I do not feel bad for HIllary. She had ample time, fat coffers full of cash and connections.

She did not exercise good judgment even with all her experience.

People didn't want to hear the same tired message. She struck the safe route like Gore and Kerry before her. The moderate republican in democrat clothing...

She has no guts to give a real message of change. She lacks courage to be a real voice of change and that is what has killed every Democratic candidates changes in the last few elections.

Being afraid to say what is really right/wrong for fear of upsetting some power base, for fear of upsetting the purse strings which pull you.

I liked Hillary when she had a heart and less to l...

I do not feel bad for HIllary. She had ample time, fat coffers full of cash and connections.

She did not exercise good judgment even with all her experience.

People didn't want to hear the same tired message. She struck the safe route like Gore and Kerry before her. The moderate republican in democrat clothing...

She has no guts to give a real message of change. She lacks courage to be a real voice of change and that is what has killed every Democratic candidates changes in the last few elections.

Being afraid to say what is really right/wrong for fear of upsetting some power base, for fear of upsetting the purse strings which pull you.

I liked Hillary when she had a heart and less to lose, now she seems cynical and has been "borged" into the very thing she used to rail against.

If she tries to turn the campaign into mud slinging ugliness, and Obama stays the course, it will only make her spin down the toilet even faster.

Le'ts hope she does the right thing, make it a real race, actually talk about that excellent Health Care plan that she advocated so passionately for when her husband was in office.

THAT's the HIllary I'd vote for and feel sorry for... THAT Hillary doesn't exist today.

Obama is the right man at the right time.

His vision of healing partisan divisions in favor of progress, and breaking down the bulwarks we've built around our entrenched ideological positions is the only way we will have of winning the war on terror and restoring America's place in the world.

Internationally, the feeling is electric. Internationally, as people hear about Obama and what he is doing, he erases cynicism about America. For the first time in years, abroad I am begining to hear people talk again about hope and the greatness of America, not its violence and corruption.

Even without yet becoming President, he is leading our country. And he is doing so through respect and civili...

Obama is the right man at the right time.

His vision of healing partisan divisions in favor of progress, and breaking down the bulwarks we've built around our entrenched ideological positions is the only way we will have of winning the war on terror and restoring America's place in the world.

Internationally, the feeling is electric. Internationally, as people hear about Obama and what he is doing, he erases cynicism about America. For the first time in years, abroad I am begining to hear people talk again about hope and the greatness of America, not its violence and corruption.

Even without yet becoming President, he is leading our country. And he is doing so through respect and civility, and genuinely listening to people and showing them he cares. It's all the rest of the world has asked from us, and yet for so long, we have never given it.

Obama is the first politician in my lifetime that I have ever felt myself wanting to work for.

Hey, don't marginalize enthusiasm for a candidate who fits what people are looking for. It isn't mania so much as relief.

Actually, I really like Edwards and I hope he stays active in politics. I don't like Hillary, and I hope she doesn't. I also hope Richardson finds a place in the national government, it would be a shame to waste his talents.

But I've been for Obama all along. Actually wanted Obama to run in 2004. Why? Simple: I dream of a day when Americans elect someone educated and reasonable to lead our country. Obama taught Law at the University of Chicago.

In looking over the Presidents of the last 35 years, it seems like America has been picking mostly losers, nuts, or guys who ...

Hey, don't marginalize enthusiasm for a candidate who fits what people are looking for. It isn't mania so much as relief.

Actually, I really like Edwards and I hope he stays active in politics. I don't like Hillary, and I hope she doesn't. I also hope Richardson finds a place in the national government, it would be a shame to waste his talents.

But I've been for Obama all along. Actually wanted Obama to run in 2004. Why? Simple: I dream of a day when Americans elect someone educated and reasonable to lead our country. Obama taught Law at the University of Chicago.

In looking over the Presidents of the last 35 years, it seems like America has been picking mostly losers, nuts, or guys who would make a better fishing buddy than Commander in Chief.

Wouldn't it be refreshing to get someone who has an education, and thinks for a change? I think the fact that he was a teacher is one of the main reasons he's able to listen to people and connect with so many alienated voters.

Don't mistake the fruits of a skilled campaign for simply a fad.

Hi kmcolo,

I appreciate your awareness of the eventual dirty politics that will be used against any democratic candidate. It reminds me when Bush's surrogates in the South Carolina primaries passed around the rumor that John McCain had a black child (in reality adopted India Indian child). There is no level they won't stoop to. However the question is how long do we let them dictate our politics and decisions?

dl211 is representative of a number of very spiteful, angry, mean conservatives but what are their total numbers? There are some states that no democrat is going to win regardless (Wyoming, Utah, Oklahoma).

However if you look at what Obama did in Illinois senatorial elections, he c...

Hi kmcolo,

I appreciate your awareness of the eventual dirty politics that will be used against any democratic candidate. It reminds me when Bush's surrogates in the South Carolina primaries passed around the rumor that John McCain had a black child (in reality adopted India Indian child). There is no level they won't stoop to. However the question is how long do we let them dictate our politics and decisions?

dl211 is representative of a number of very spiteful, angry, mean conservatives but what are their total numbers? There are some states that no democrat is going to win regardless (Wyoming, Utah, Oklahoma).

However if you look at what Obama did in Illinois senatorial elections, he carried rural, farm economy, white, Illinois. He attracted independent whites in Iowa (is there much anything else than whites in Iowa?). I feel that he can attract thoughtful independents who aren't going to fall yet again for the hateful Carl Rovian politics of the republicans.

You know it was fairly accepted that Colin Powell could have been President before Bush's pathetic ineptness and Powell's association with it ruined that sentiment.

I read a pretty in depth article by Christian Century that had some good coverage and insights, including insights about the Trinity Church in Chicago. Amongst them: Obama has shown that he can speak about his Christian faith in ways that are authentic and broadly appealing.

Each Democrat that has a chance of winning the Democratic nomination has an aspect that republicans will attack vigorously. However, when I take into account the entire situation a democrat should win barring an incompetent campaign (and GOP dirty tricks, such as Ohio 2004 and Florida 2000).

Actually, though, I think white guilt these days will outweigh white fear. This isn't the 60s, and we don't have the Black Panthers arming themselves for war. They have tried to hit Obama on religion before, but it doesn't stick. Remember when the piece came out that said he went to a Madrashah? (Right on the heels of CNN "accidentally" confusing his name with any number of terrorists and dictators!)

The problem is that I think white Americans would feel more guilty about stopping history in the making than they would be afraid that he will institute some bizarre anti-white agenda. (Not that anyone could ever tell me what exactly they would do to knock the whites off their perch atop the US...

Actually, though, I think white guilt these days will outweigh white fear. This isn't the 60s, and we don't have the Black Panthers arming themselves for war. They have tried to hit Obama on religion before, but it doesn't stick. Remember when the piece came out that said he went to a Madrashah? (Right on the heels of CNN "accidentally" confusing his name with any number of terrorists and dictators!)

The problem is that I think white Americans would feel more guilty about stopping history in the making than they would be afraid that he will institute some bizarre anti-white agenda. (Not that anyone could ever tell me what exactly they would do to knock the whites off their perch atop the US economy and political system...)

Actually, my bet would be that black voters will be harder on Obama than the whites would be. Iowa seems to bear out this hypothesis.

Also, Americans are becoming desnsitized to dirty tricks. There was an article in the IHT that talked about push polling in Iowa. The article certainly made it sound like Hillary was behind it. The interesting thing is that nobody seemed fooled by it. They all immediately knew it was a push poll and just got angry with the caller.

The new propaganda seems to be the article itself, rather than the old-school dirty tricks. That is to say, portray a candidate as using dirty tricks in order to smear them. That will be a much more effective strategey.

But, if we have to push poll, McCain may have one black baby, but I heard Obama father two!

Oh and by the way, Bit Drifter, thanks for being one of the few people on the right with the tumerity to call the situation like it is.

I'd agree.

But I won't count the race as over just yet. If McCain can recapture his independent spirit and distance himself form the poisonous Bush Administration (which Romney seems to be working hard to help him do.) then McCain is still in the game nationally. He just has to get out of the primaries, which will be his biggest challenge because he doesn't always play well with the base.

But to give you an example of his power, I am fully prepared to vote McCain in a McCain-Hillary election, and I know a lot of other extremely liberal people who think th...

Oh and by the way, Bit Drifter, thanks for being one of the few people on the right with the tumerity to call the situation like it is.

I'd agree.

But I won't count the race as over just yet. If McCain can recapture his independent spirit and distance himself form the poisonous Bush Administration (which Romney seems to be working hard to help him do.) then McCain is still in the game nationally. He just has to get out of the primaries, which will be his biggest challenge because he doesn't always play well with the base.

But to give you an example of his power, I am fully prepared to vote McCain in a McCain-Hillary election, and I know a lot of other extremely liberal people who think the same way.

That said, I'm still a bigger fan of Obama, Edwards, and Richardson. (although Richardson seems like a pipe dream...) Although I'm sure McCain could swing a lot of votes that normally wouldn't be in play.

N2Sooners: Give it up. You're not fooling anyone. Nobody who actually votes democrat is going to buy it when you try to sabotage liberal candidates.

Hey, Kmcolo and Bobby Rutan:

This clip is another interesting way people are trying to hit Obama. I call it the "Nader Strategy," which is to convince liberals that electable candidates are too conservative, and get them to throw their votes away on fringe candidates.

Calling Obama a "Globalist Neoconservative" is an interesting move, mainly because those words sound scary, and very few people know what they mean. Understanding the difference between Neo Liberals, Neo Conservatives, and Globalists takes a lot of thought and education (which has been out of style for the last few millennia) but throwing your vote away only takes one...

Hey, Kmcolo and Bobby Rutan:

This clip is another interesting way people are trying to hit Obama. I call it the "Nader Strategy," which is to convince liberals that electable candidates are too conservative, and get them to throw their votes away on fringe candidates.

Calling Obama a "Globalist Neoconservative" is an interesting move, mainly because those words sound scary, and very few people know what they mean. Understanding the difference between Neo Liberals, Neo Conservatives, and Globalists takes a lot of thought and education (which has been out of style for the last few millennia) but throwing your vote away only takes one impulsive moment.

Actually, every time I vote I am struck by how quick and arbitrary the final act is, and yet so final. Every time I check the box and put my absentee ballot in the mail, I think to my self "my goodness, that was too easy. What if I was drunk while trying to do this?"

As annoying and discouraging as it may seem, conventional wisdom is correct the vast majority of the time. Hollywood and television likes to play up the role of revolutions, they are romantic and give a sense of the zeitgeist of our time. An event upon which we can attach a memory and say we participated. But sadly, unlike in Hollywood, revolutions almost never happen. Now I am not one to discourage tilting at windmills, I am a professional windmill tilter. I am still a dreamer who aims for change. But I am also sober and know the odds. The odds are so stacked against and Obama presidency that I think it is the wrong course to take. Our nation has had eight years of incompetent leade...

As annoying and discouraging as it may seem, conventional wisdom is correct the vast majority of the time. Hollywood and television likes to play up the role of revolutions, they are romantic and give a sense of the zeitgeist of our time. An event upon which we can attach a memory and say we participated. But sadly, unlike in Hollywood, revolutions almost never happen. Now I am not one to discourage tilting at windmills, I am a professional windmill tilter. I am still a dreamer who aims for change. But I am also sober and know the odds. The odds are so stacked against and Obama presidency that I think it is the wrong course to take. Our nation has had eight years of incompetent leadership and twenty years of anti-progressive politics. But we _do_ have the potential for a revolution and the re-establishment of a progressive movement with a candidate that can win in November. That is Edwards.

Ah, but Kmcolo, don't overlook the fact that Obama is affluent. American has come a long ways since the days of simple racism. The Republican party was even conscientious enough to (temporarily) drum out Trent Lott for implying America would be better off segregated.

But serriously, I don't think the issue of race is as straightforward as it once was. There is probably only a negligible number of voters who seriously believe that black people are inferior to whites, as they did in the 1950s, or even bestial and sub-human, as they did in the 1850s.

What drives prejudice now is fear more than condescension. Racism today functions primarily in a cultural sphere, including racism against po...

Ah, but Kmcolo, don't overlook the fact that Obama is affluent. American has come a long ways since the days of simple racism. The Republican party was even conscientious enough to (temporarily) drum out Trent Lott for implying America would be better off segregated.

But serriously, I don't think the issue of race is as straightforward as it once was. There is probably only a negligible number of voters who seriously believe that black people are inferior to whites, as they did in the 1950s, or even bestial and sub-human, as they did in the 1850s.

What drives prejudice now is fear more than condescension. Racism today functions primarily in a cultural sphere, including racism against poor blacks, un-educated blacks, or in more subtle ways, as people tend to view blacks in a one-dimensional way rather than appreciating the diversity of individual personalities. If Obama spoke Ebonics and wore a Raiders jacket, then certainly, the headwind would be full force against him. But he doesn't.

His culture isn't "black" or "ghetto" and it isn't necessarily "white" either, it's "affluent" and "upper class." These are the people who Americans are consistently comfortable voting for, considering how many millionaires win the Presidency. (in the 20th Century, all but Nixon and Clinton, I believe...)

Now, I should add a disclaimer: I'm from Seattle (although I have a lot of family in Texas and Georgia) so I grew up with a certain kind of race situation, and I may be giving the rest of the country too much credit.

But as it is, I think Americans aren't as racist as everyone thinks, and I certainly don't think that conservatives are necessarily more racist than liberals (which would seem to be the implication of saying that race would work for him in the primaries but against him in a general election - forgive me if I'm wrong on that...)

I grew up in NYC and DC. Race is far more subtle an issue in those locales relative to the west. Race is an issue in both places but the racism of the west tends to be cultural racism rather than purely color racism (at least from the perspective of this white man) which is what you are implying in mentioning Obama's status and how he speaks and presents himself. In the south of course the racism is a little more pronounced but I have heard that the racism of the North East is one of the most pernicious since it is constructed around the belief that there is no racism there.

But this is one of my windmill tilts, a belief that some portion of what gets passed off as racism in the U.S....

I grew up in NYC and DC. Race is far more subtle an issue in those locales relative to the west. Race is an issue in both places but the racism of the west tends to be cultural racism rather than purely color racism (at least from the perspective of this white man) which is what you are implying in mentioning Obama's status and how he speaks and presents himself. In the south of course the racism is a little more pronounced but I have heard that the racism of the North East is one of the most pernicious since it is constructed around the belief that there is no racism there.

But this is one of my windmill tilts, a belief that some portion of what gets passed off as racism in the U.S. today is a form of classism but that since social class and one's place in that system are a major taboo in the U.S. (have you ever met any American that self identifies as anything other than middle class?) we have no language for it so it gets misidentified as racism.

I'd agree with that. Class-ism is a serious issue, and it is one deeply buried because of America's traditionally populist values.

But modern racism I see as being a combination between cultural and class issues. That is to say, Huckabee is poor but doesn't scare "racists" because he is culturally white, and although he's rough around the edges, a little kooky and not so well educated, he's familiar.

What I see as the strongest strain of racism now is a fear and intolerance of people outside of our own cultural sphere. This fuels much of the rhetoric against the immigration debate. I also think it is a big part of the class issue, since the cultural and lifestyle differences between rich a...

I'd agree with that. Class-ism is a serious issue, and it is one deeply buried because of America's traditionally populist values.

But modern racism I see as being a combination between cultural and class issues. That is to say, Huckabee is poor but doesn't scare "racists" because he is culturally white, and although he's rough around the edges, a little kooky and not so well educated, he's familiar.

What I see as the strongest strain of racism now is a fear and intolerance of people outside of our own cultural sphere. This fuels much of the rhetoric against the immigration debate. I also think it is a big part of the class issue, since the cultural and lifestyle differences between rich and poor foster most of the knee-jerk discrimination.

In a sense, while racism used to be based on a mis-understanding of biology and physiology, today racism is more accurately an acute form of xenophobia. Where I grew up, I saw a lot of discrimination and fear against Ukranians and Russians, as well as Mexicans, Blacks, and American Indians. On the other hand, Asians were essentially accepted as "white."

This is interesting to me because someone white, such as the Slavs, could still be discriminated against on the basis of race, because they represented something strange, unfamiliar, and possibly dangerous. (The Russian Mafia is very active where I grew up.)

But also, we should consider what exactly "race" is in the first place. Biologically the concept has virtually no substance. Most scientists agree that race is more of a cultural and social construct that simply centers on superficial physical differences.

Thus the question of "Perceived Race" becomes paramount. Generally, in Seattle, Jews are culturally (broadly speaking) not so different from Anglo-Saxons, and as such there is not a perception of them as a distinct race. On the other hand, in cities with Jewish ethnic neighborhoods, the Jews are often seen as different.

Interesting findings in exit polling in New Hampshire. Although a good number of women made their minds up to vote for Hillary at the last moment, most Democrats when asked "who did they think could beat a republican opponent in November" answered Obama (46% to Hillary's 31%). Disclaimer: I know polling is fluid.

A Democratic candidate is not going to win without winning independents. Both in Iowa and New Hampshire, Obama attracted more independents than did Hillary and McCain.

It's going to be an interesting race. Kmcolo, I am interested on your thoughts about Edwards chance to win the Democratic nomination. He is not polling well in his neighboring state (and state of his birth) South Ca...

Interesting findings in exit polling in New Hampshire. Although a good number of women made their minds up to vote for Hillary at the last moment, most Democrats when asked "who did they think could beat a republican opponent in November" answered Obama (46% to Hillary's 31%). Disclaimer: I know polling is fluid.

A Democratic candidate is not going to win without winning independents. Both in Iowa and New Hampshire, Obama attracted more independents than did Hillary and McCain.

It's going to be an interesting race. Kmcolo, I am interested on your thoughts about Edwards chance to win the Democratic nomination. He is not polling well in his neighboring state (and state of his birth) South Carolina (a state he won in 2004). What are your feelings about a possible Clinton win due to Edwards remaining presence in the race (I am assuming most Edwards supporters would not bring themselves to vote for Hillary).

I have noticed long time activists in my state who supported Richardson move to the Obama camp.