I actually don't have anything else to say at the moment, but I just wanted to start (what I think) is the first US Election 2008 thread in the new digs.

I just keep liking Hillary less and less...her speech on the economy was branded like one of Bush's speeches--with her standing in front of a repeated slogan:



I just find stuff like that really creepy.

What a great, great photo.

Given the porky she got caught out telling about being under sniper fire maybe she's talking about the last fishing trip she was on.

Magnificent picture.

She looks like the head of Richard Nixon when he got Bender's body

Hillary advisor Harold Ickes spoke with TPM.

QUOTE:
In an interview with me this morning, senior Hillary adviser Harold Ickes confirmed that Reverend Jeremiah Wright is a key topic in discussions with uncommitted super-delegates over whether Obama is electable in a general election.

The comments from Ickes, who is Hillary's chief delegate hunter, are to my knowledge the first on-the-record confirmation from a Hillary adviser that the Wright controversy is a subject in conversations between the Hillary campaign and the super-delegates her advisers are trying to win over to Hillary's side.

In the wide-ranging interview, Ickes also:

* Said that it was possible that Hillary forces on the convention credentials committee could bring a so-called "minority report" to a full convention vote, though he also said that this is something Hillary doesn't want to happen

* Confirmed that the Hillary campaign could still try to woo super-dels even if she lost the popular vote, with Michigan and Florida counted

* Said that there was no risk of Hillary's efforts "tearing the party apart," described the current campaign as "genteel," and dismissed those worrying about the damage the campaign could do to the party as "hand-wringers"

The bit about the campaign being genteel makes me think there's an implication of "you wouldn't want to see us get dirty" behind it.

To be fair, this campaign has been pretty mild by historical standards. And I don't really object to Clinton staying in the race, even at this stage. What I object to is using tactics that will hurt both Obama and Clinton in the general - praising McCain's experience to denigrate Obama, echoing Republican narratives of "latte drinking liberal elites" and so on.

I also think that HRC is getting a very hard ride about staying in the race for no good reason. She still has a serious chance of beating Obama in the popular vote. As long as she does that, she would have a good case to make to the superdelegates, who might then vote her in. No one could say that superdelegates "stole" a victory from Obama in that case; or at least, it would be equally the case that an Obama win would be "stealing" victory from HRC and a majority of Democratic voters.

Obama has out-organized Hillary. But Texas and Ohio show that he hasn't really been able to out-campaign her. He is, in one memorable phrase, a winner who can't quite win

Why should she quit? I'm not sure I would, in her position.

"She still has a serious chance of beating Obama in the popular vote. "

Like bollocks she does. Obama has a lead of nearly 200 delegates and there are only just over 200 elected delegates left.

erm..popular vote, not delegate count.

How far behind him is she in the popular vote?

Even then it's really unlikely. Obama's leading by 750,000 or so, and the only big state left is Pennsylvania. Clinton will win that, it's true, but she'd need a crushing (ie 75/25) victory there and dead heats everywhere else to win. Most of the other states look like Obama-leaners.

QUOTE:
Even then it's really unlikely. Obama's leading by 750,000 or so, and the only big state left is Pennsylvania. Clinton will win that, it's true, but she'd need a crushing (ie 75/25) victory there and dead heats everywhere else to win. Most of the other states look like Obama-leaners.

I think that's right. There are risks, though, as the latest polls in KY and WV have Clinton up by 20+ percent. It wouldn't be surprising if those states went to Clinton, but the current polling margins are higher than I would've thought. The real surprise for me was Indiana, in which yesterday's poll had Clinton with a statistically significant lead. All that being said, so far in this primary season, Obama has been able to eat substantially at Clinton's early polling lead once he starts campaigning in the relevant state.

The biggest risk to Obama winning the popular vote is the chance that the DNC will cave in to pressure from Florida and Michigan to seat their delegations. If the beauty contests there became legitimated, then the popular vote totals in those states would narrow the current gap substantially (Obama's name wasn't even on the ballot in MI).

Puerto Rico isn't necessarily pro-Obama, GY. And they have a full primary and high turn-out rates.

Jay Cost and Sean Oxendine have both written about this on Real Clear Politics recently.

Real Clear Politics has a track of the popular vote, in all kinds of forms. Excluding Florida and Michigan; including Florida but not Michigan, and including both; and also with, and without, various states which haven't officially announced tallies.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html

Only with Michigan included where Obama wasn't even on the ballot could Hillary win the popular vote.

QUOTE:
All that being said, so far in this primary season, Obama has been able to eat substantially at Clinton's early polling lead once he starts campaigning in the relevant state.

This was true through to about the Potomac primaries. The Texas and Ohio polls were pretty much dead on.