This is a very very short diary that is only meant to share a logo I think we all should spread as much as we can all over the blogosphere.

Things for those of us with nothing better to do than look from the outside in and watch the Bachelor with a pit in the stomach waiting for tomorrow is to try to read tea leaves beyond the endless parade of polls.
Some people use numbers and facts and demographics and sophisticated political history analysis to determine what will happen tomorrow.

I choose to use Dr Phil-style psychology and cheap political guessing game.

One famous tea leaf is where the candidates spend Election Night but even if IN was close, it probably makes sense for Obama to spend the time in NC since it would take quite a stunner for him to lose the state altogether.

So that does not really count.
For the record, HRC will be in Indianapolis and Obama in Raleigh.

OK This is going to be a short diary but a new poll conducted by Rasmussen yesterday (after the debate) shows Hillary losing three points and Obama gaining them.

Last Monday, PA was 50-41 for her
Yesterday they were 47-44

http://rasmussenreports.com/...

As Pink would say, let's get the backlash party started !

OK I am going to get flamed for posting a short diary about a single news story butthisis too funny to pass up.

PHILADELPHIA -- Hillary Clinton was forced to cut her normal stump speech short when a chatty and meddlesome crowd kept her from grasping their attention. Clinton, who was addressing the Philadelphia County Democratic Party's Jefferson-Jackson Dinner, spoke for just over five minutes, despite having the press arrive almost two hours beforehand.

My random thoughts on Bittergate:

1. Does this really help Hillary ?  Isn't this one of these moments (unlike Wright where she ignored the story while it was unfolding) where the party realizes it does not help when Clinton is calling Obama "elitist and out-of-touch" thereby giving some legitimacy to a GOP attack that a united party could have dismissed as a "There they go again ..."But notice how the whole spiel by the campaign seems aimed at the Superdelegates. They don't even seem to say this hurts with voters. Rather they say the Republicans will use it to hurt with the voters. So if it doesn't hurt on its own merits, what's their point here ? And why would Evan Bayh be arguing that SDs should switch to Hillary because Obama might be painted as an elitist like Gore and Kerry was when two days ago, he said Hillary would be painted as a serial liar like Gore was. Where is the difference ?

Hey guys

Just a rant here. A random list of things that have pissed me off today. Is the list pointless ? Yes.
But please take this thread as a ranting venting thread where you can let off some steam so that you can stay polite and sane on the rest of the threads.

So what is pissing me off lately ?

OK OK I will post a link as soon as I see one (UPDATE: http://www.showbuzz.cbsnews.com/...
but I see on CBS News that great actor and gun-nut Charlton Heston has passed away.
And I can't resist breaking a scoop on Daily Kos so here is an open thread !

Let's use this thread to also discuss actors one likes until one finds out what kind of political nutdouchebaggery they are advocating.

My vote: Sean Astin from Lord of the Rings.
Read the following for explanation
http://slog.thestranger.com/...

I am going to open a thread to discuss the first few paragraphs of a new New York Magazine story covering the President primary.
http://nymag.com/...

Those first few paragraphs reproduced below go into what happened that kept Edwards on the fence.

In the days after John Edwards’s withdrawal from the Democratic race, the political world expected his endorsement of Barack Obama would be forthcoming tout de suite. The neo-populist and the hopemonger had spent months tag-teaming Hillary Clinton, pillorying her as a creature of the status quo, not a champion of the kind of "big change" they both deem essential. So appalled was Edwards at Clinton’s gaudy corporatism—her defense of the role of lobbyists, her suckling at the teats of the pharmaceutical and defense industries—that he’d essentially called her corrupt. And then, not least, there were the sentiments of his wife. "Elizabeth hasn’t always been crazy about Mrs. Clinton" is how an Edwards insider puts it; a less delicate member of HRC’s circle says, "Elizabeth hates her guts."

OK So someone suggested I make a diary about this even though I don't have much to say about it.

So, it seems either Hillary's conscience is getting to her or they realize their tactics are severely backfiring.

In any case here is what she said today at a rally:

Clinton was asked by a questioner in the audience here what she would tell frustrated Democrats who might consider voting for McCain in the general election out of spite.

"Please think through this decision," Clinton said, laughing and emphasizing the word "please."

"It is not a wise decision for yourself or your country."

The crowd applauded loudly.

From the Washington Post:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/...

A group of major contributors to the Democratic Party sent a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi today calling on her to back away from previous comments and reaffirm that superdelegates should be free to back whichever candidate they believe would be the party's best nominee.

The contributors said Pelosi has laid out an "untenable position that runs counter to the party's intent in establishing superdelegates in 1984" by suggesting on ABC's "This Week" recently that supedelegates should support whichever candidate has the lead in pledged delegates. "If the votes of the superdelegates overturn what happened in the elections it would be harmful to the Democratic Party," she said.

The contributors, who include some of Clinton's biggest bundlers, said that, with 10 contests remaining and millions of Democrats yet to be heard from, any effort to short-circuit the process should be curtailed, and they suggested that Pelosi's declaration that superdelegates follow the pledged delegate count fell into that category.

I am going to keep it short so that we can get this entry corrected/taken down as soon as possible

Here is what Jay Newton-Small posted on The Swampland today.

http://www.time-blog.com/...

To all of those who want to argue that "Obama is done" or that "Superdelegates will see how wounded Obama is for the general" or that "so and so is more electable", I have this to say.
No, I won't argue about the specifics of these claims although I certainly could or would. I have a very very very very simple message, more general, that I wish we had listened to in 2004 and that I hope we will listen to this year.

I am an Obama-niac.
I am not concerned the Wright story would make him lose the election but it definitely hurt my candidate.
Yesterday's speech was exceptional and presidential and is going to go a long way to kill the story in the short-term and stanch the bleeding with his own supporters and most good-will Democrats.
Now comes the question of what we can do in advance to make this story less hurtful when the Republicans will dig it back up next summer.

Say what you want about Obama, about Pastor Wright and this whole mess, one of the reasons Hillary supporters have to judge this "important" is because they see a potential GE weakness in the story.
Well, say what you but Obama won't be swiftboated. After that media blitz of tonight and that powerful entry on the Huffington post, he taped his denunciation of Pastor Wright

http://www.youtube.com/...

And is asking all his supporters to circulate it through email and so on.