as a tool used by Insurance companies to drain consumer bank accounts even faster, using the Federal Government as their bill collectors.  More people will be 'covered' [though probably not cared for, since doctors will still be getting stiffed by insurance companies which will retain wide discretion in billing matters], and more people will HATE their coverage, and thus hate the Federal Government for mandating this new pain.

The only ones who will love hillarycare will be the poor receiving subsidies, and Big Insurance, receiving corporate welfare to the tune of $700billion/year.

Do you recall the scene in the last James Bond movie, Casino Royale, when the Ugandan terrorists came to Europe to kill the gambler, Le Chiffre, who had lost their $100 million?  That is a corollary to what the Clintons will face [politically, legally] if Obama wins in November from a number of very unsavory characters who have given money to the Clinton campaigns, Bill's Library, his Foundation, speech fees, book deals, business partnerships w/ Canadian billionaires, Saudi sheiks, and Central Asian despots.  This does not even touch the $95 million donated to hillary's HillPAC and Friends of Hillary with which she bought out enough of the Democratic Congressional caucus to render Pelosi and Reid neutered.

But as long as Obama loses in november, assuming the Clintons don't get the nomination, Clinton's nefarious backers still have reason to believe that the Clintons are the Democrats you must go thru to make a deal.  So PLEASE Kossacks, stop whining about hillary dropping out: the Clintons have NO CHOICE but to destroy Obama and the Democratic Party with him.

My grandma came to America in 1912 on the Andrea Doria, shortly after the Titanic went to the bottom.  In fact, the Doria itself went to the bottom years later off Nantucket, for you history buffs.

She was 14 yrs old, traveling alone to meet up w/ her father in New York [Brooklyn].  Her mother and other siblings stayed in Italy until my great-granddad could save enough $ to bring them over.  My grandma cooked and cleaned for her papa until she was married to a man her papa met on the street and brought home to meet her [my grandpa].  She had 12 children, 2 of which died at birth, 1 in the military.  All but one were boys, including my father.

My uncles said many disparaging things about black people over the years, but my grandma never made a disparaging remark about anyone; in fact, I once heard her scold one of her boys when he used a racial epithet to describe a black man.

There is much teethgnashing going on here at DKos over the increasingly harsh tone of the Democratic race for president.  People on both sides, and those few who haven't taken sides, are concerned that this infighting will result in fractures that will split the Party and put Magoo in the White House.

Perhaps a Magoo presidency will come of this, though the GOP will have a much harder time of putting together a winning ticket because of the economy.  The Iraq War MAY be a plus for them, if Clinton is the nominee, since her vote for the War and her continued defense of that vote will reinforce her untrustworthiness.  For Obama, the War is a plus because he can offer a clear difference from Magoo.

The main thing is, however, that we must elect a Democrat in November, but what we must first settle is the question of what constitutes a Democratic Party in 2008.

When did Obama put Sean Hannity on his payroll?  How much of my hard-earned donations did they pay that asshat to badmouth Obama on faux news?  I'll bet Obama gets about a 5% bump in the polls from Democrats for going toe to toe with that turd spewer, Hannity!

The false meme of being a Muslim was dragging Obama down in the polls so that his national lead over hillary was only 6-8%.  But now that even Sean Hannity has recanted and is berating Obama for being a Christian, that drag should soon whither away.

The Clintons have a legitimate right to fight for the nomination, even though the 'math' is against them.  The 'math' Obama supporters like to use is Obama's lead in so-called pledged delegates, which the Clintons are not likely to overcome, even with victories in PA, KY, WV, and Guam.  In fact, they probably wouldn't beat Obama's pledged delegate lead if they won every remaining contest.

But is that really the point?  The Superdelegates could decide, en-masse, to flock to the Clintons before or at the Convention [more likely before, if they were to so decide].  So here is where the whining gets loudest: Obama could have more pledged delegates--maybe a small % more--a few thousand more votes [though caucus states make such a tally difficult], and Obama could have won more states than the Clintons.

The winner will be decided by who has won the fight in the arena of public opinion.

Just as the Obama campaign sets down the framework of their rebuttal to Clinton's phony resume Obama lays out Clinton's record, hitting Clinton at her flimsiest point [apart from ethics], Clinton surrogate Geraldine Ferraro fans the flames of racism by claiming that a black man is in the process of taking away a job from a white woman.  This comes after Clinton surrogate and PA governor, Ed Rendell, makes the outlandish claim that white people in his state are such racists that they won't vote for a black man.

Also today, Obama will win the majority of delegates and votes in yet another state, Mississippi.  But which of the stories, Clinton's phony resume, the MS primary, or Ferraro's racist digs, will get the most coverage?

Yes, another gratuitous Al Gore diary--or not.

There has been a lot of ink spilled recently about Al Gore playing deus ex machina at or before the Denver convention, swooping in to either be the ultimate superdelegate, or to be the compromise nominee for president should Obama and Clinton not be able to win outright.

All of this supposes Obama does not tie or win PA [which may or may not be probable], or that Obama or Clinton doesn't make a major gaffe and doom their candidacies.  Personally, I believe Obama has a decent shot at PA--no repugs to help Clinton out--and anything less than a 10 pt win is basically a loss for Clinton because of what happened in Ohio.

So how does Gore fix the Democrats' dilemma?

Wayne Dyer, New Age 'guru',once wrote:

Everything you're against makes you weaker.  Everything you're for makes you stronger.  Don't say you're against war, say that you're for peace.

Negative ads work by bringing down positive feelings a person may have of someone they know only anecdotally and from a distance.  The Clintons have made a career of pitting people against each other.  Was it only me, or did anyone else notice that in the 90's the Progressive Movement spent most of its ammo fighting off the enemies of the Clintons, rather than fighting for progressive causes?

During the 90's, when $$ was cheap and oil averaged $22/barrel, a lot of money was made.  The number of millionaires doubled, even people in the lower half of the economy benefited [slightly], aided by easy credit and cheap energy.

But where were the social gains that a wealthy society could afford?  True, there were more police on the streets, and 1 million US citizens were added to the prison system: not exactly my definition of progress.  We certainly didn't get Universal Health Care, even with Congress and the Presidency in Democratic hands--though we did get NAFTA, with union membership dropping from 18% to 14% of the workforce during the Clinton years.

Kidding!  Traitor Joe, the other kool-aid swilling liebercrat, has been awarded the [dis]honorable Zell Miller chair at the Repug convention this year.  If you read my diary from last night, you'll understand why today on the campaign trail, the Clintons would stoop so low as to film the first McCain campaign commercial for this fall by claiming that Mc Cain would make a better commander in chief than Obama: Why the Clintons won't drop out.