Democrats have a terrible track record of picking presidential candidates.  

Since 1932, only six Democrats have been elected and only ONE has been re-elected.  If you've been in a coma the last 15 years (as many Obama supporters act like they have) that lone survivor is Big Bill Clinton.

If Hillary's presidency would essentially be a restoration of the first Clinton Administration, I think that's one hell of an argument for her being the nominee.  Don't you all?  Bill Clinton's re-election was the first for a Democrat in 72 years!

Isn't it funny that Hillary's negatives are presently among the highest of her entire public career, yet she still runs even with McCain?  I think that speaks volumes about how the public feels about the first Clinton administration.

In times of uncertainty, trust is a must.  I know many Obamabots will point to polls that show Hillary isn't "honest" and "trustworthy".  However, I think people think of Hillary as a typical politician, which are seen as exactly those things.  If they believe the Clintons will heal this economy, they won't give a good god damn if she ducked sniper fire or not, what the her tax records show, or where she was in the White House while Bill was getting head.      

I just can't imagine why the Democratic Party wants so terribly to roll the dice with Barack Hussein Obama.  I can't imagine sending someone into a general election who acted to give drivers licenses to illegal immigrants.  As bad as Wright,  Michelle's unpatriotic soundbite, and Obama's refusal to wear the American flag, this drivers license issue, I believe, will be enough to do him in. But, like I said above, Dems have a terrible track record of picking presidential candidates.  I pray to God that Obama's mug isn't the latest on a string of losers, right behind Dukakis, Mondale, and Gore.  

If we lose now, our party will be the laughing stock of the universe.  I hope the Obamabots appreciate this.  I hope they hold the party's future at heart and not just fantasies of crowning their cult leader.

I am an enthusiastic supporter of Hillary Clinton.  I think she's the better candidate and would make a better president.

I am disappointed in the supporters of Obama who are more and more eager everyday to have this election shut down.  On the one hand, it would be best to have a free nominee taking on McCain everyday.  On the other hand, it makes perfect sense to have a few more contests, at the very least, to see exactly what damage Wright has done. Also, it would do our eventual nominee great good to have a hard-fought contest in PA, a state crucial to our chances of winning.  There will be real ground operations left for our nominee to use in November.

Having said that, I strongly feel that this race will virtually end in the state of NC.  It is the last big state to vote and it is the last state with a sizeable African-American vote.  Although the population of blacks is larger than most states, it is not anywhere near as large as states like SC, AL, and MS.  White voters will decide the Dem primary in the state of NC.  We will see in NC whether or not white voters are being truthful when they say they will support Obama.  If NC white voters break more heavily toward Clinton than in those other southern states, Obama could be in for a devastating loss and a grand shift in momentum toward Clinton. In other words, the expectations game (with polls showing double-digit leads for Obama) could seriously damage Obama.  On the other hand, if Clinton loses by double digits, I believe her campaign is over.  It will show that Wright has not damaged Obama with white voters and her chances of overcoming him at that point, in either delegates or the popular vote, will be officially dead.  That would be the best time for her to start cutting deals.

The NC primary is in early May, which leaves a half year left before the election.  I'm sure the Obama camp knows all of this.  I work at a political consulting firm, with clients in NC, SC, and GA.  I can tell you, everyone here expects NC to end this contest (at the very least, it will be the ultimate determining factor in what the super-delegates will do) and its hard for even the most enthusiastic Obama operative here to believe those polls coming out of NC.

I can't understand what Leahy is doing here.  What are the Obama people scared of?  Am I the only one to get that feeling that the Obama people really don't want anymore votes?  Perhaps they are scared white voters are saying one thing, and will do another?  That fear would be well-founded, many think.  

In fairness to the millions of those who support both candidates, we should at least wait for NC to vote before pushing a media campaign to shut the election down.  McCain is a god awful candidate who just made a major economic speech (in the thick of a recession, in a climate of economic fear and unease) and told the American public, in no uncertain terms: we are on our own.  More Katrina government.  More war.  He's a terrible candidate, so let's take the time to make sure our party makes the right decision.  

We have the time to spare.  

We will unite.  

The Hill is reporting that a group of Jewish Republicans has issued a demand that Barack Obama's campaign reject and denounce their surrogate, retired Gen. McPeak.

McPeak recently made news by comparing Bill Clinton to Joe McCarthy.

The group's director said "serious questions and doubts are once again being raised about Sen. Obama's positions and judgment on Middle East issues."

McPeak, in a 2003 interview, appeared to blame American Jews for the lack of progress in bringing peace to the conflict between Israelis and the Palestinians.

According to the group, McPeak said  `New York City. Miami. We have a large vote ... here in favor of Israel. And no politician wants to run against it.'

http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/republi can-jewish-group-wants-obama-adviser-rem oved-2008-03-25.html

For those of us who actually care deeply about the fate of the Democratic Party, we find ourselves faced with a simple choice: do we opt for the poison or do we put up a fight?

I don't believe that Obama is in anyway unpatriotic.  However, certain aspects of his life and the incredibly stupid things he and his wife have said, serve to provide the GOP with a beautifully wrapped gift; a very simple and powerful narrative that will be very successful in painting the Obamas unpatriotic.  

Obama looked directly into a television camera and declared to the world his refusal to wear the American flag.  Michelle Obama, in front of a crowd and cameras, told the world she has never been proud of the USA (that is, until her husband gained front-runner status in the nomination process of the Democratic Party - which makes the statement worse).  Obama, however absent-minded he may have been, did not put his hand on his heart to salute the flag at a public event (giving the GOP a beautiful picture, contrasting Obama's folded arms to his opponents, all with their hands on their hearts).  

As one Republican stategist has said recently, these were merely dots.  Once Rev. Wright hit the scene, with his sensational sermon clips burning up TV news and the internet, the dots suddenly became connected and, thus, the narrative complete.

American voters are as dumb as dirt. If voters see Obama as unpatriotic they will opt for the tortured war hero, no matter how much we try to hang George W. Bush around his old, flappy neck.

That's why I'm not surprised today to see that

BHO 41% vs McCain 50%
Clinton 43% vs McCain 48%

BHO favorable 46% (3/13 52%)
BHO unfavorable 52% (3/13 44%)

What was that about a well-praised speech? That is a dramatic switch. I doubt the media will cover these numbers, but they truly are dramatic.

And I'll beat you Obama supporters to the punch:

HRC favorable 45% (3/13 47%)
HRC unfavorable 52% (3/13 50%)

So, what was that about Hillary being too polarizing?

I was never absolute in my thinking Obama couldn't win the nomination. I think, once you look at the track record of candidates nominated by the Democratic Party, you quickly see we don't know how to pick them.

Only ONE (UNO!) Democrat since FDR (who was elected in 1932) has been reelected as president. Of course, you all know who that is, right. For those that don't: its Big Bill Clinton.

Why anyone could still support Obama is beyond me. Clearly, we have a lemon on our hands. I just pray to God that Clinton sweeps the remaining contests and proves that Obama and the media have been playing the Obama inevitability card non-stop.

She can still do it, no matter what the memos coming out of the Obama camp (and repeated on tv news and blogs) say. I will admit, though, the task seems daunting and the track record of the Democratic Party - from miserable John Kerry to p*ssy Jimmy Carter to snoring Mondale - doesn't inspire confidence.

The Dems may opt for the poison, they've done it before.  However, dire the situation is, it is the reality we face.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_c ontent/politics/election_20082/2008_pres idential_election/daily_presidential_tra cking_poll

EASTER TIME!  Time for families to come together and discuss!

Insider Advantage poll:

If you heard Obama's major speech on race, are you more or less likely to vote for him?

More likely - 19%
Less likely - 52%
About the same - 27%

The most talked about thing on the street (that I hear) is how disrespectful Obama was to throw his grandmother under the bus.

Brand new from Survey USA

Minnesota
Obama 46%
McCain 47%

Massachusetts
Obama 47%
McCain 47%

OHIO
McCain 50%
Obama 43%

NO DEMOCRAT WILL WIN AN ELECTION IF THEY HAVE TO SPEND ONE DAY OR ONE DIME ON MASSACHUSETTS.

WE ARE LOOKING AT A MONDALE-LIKE DEFEAT WITH OBAMA.

Easter is this weekend and families across the country will gather together and discuss this matter.  I expect to see Obama's poll numbers continue to sink.  I will eagerly await the daily tracking polls to come out startin Tues. or Wed.