Wow - if the Clintons actually put as much effort into trying to win elections as they put into winning the news cycle they might not be in the middle of losing 13 of the last 16 primaries (14 of 17 after they lose Miss. on Tuesday)

Heck, they might have also ended up actually winning the facts out of Texas (delegates) instead of just winning the perception (the networks called Texas for Clinton!).

Posted at March 8, 2008 7:48 PM in response to Obama: You Won't See Me As Vice President

A look at the likely outcome of Obama's worst 8 days of the primary season (3/4 - 3/11)

Wins 3 of six states

Win in delegates in Texas, one of the 3 states he lost and 3d most populous state in the nation

Tie in overall delegate count for the 8 day period

Head into a 5 week dead period in the election cycle.

I'll take that.

Posted at March 8, 2008 7:39 PM in response to Obama Wins Wyoming, Networks Say

The question is already starting to creep up - what exactly makes Hillary ready to be commander in chief? When you keep asking a question about somebody else, eventually folks start asking it about you. McCain is already starting to ask it about Hillary.

Hillary is now going to have to prove that being an observer has prepared her to be a doer. And my guess is that she has already peaked on the positives of folks perceiving her as being ready to be "commader-in-chief." Bill can come to her rescue and start defending her newly unveiled role as the face of the Clinton foreign policy, but he is only going to be able to make that argument persuasively if he becomes her highest visibility advocate again. I'm all for Bill coming front and center again. He's gotten cranky in his old age.

Posted at March 7, 2008 6:20 PM in response to Wolfson: We'll Keep Hitting Obama For Lack Of "Commander-In-Chief" Cred

As an Obama supporter I have one thing to say, "Thank you Hillary Clinton"

I might dislike what has happened over the past week, but Obama does need this to happen. He needs to get hammered and tested. He needs to survive a serious, relentless assault. And he needs as many negative narratives to be put out about him as possible. We need this to happen first in March so it won't happen first in September.

Right now, we have a candidate that is winning in the official "by the rules" vote total, delegates, fund racing, and states won. He is heading into a 4 day period in which he can win two elections. 4 days ago he suffered his worst electorial night in a month and he ended up losing about .3% of a 10% lead in delegates. And he is going into a 5 week "dead" period in the election.

If he can't come back from this, then he isn't the man that we believe he is. And I really don't have a doubt that he is the man I believe he is. Come on? An inter-racial kid with a name like Barack can't stand the heat in the kitchen? Please.

Let's not allow the pundits and Hillary supporters to change the way we view the facts. And the facts are on Obama's side. Hillary has the perception that she is winning this press cycle, Obama has the reality that he is winning the election.

Plus, let's be honest with ourselves - there is no way that if Obama has a 100 point lead in pledged delegates that the superdelegates will overturn the will of the people. These are mainly elected officials. And they are going to have to ask themselves "How am I going to ever win a democratic primary when the under 40, college educated and African American vote is going to be looking for any excuse to vote for my opponent?" Hillary's team might not believe that red state or small state Democrats matter, but they are all that matter to the elected Democrats in those states.

Posted at March 7, 2008 6:00 PM in response to Wolfson: We'll Keep Hitting Obama For Lack Of "Commander-In-Chief" Cred