Matthew Yglesias (May 13, 2008) - Clinton Wins WV (Politics)

I think it's also important to note that no biracial men or white women have been elected president. Also, no 72-year old geezers. I'm betting on Gravelmentum.

Posted by ben | May 13, 2008 7:57 PM

Looks like the racists finally got their say in good ol WV.

Posted by Middleman | May 13, 2008 7:58 PM

That was some low-quality snark.

Posted by JFD | May 13, 2008 7:59 PM

Any chance she uses this to go out on a high note?

Posted by 55 | May 13, 2008 8:01 PM

Why won't the poor, white, uneducated, racist motherfuckers vote for Obama? Surely this spells trouble for the general election!?!?!?

Posted by PeteyDouchebag | May 13, 2008 8:05 PM

"What's even more interesting is that no Democrat has won the White House without carrying Minnesota since 1912"

Clinton can win Minnesota in November.

Obama can't win West Virginia in November.

But, of course, Matthew knows this already.

-----

Yglesisas and the Marty Peretz pool boys have no problem with lying about the nomination race to get their anti-universal healthcare, anti-progressive economy guy the nomination.

Yglesias and Peretz don't much care if the Democrat or Republican wins in November. They've got their familial bank accounts to fall back upon.

Rich folks uber alles!

Posted by Petey | May 13, 2008 8:05 PM

55:

Two chances: slim and fat.

Posted by joel | May 13, 2008 8:06 PM

Looks like the racists finally got their say in good ol WV.

Exits (check out TPM) show 1 in 4 of Hillary's voters were racist and 1 in 5 of Obama's voters were sexist. If Hillary wins 2:1, that's a Dem electorate that's about 17% racist and 6.5% sexist. This doesn't assume that the taboo of declaring oneself racist is larger than declaring oneself sexist.

That said, WV is very white, very poor, very old, and loves familiar names.

Posted by ben | May 13, 2008 8:07 PM

And Petey doesn't care about the mountain of corpses both of his preferred candidates, Edwards and Clinton, helped build in Iraq. Why is Petey such a fan of war mongers?

Posted by mad6798j | May 13, 2008 8:09 PM

Heh. We got the faux Petey Douchebag to appear just before the real one. Perfect timing.

Posted by Karl | May 13, 2008 8:10 PM

Congratulations to Hillary Clinton. Now onward and forward. Here’s a summary of some good reasons to consider supporting Obama. Share it widely with friends in Kentucky and Oregon:
http://acropolisreview.com/2008/04/top-reasons-to-give-barack-obama-your.html

Posted by Tina | May 13, 2008 8:12 PM

"That said, WV is very white, very poor, very old, and loves familiar names."

WV is relatively economically disadvantaged, and doesn't like economic royalists, when given a choice.

Obama may love bashing universal healthcare and talking down Social Security, but that's not in the interests of the voters of WV.

Or the voters of OH.

Or the voters of PA.

Or the voters of MI.

It's sure in the interests of Matthew Yglesias, Marty Peretz, and General Electric, however. Obama's their guy!

Posted by Petey | May 13, 2008 8:12 PM

Typical white people, all bitter and clinging.

Posted by Will Allen | May 13, 2008 8:13 PM

If Hillary did withdraw tonight, she'd have to denounce herself.

Posted by TKD | May 13, 2008 8:13 PM

Why doesn't Matt ban Petey? Is it because he ignites flame wars, which tend to extend comment threads, which, of course, inflate page views?

Is because even though he's a troll, he is Matt's troll, as opposed to Al, who used to troll at Drum's site and who might actually be not one troll, but a collective; or SLC, whose unhinged rants could just as easily be posted on TPM or Drum's site?

Posted by Shine | May 13, 2008 8:15 PM

WV is relatively economically disadvantaged, and doesn't like economic royalists, when given a choice.

WV has the 3rd lowest per capita income. Where I come from, we call that poor. In Douchebagland, I guess that's some sort of slur. As someone who's spent some time growing up on foodstamps, I'm going to apologize to you for not using your fancy words.

As for "economic royalists", WV's junior senator is a freakin' Rockefeller. WV looooooves royals.

Posted by ben | May 13, 2008 8:19 PM

Clinton can win Minnesota in November.

She can't win Oregon or Washington in a matchup with McCain. Obama can.

So, Petey, for the 35th time of asking: given the electoral battleground of a (na-ga-happen) Clinton campaign, where would the Senate votes to pass a Clinton healthcare plan come from?

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | May 13, 2008 8:22 PM

"That said, WV is ... very old"

Clinton won the 17 - 29 yo vote tonight by around twenty points.

"WV is ... very poor"

While I understand that purging poor folks from the Party is the core mission of Yglesias, Peretz, and General Electric, it's worth noting that all three of those entities are happier with a weak Democratic Party than a strong Democratic Party.

Posted by Petey | May 13, 2008 8:24 PM

He's right, look what Minnesota did for Mondale in 84.

Posted by Kyle | May 13, 2008 8:26 PM

And since DC could vote, NO Democrat has won without DC. Since Clinton lost DC by a landslide, there is no way she could win DC in the general election, and therefore no way she could win the White House. QED.

Posted by Galois | May 13, 2008 8:31 PM

The collective opinion of the voters of West Virginia is worth roughly four dollars, or the state's gross income for a month.

Posted by Andy | May 13, 2008 8:32 PM

1) I don't understand why Obama doesn't ask Jesse Jackson to help him campaign in Kentucky. Jesse has actually spent a fair amount of time over the past decades in Appalachian white blue-collar communities trying to build his Rainbow coalition.

2) He's been a stronger advocate for the working poor in that area than their royalist representatives like Senator Mitch McConnell.
See, e.g,, http://www.enquirer.com/editions/1998/09/23/loc_jesse23.html

3) Who else at the Democratic 2000 Convention mentioned the poor of Appalachia?
From http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/conventions/democratic/transcripts/u060815.html
"In the midst of great wealth, one in five children still grow up in poverty. It's a moral disgrace we cannot accept. A coal miner dies every six hours from black lung disease.

In Mud Creek (ph), Kentucky; in Hazzard (ph), in Nelsonville, Ohio, in Big Stone Gap, children live in trailers and go to school in trailers.

Think of Appalachia and remember most poor people are not on welfare, they work every day. They do their heavy lifting. They take the early bus. They work the late shift. Most poor people are neither brown nor black. They're white. They're female. They're young. They're invisible. But they're all God's children. "

4) Plus the coal mining areas were kinda screwed during the Clinton Administration because of Gore and Wild Bill's environmental advocacy.

5) Plus Jesse probably has some contacts in the area that would give Obama a starting network -- and credibility by association.

Posted by Don Williams | May 13, 2008 8:34 PM

"As for "economic royalists", WV's junior senator is a freakin' Rockefeller. WV looooooves royals."

I don't think it's any coincidence that Rockefeller's tenure has coincided with WV's slide from solid Dem to slight Republican.

If the Democratic Party in WV is represented by folks like Rockefeller and Obama, it's hard to make the case to voters there why they should vote Dem in November.

If the nominee of the Democratic Party is someone like Obama who bashes universal healthcare and talks down Social Security, folks in WV, OH, PA, and MI are going to justifiably feel sold out.

But Yglesias, Peretz, and General Electric will sure feel happy. For them, it's not about winning in November, it's just about stopping Clinton.

Posted by Petey | May 13, 2008 8:34 PM

My theory is, Petey has a disease and has maybe a year to live without an operation. He can't afford it right now, which is why the issue of mandates is all that matters to him. Fear of dying makes him a moron, an asshat, a liar, and a flip-flopper. He's convinced that mandates will help him get his operation, so he'll defend them to the death.

Posted by Danny Glover | May 13, 2008 8:35 PM

The Clintons are blowing smoke, and a lot of their win came from fond memories of Bill, but this is still a blow to Obama. Pre-Wright, pre-all those Muslim smear e-mails, pre-"bitter," his campaign was hoping to break 40 percent here. It's not impossible for him to claw back some of these voters (enough to win Ohio, Penn, but not West Virginia), but the post-racial candidate is no longer so.

Posted by David Weigel | May 13, 2008 8:36 PM

He's right, look what Minnesota did for Mondale in 84.

And look at what West Virginia did for Adlai Stevenson in '52!

Context-free historical factoids are fun!

Posted by Marc | May 13, 2008 8:37 PM

I'm sick of people telling us West Virginians we're racist. We voted against Obama cause he's a MUSLIM. Not because he's a ni--I mean, colored guy. Of color.

Posted by West Virginian | May 13, 2008 8:38 PM

Oh wait. McCain can't win either because when was the last time a Republican won without Kansas? I guess Bob Barr is our next President.

Posted by Galois | May 13, 2008 8:40 PM

How, oh how, did I know that this thread would be nothing but repeated talking points from resident Reagan Democrat Petey.

Posted by jbryan | May 13, 2008 8:44 PM

My theory is, Petey has a disease and has maybe a year to live without an operation

Nah, he's hoping to get his compulsive gambling treated.

But he still (36th time) won't say how Clinton's putative electoral college map gets her the Senate votes to pass her healthcare bill, given that her strongest states don't have Senate contests this year, and Obama's stronger states do.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | May 13, 2008 8:46 PM

Clinton can win Minnesota in November.
Obama can't win West Virginia in November.

But Clinton is down by double-digits in West Virginia, and Obama does better in Minnesota.

I'm pretty sure this cycle is the only time I've heard people posit that general election results can be predicted by what Democratic primary voters say. There is no reason why there should be a connection.

Posted by Dylan Matthews | May 13, 2008 8:46 PM

Petey,

Hillary's health care plan sucks too.

[kisses]

Posted by scythia | May 13, 2008 8:47 PM

If the Democratic Party in WV is represented by folks like Rockefeller and Obama, it's hard to make the case to voters there why they should vote Dem in November.

17% of the Democratic primary voters in WV admitted to real, live person that they voted against a black man because he is black. If these are the people who you think represent the heart and the soul of the Democratic party, then you need to GTF back to the '50s.

My theory is, Petey has a disease and has maybe a year to live without an operation. He can't afford it right now, which is why the issue of mandates is all that matters to him. Fear of dying makes him a moron, an asshat, a liar, and a flip-flopper. He's convinced that mandates will help him get his operation, so he'll defend them to the death.

Or he could be a dishonest hack trying to make his name in the 'sphere by making outrageous Coulter-esque claims.

Posted by Petey's Conscience | May 13, 2008 8:48 PM

But Clinton is down by double-digits in West Virginia, and Obama does better in Minnesota.

And this is why Clinton's campaign is kaput. Given its tone and tenor, she'd be compelled to throw resources into Working White Man territory, having told purple states between the Mississippi and Pacific that they don't fucking count. All eggs, one basket: 2004 redux.

(And, just in case Petey has selective blindness, no downticket help for the Senate contests.)

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | May 13, 2008 8:53 PM

Which one is more important to winning the white house? Winning W.V. in a primary or actually having your name on the ballot. Do something gracious for once and bow out. Of course, I'm just a patronizing man trying to put a strong woman back in her place.

Posted by Jesse | May 13, 2008 8:55 PM

“…McCain is guaranteed to win the general election unless the eventual nominee can somehow completely replicate the social and political conditions prevailing in pre-WWI America.”

McCain does have an advantage here as he’s the only candidate old enough to remember this era personally. Rumor has it that, a few years later, he and Henry Cabot Lodge nearly came to fisticuffs over McCain’s first proposal to create a “League of Nations.”

Posted by Tyler | May 13, 2008 8:56 PM

Was Petey's soul the collateral on the massive Intrade debt? It's either that, or he's actually a bot.

Posted by J.W. Hamner | May 13, 2008 8:59 PM

"My theory is, Petey has a disease and has maybe a year to live without an operation. He can't afford it right now, which is why the issue of mandates is all that matters to him. Fear of dying makes him a moron, an asshat, a liar, and a flip-flopper. He's convinced that mandates will help him get his operation, so he'll defend them to the death."

Huh. And I guess the fact that I support Social Security means I must be old.

Which is oddly contradicted by the fact that I support College for All, which means I must be young.

-----

Y'know, I've understand for months now that if you scratch the most vociferous Obama supporters, you find someone opposed to universal healthcare.

I understand that Team Obama sees their mission in separating the Democratic Party from its core mission of social justice.

It's why the more folks make, the more likely they are to be Obama supporters.

Posted by Petey | May 13, 2008 9:00 PM

Hey there, guys, it's me again--the moldering corpse of John Edwards. It's hard to tell exactly where I am, since my eyes have already rotted away, but from what remains of my senses of smell and hearing I think I'm on a hog farm somewhere outside of Sioux City, Iowa.

Anyway, don't worry about me, I'm doing fine. I just wanted to chime in here in defense of my good friend Petey! Friends, take it from this moldering corpse of a son of a mill worker--when Petey backs a multimillionaire white candidate in a fight-to-the-end against Barack Obama, you can count on his good judgment. It doesn't matter if that candidate is the multimillionaire wife of a former president, or this multimillionaire--SON OF A BITCH! OH, GOD, I CAN STILL FEEL EVERYTHING! PLEASE DON'T FEED ME TO THOSE HOGS! OH, GOOD GOD! PETEY YOU BASTARD! HOW COULD YOU LET THIS HAPPEN TO MEEEAAARGHARGHAAAAAA!!!!

Posted by The Moldering Corpse of John Edwards | May 13, 2008 9:01 PM

"But Clinton is down by double-digits in West Virginia"

The last polling done in WV - by SUSA, no less - shows Clinton winning WV against McCain by 5 points.

It's Clinton's broad strength among voters in WV, OH, PA, and FL which is why she's winning the electoral vote contest against McCain 280 - 241 while Obama loses to McCain 237 = 290.

But for those who were born into or married into wealth like Yglesias and Peretz, and for those who seek to financially benefit by the weakening of entitlements like General Electric, a McCain/Obama race is win/win! It's only Clinton they have to fear.

Posted by Petey | May 13, 2008 9:08 PM

Just for fun:

Dukakis
Carter (1980)
Humphrey
Stevenson

All Democrats who won West Virginia and lost the White House.

Posted by David Weigel | May 13, 2008 9:11 PM

^^^^ HAHAHAHA, Classic!

Posted by Middleman | May 13, 2008 9:11 PM

but the post-racial candidate is no longer so.

Post-racial? Obama wasn't black before the smear emails? Hmm, interesting take.

Posted by Seitz | May 13, 2008 9:13 PM

Hillary is on the podium, but even she doesn't seem to be buying what she's selling. This is over except for begging for the money to pay her debts.

Posted by Helter | May 13, 2008 9:15 PM

"It's why the more folks make, the more likely they are to be Obama supporters."

I can pretty much guarantee you that I make less money than you do. Would I like universal health care? Yes, it might have saved my mother's life. The truth is, neither candidate is offering what is really needed, they're merely proposing plans to increase insurance coverage. They're not the same thing. One of the two candidates did vote for an illegal and disastrous war though.

Posted by mad6798j | May 13, 2008 9:21 PM

I dont believe Obama needs to win WV in order to win. that's reading tea leaves. it is possible that if he wins in november the red/blue map will be different than it has been in 30 years.
besides, i believe that Kerry lost WV, but won the election.

Posted by joe in oklahoma | May 13, 2008 9:22 PM

I dont believe Obama needs to win WV in order to win. that's reading tea leaves. it is possible that if he wins in november the red/blue map will be different than it has been in 30 years.
besides, i believe that Kerry lost WV, but won the election.

Posted by joe in oklahoma | May 13, 2008 9:22 PM

If the term "economic royalists" has any semantic content, it surely embraces both John Edwards and the Clintons. But of course, it doesn't mean anything at all--it's just another verbal spasm spawned by the inTrade-addled cortex of NAMBLA Petey (my google-bomb of choice).

Posted by marcj | May 13, 2008 9:23 PM

Isn't the primary race effectively over by the time WV usually votes? If so, isn't Clinton's claim similar to, "No one has ever become President without winning nomination"?

The latter ought to strike a chord with her.

Posted by Trieu | May 13, 2008 9:26 PM

The best part of her speech is describing the working people who are skipping meals out to save money to contribute to her campaign. This woman has $109 million, but she wants the poor to finance her doomed campaign.

Posted by Rid | May 13, 2008 9:27 PM

Rid,

With respect, the best part was the discussion of the 11-year old who sold his bike to fund her. If I recall correctly from reading elsewhere, this happened within the past week, and resulted in a $400+ contribution.

I eagerly await NAMBLA Petey's take on the highlights.

Posted by marcj | May 13, 2008 9:31 PM

The pundits are right to follow the Clinton lead in shining some light on the concerns raised by her campaign about Obama's electability after winning by such a HUGE margin in West Virginia. As we all know, Obama has never run up a similar margin against Clinton during this race. Otherwise, I'm sure we'd hear the same kind of hemming and hawwing about HER viability.

Oh, and by the way, does Clinton know that the Magic are playing the Pistons right now? She's speaking, and it's close in the 4th quarter... Now, that's neglecting Florida and Michigan voters.

Posted by LIJ | May 13, 2008 9:31 PM

She's bragging about some kid who sold his bike to send her money. She took money from a kid who sold his bike? She’s rich, she needs to buy him a new bicycle.

Posted by bjd | May 13, 2008 9:32 PM

In statistics, they have three words for West Virginia: small sample size

Posted by Andrew | May 13, 2008 9:33 PM

Petey what you need isn't Clinton, you need to get a high paying job and stop with the penis envy BS.

Posted by coomaraswamee | May 13, 2008 9:34 PM

Wait--Appalachian Democrats really like the Clintons? I'm completely shocked.

Anyway, moving on ...

Posted by DTM | May 13, 2008 9:36 PM

A $400 bike? Parents these days.

Posted by 55 | May 13, 2008 9:36 PM

Sad. Hillary says overwhelming support from a sorry state full of fat, nicotine stained, alcohol addled, bigoted, wheezing emphysemic, high school dropouts is indicative of broader national electability.

Posted by steve duncan | May 13, 2008 9:36 PM

Petey loses this thread by citing "the voters in MI".

I mean, yes Clinton probably wins Michigan easily if she's the only name on the ballot. BFD there.

Posted by Pooh | May 13, 2008 9:38 PM

Sad. Hillary says overwhelming support from a sorry state full of fat, nicotine stained, alcohol addled, bigoted, wheezing, emphysemic high school dropouts is indicative of broader national electability. Maybe it's a more prevalent demographic than I'd care to ponder.....

Posted by steve duncan | May 13, 2008 9:40 PM

ok so the logic is that whenever a dem wins WV the Dem wins the WH.
dems don't win oklahoma, and they still win the WH.
neither Clinton nor Obama will win oklahoma,
ergo, Obama wins in November....

and oklahoma has more electoral votes than WV.

Posted by joe in oklahoma | May 13, 2008 9:42 PM

WV Exit polls: 63% said that Hillary is honest.

Posted by JL | May 13, 2008 9:43 PM

Here's the bike story, from Clinton fan-zine MyDD:

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/12/12174/3226

I wonder what NAMBLA Petey would sell to support the $109 million economic peasant.

Posted by marcj | May 13, 2008 9:43 PM

Hillary Clinton is (paying Mark Penn with the proceeds from) your new bicycle.

Posted by Eric | May 13, 2008 9:50 PM

Petey should be happy it appears that Edwards is having his best night in months.

Posted by bjd | May 13, 2008 9:59 PM

"Petey,

Hillary's health care plan sucks too."

For someone like me, it actually sucks more. Obama's plan does little to nothing for me. Hillary's plan does nothing and costs me money. I'll stick with my "fly to Thailand when I need treatment" plan, thank you.

Posted by fostert | May 13, 2008 9:59 PM

From the Hotline summary of the speech:

"Tonight's speech, however, sounded like a final argument. Clinton, tough, combative, scrappy throughout this 15-month fight, didn't even take a shot at the presumptive GOP nominee, John McCain."

Well, why start now?

Posted by norbizness | May 13, 2008 9:59 PM

Hillary Clinton remains the most self centered politician in the Democratic party. That is why so many don't like or trust her; she is all about herself, and doesn't really give a damn about anyone else. That is so obvious.

Posted by cm | May 13, 2008 10:03 PM

No reason to insult the West Virgians, who have been screwed over more than most by big corporations. It is nutty to think Hillary Clinton has a chance anymore at the nomination - Petey is running on hot air. But Obama should appeal to those people when he is nominated, because voting for McCain is voting against their short and long term interests. He has a strong lead over McCain at the moment, and now is the time to start planning on how, exactly, to incorporate some of Clinton's rhetorical tropes into Obama's national campaign. Notably, Clinton's unabashed willingness to attack "elites" which have provided her and her husband with millions of dollars. Obama can't do Hillary's schtick, but he can learn to hit McCain harder on Bush's record. He doesn't have to preface every attack with McCain being an honorable man.
Obama needs to make it simple. Every commenter on a political blog dreams of making up the campaign strategy or advertising, and this would be my walter mitty fantasy. I would make it simple - I would have a researcher count the number of stories dedicated to the flag pin issue, and go through the questions he's been asked. Then, on some appropriate occasion - an interview with one of the talking heads - he should compairhow much time has been devoted to his flag pin as opposed to dentistry. I imagine no tv talking head has asked him about that once. Yet, there's a major dentristry crisis in the country - for the first time, Americans are going without dental care because they can't afford it. This is a potent symbol of American decline. And a potent symbol of how the elites have treated the serious business of the people like it was an issue of People magazine.

End of the mittyism. Obama should take Clinton's turn to populism seriously. It can win for him.

Posted by roger | May 13, 2008 10:04 PM

Courtesy of the field here is an intersting map that shows the counties where Hillary got >65% of the vote:

http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/clinton65.jpg

Of course now we can add WV which fill sin part fo the gap with KY next, pretty obvious where her support is coming from.

Posted by Eric K | May 13, 2008 10:04 PM

Hillary Clinton is (paying Mark Penn with the proceeds from) your new bicycle.

Eric wins the thread.

Posted by drjimcooper | May 13, 2008 10:11 PM

Eric wins the thread.

Petey: Where are Clinton's healthcare-passing Senators coming from?

Not being able to answer means you're even more full of shit, you fucking cooler.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | May 13, 2008 10:12 PM

End of the mittyism. Obama should take Clinton's turn to populism seriously. It can win for him.

Now, that's a serious point. But there's a difference between populism and pandering, and the late focus on the Appalachian states really has narrowed the focus on the race in general, as if the Mississippi were the western border of the US.

You're going to hear a lot more about Obama's 'white people' problem in Kentucky for the next week than about how Clinton has real trouble in Oregon matched against McCain. Why might that be?

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | May 13, 2008 10:17 PM

Worth noting that with the results in WV tonight, Clinton goes back ahead of Obama in the popular vote. And given the upcoming contests, Clinton will almost definitely remain ahead in the popular vote the rest of the way.

Looks like the voters in the Democratic primaries aren't in favor of bashing universal healthcare after all.

Looks like the voters in the Democratic primaries want a winner in November after all.

Posted by Petey | May 13, 2008 10:17 PM

These pathetic alterations in how to measure the legitimacy of the Clinton campaign are truly puzzling. West Virginia since 1916? I mean you've gotta be kidding me.

This is akin to the Packers saying something like "even though the Giants won the game, we are a better passing team, and having a good pass offense is essential when going up against the Patriots. Therefore, we urge you to ignore the score of the game and choose the Packers to represent your conference in the Super Bowl."

Get over it, folks! You lost the nomination. Now move on.

Posted by JY | May 13, 2008 10:18 PM

Clinton goes back ahead of Obama in the--

--in the bullshit Peteymath vote, in which Florida and Michigan count, but caucuses don't.

Stop lying, Petey, and answer my fucking question.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | May 13, 2008 10:21 PM

ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY. ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY.

Posted by /b/tard | May 13, 2008 10:26 PM

The point is that you can win MINUTE and lose the presidency (Gore, Kerry,etc.) But you can't win the presidency without West Virginia.

Of course she's losing the spin war, most people on cable and with struggling blogs (pretty much The Atlantic sans Ambinder) aren't too bright.

Posted by israel | May 13, 2008 10:26 PM

I said Worth noting that with the results in WV tonight, Clinton goes back ahead of Obama in the popular vote. but clearly I'm out of my mind.

Posted by PeteyIsAnIdiot | May 13, 2008 10:27 PM

I just wish some anchor, reporter, journalist, etc... would call Terry MacAullife and Howard Wolfson on their Michigan/Florida b.s./spin.

It is almost painful to listen to.

Worst case, the world has to put up with it for a few more weeks.

But what a depressing and embarrassing way for them to go out.

Oh well. Tim K would be proud.

Posted by SoCalJustice | May 13, 2008 10:28 PM

Thank you WV. You are awesome!!!!!!!!

Obama Cyberbullies

You just don't get it. We know Hillary is a long shot to get the nomination. However, every Presidential candidate has been allowed to take their case to the convention without being called divisive or selfish. She is being held to a different standard.

If Hillary has to exit the race because of an unqualified candidate, her supporters will feel cheated and angry. He seems to inspire the worst qualities in his supporters, and judging from your comments, you expect Obama to win without us.

If I could produce a campaign video on You Tube with your petty and hateful remarks, Obama would be toast.

Posted by EWard | May 13, 2008 10:28 PM

Worth noting that with the results in WV tonight, Clinton goes back ahead of Obama in the popular vote. And given the upcoming contests, Clinton will almost definitely remain ahead in the popular vote the rest of the way.

Sure, if you include Florida, but exclude Iowa, Nevada, Maine, and Washington state--and include Michigan, but exclude everybody in Michigan who was denied the chance to vote for Obama and pulled the lever for "Uncommitted" instead.

That's a completely honest count.

(Actual numbers here.)

Here's another question Petey has never answered: what does it say about Clinton's claim to the nomination that he has to use the most arbitary and inconsistent count, including illegitimate contests and excluding legitimate ones, just so he can argue Clinton has won a metric that plays no role in selecting the nominee?

Posted by Marc | May 13, 2008 10:33 PM

"Stop lying, Petey, and answer my fucking question.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | May 13, 2008 10:21 PM"

He's a dishonest hack stuck in a "No True Scotsman" mindset where mandates - which started out as a center-right economic royalist proposal - without an enforcement mechanism are somehow more important than the Iraq War. He's a whiny child whose just sad he made bad bets on inTrade, which is what economic royalists do. Ignore him.

Posted by Reality Man | May 13, 2008 10:33 PM

Petey: Yglesisas and the Marty Peretz pool boys have no problem with lying about the nomination race to get their anti-universal healthcare, anti-progressive economy guy the nomination.

That should read:

Yglesisas, John Edwards and the Marty Peretz pool boys have no problem with lying about the nomination race to get their anti-universal healthcare, anti-progressive economy guy the nomination.

Can't believe you were backing a trust fund scumbag - so vehemently - all that time.

Posted by SoCalJustice | May 13, 2008 10:33 PM

I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ. I HERD BROKAMA LIEKS MUDKIPZ.

Posted by /b/tard | May 13, 2008 10:37 PM

Isn't the primary race effectively over by the time WV usually votes?

WV, hell. The race is usually over by the time that big, bellwether, we-cannot-possibly-decide-the-nominee-without-them, PA votes. For some reason everyone's buying into the Clinton frame that we always decide the nominee by four or five swing states, when that just hasn't happened in a while.

Posted by Cala | May 13, 2008 10:38 PM

"If Hillary has to exit the race because of an unqualified candidate, her supporters will feel cheated and angry. He seems to inspire the worst qualities in his supporters, and judging from your comments, you expect Obama to win without us."

So basically you don't recognize the legitimacy of the democratic process. Getting fewer votes isn't being forced out, it's losing when the other candidate had more supporters. If she was such a qualified candidate, she would be able to convince more people of that than Obama. However, she has failed to do so. That isn't Obama's or his supporter's fault. That's her fault.

Posted by Reality Man | May 13, 2008 10:39 PM

Well, since only about 15 people live in West Virginia, and the undereducated among them all voted for Hillary, I guess that means she's 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue bound. Isn't W. Virginia's state motto, "It's All Relative?" I don't mean to be a snob. I love Appalachia, but Hillary has to read the handwriting on the wall, the Internet, and all the major newspapers. Pack it in girlfriend; the presidential thing is over: http://theseedsof9-11.com

Posted by Peggy McGilligan | May 13, 2008 10:45 PM

Was there a Republican primary in West Virginia today, or have they already had theirs? Whatever the case, I would be interested in the percentage of voters who voted against McCain there, especially those who bothered to go to the polls to vote against him even though he has the Republican nomination sewed up. In the last few Republican primaries, it has ranged from twenty to twenty five percent.

If that holds true in the general election, and if Bob Barr runs a strong campaign, McCain might have a real problem.

One of those pre-World War I conditions that enabled the defeat of Taft in 1912, by the way, was the emergence of a strong third party candidate in former President Roosevelt.

If Barr pulls between ten to twenty percent of the vote in the South, and two to three percent of the vote elsewhere in the country, that could be enough to swing quite a few states over to Obama. Especially if ten percent of Republican voters stay home, and another ten percent actually vote against McCain, particularly if they vote for Obama.

I somehow doubt that McCain will make up the difference, either with independents, Democrats, or even with the folks of LaRaza.

Posted by The Pagan Temple | May 13, 2008 10:46 PM

ANONYMOUS HATES THE DARK VOTE HILLARY.

Anonymous hates the dark. Vote Hillary!

Anonymous hates the dark. Vote, Hillary!

Anonymous hates; the dark vote Hillary.

Anonymous hates the dark vote, Hillary.

Anonymous hates the dark vote? Hillary!

Anonymous: Hates the dark. Vote: Hillary.

Posted by Punctuation Wizard | May 13, 2008 10:48 PM

Was there a Republican primary in West Virginia today, or have they already had theirs? Whatever the case, I would be interested in the percentage of voters who voted against McCain there, especially those who bothered to go to the polls to vote against him even though he has the Republican nomination sewed up. In the last few Republican primaries, it has ranged from twenty to twenty five percent.

If that holds true in the general election, and if Bob Barr runs a strong campaign, McCain might have a real problem.

One of those pre-World War I conditions that enabled the defeat of Taft in 1912, by the way, was the emergence of a strong third party candidate in former President Roosevelt.

If Barr pulls between ten to twenty percent of the vote in the South, and two to three percent of the vote elsewhere in the country, that could be enough to swing quite a few states over to Obama. Especially if ten percent of Republican voters stay home, and another ten percent actually vote against McCain, particularly if they vote for Obama.

I somehow doubt that McCain will make up the difference, either with independents, Democrats, or even with the folks of LaRaza.

Posted by The Pagan Temple | May 13, 2008 10:48 PM

ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK ANONYMOUS HILLARY VOTES FOR THE DARK

Posted by /b/tard | May 13, 2008 10:50 PM

Was there a Republican primary in West Virginia today, or have they already had theirs? Whatever the case, I would be interested in the percentage of voters who voted against McCain there, especially those who bothered to go to the polls to vote against him even though he has the Republican nomination sewed up. In the last few Republican primaries, it has ranged from twenty to twenty five percent.

If that holds true in the general election, and if Bob Barr runs a strong campaign, McCain might have a real problem.

One of those pre-World War I conditions that enabled the defeat of Taft in 1912, by the way, was the emergence of a strong third party candidate in former President Roosevelt.

If Barr pulls between ten to twenty percent of the vote in the South, and two to three percent of the vote elsewhere in the country, that could be enough to swing quite a few states over to Obama. Especially if ten percent of Republican voters stay home, and another ten percent actually vote against McCain, particularly if they vote for Obama.

I somehow doubt that McCain will make up the difference, either with independents, Democrats, or even with the folks of LaRaza.

Posted by The Pagan Temple | May 13, 2008 10:51 PM

WV Republicans had a caucus like four months ago. McCain got a cool 1% of the vote, which I guess means that he is DOOMED.

Posted by Gabriel | May 13, 2008 10:54 PM

Cleanup on aisle 5, please...

WV Republicans had a caucus like four months ago. McCain got a cool 1% of the vote, which I guess means that he is DOOMED.

That was a curious one: almost all of the McCain delegates went over to Huckabee in order to stiff the Mittster.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | May 13, 2008 10:58 PM

Looks like the voters in the Democratic primaries want a winner in November after all.

If Clinton is such a winner, please explain all the losses she's racked up going head to head with that big loser Barack Obama.

SCOREBOARD

Posted by Killjoy | May 13, 2008 10:59 PM

"Was there a Republican primary in West Virginia today, or have they already had theirs? Whatever the case, I would be interested in the percentage of voters who voted against McCain there, especially those who bothered to go to the polls to vote against him even though he has the Republican nomination sewed up. In the last few Republican primaries, it has ranged from twenty to twenty five percent."

I wouldn't get too excited: since McCain already has it sewn up, his supporters have no reason to go out and vote while Paul and Huckabee supporters can show their displeasure by voting. Then again, a Barr run can hurt McCain. Kazakh teat cheese for everyone!

Posted by Reality Man | May 13, 2008 11:02 PM

when Barack Obama won a tough-fought race in the swing state of Missouri, did no one bother to mention that no Democrat has EVER won the White House without winning Missouri?

Posted by joe in oklahoma | May 13, 2008 11:14 PM

And of course McCain lost several key southern states to Huckabee, including AL, GA, TN, LA, and no Republican can win without winning those states.

So therefore none of the candidates can win the general election if we apply the Clintonian logic!

Posted by cm | May 13, 2008 11:22 PM

Please delete that idiot 10:50 p.m. message. It exists for the sole purpose of disrupting this site.

The real news of the evening: the GOP lost in Mississippi. Mississippi! They even threw in the farside rightwingers favorite politican of all times, VP Cheney. In an easy GOP district.

The question isn't: will Obama win. It is, will there be a GOP left?

So excellent. Let's get rid of all those semi-criminal thugs.

Posted by roger | May 13, 2008 11:25 PM

hese folks who voted for Clinton in the primary, but say they'll vote for McCain over Obama, are going to vote for McCain anyway. They're Reagan Democrats, but live in a state with a closed primary. Their only choice in the primary is between Clinton and Obama, so they picked the candidate who voted for the war and supports the gas tax pander.

There are other Reagan/McCain Democrats motivated by an interest for change, who probably voted for Obama. They also will vote for McCain in the fall, regardless of who wins the Democratic nomination.

This is not an issue. If there weren't half a dozen commentators on Matthews, and a full dozen (Bennett counts for at least three) on Blitzer, we wouldn't be hearing about it.

Posted by veblen | May 13, 2008 11:29 PM

ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
ANONYMOUS ONLY UNDERTAKES SERIOUS BUSINESS.
V

Posted by /b/tard | May 14, 2008 12:08 AM

With all the people acting like it's worth engaging Petey, not to mention that nitwit /b/tard, no-one's mentioned the really critical comment:

From the Hotline summary of the speech:
"Tonight's speech, however, sounded like a final argument. Clinton, tough, combative, scrappy throughout this 15-month fight, didn't even take a shot at the presumptive GOP nominee, John McCain."
Well, why start now?
Posted by norbizness | May 13, 2008 9:59 PM

Clinton is running, at this point, only to harm Obama. She doesn't care about running against McCain; she knows she'll never run against him. And the voters she wants next week in Kentucky are his voters in the fall, anyway. best not to antagonize them.

Posted by Warren Terra | May 14, 2008 12:12 AM

Clinton is running, at this point, only to harm Obama. She doesn't care about running against McCain; she knows she'll never run against him. And the voters she wants next week in Kentucky are his voters in the fall, anyway. best not to antagonize them.

I disagree. I think her current goal is to be the VP.

Posted by Rich | May 14, 2008 12:24 AM

[T]hese folks who voted for Clinton in the primary, but say they'll vote for McCain over Obama, are going to vote for McCain anyway.

Thank you. It was Norah O'Donnell, of all people, who made the point at the end of three hours of exit-poll-smoking that WV Democrats vote like Republicans in the presidential election.

In other news, North Dakota has two Democratic senators, a Democratic Congressman, voted 61-37 for Obama in caucuses with three times the turnout of the GOP, and will still probably vote for McCain.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | May 14, 2008 12:36 AM

Ignore /b/tard. I'd imagine his brethren will mete out appropriate action for attempting to use them to settle personal scores in their name.

Posted by soullite | May 14, 2008 1:06 AM

Reality Man

I'm saying that Hillary has the right to take her case to the convention like every other presidential candidate. Everyone from Reagan to Brown campaigned at their convention. None of them were asked to drop out or called divisive for staying in the race. In fact, Reagan emerged with his reputation intact after the 1976 convention.

Posted by EWard | May 14, 2008 1:07 AM

West Virginia doesn't count because it's not a caucus state. Hillary's margin of victory doesn't mean anything either (notice Matt didn't mention the actual margin, where if Osama had won by this much he'd be beating that drum pretty hard).

Posted by Harry | May 14, 2008 1:10 AM

"I'm saying that Hillary has the right to take her case to the convention like every other presidential candidate. Everyone from Reagan to Brown campaigned at their convention. None of them were asked to drop out or called divisive for staying in the race. In fact, Reagan emerged with his reputation intact after the 1976 convention.

Posted by EWard | May 14, 2008 1:07 AM"

Was Dean hitting Kerry all of the way up to the convention in 2004? She's not going to come out of this with more pledged delegates or voters, but if the superdelegates did still switch to her, then Obama's supporters would have an actual case that they were robbed. You're basically saying it's more important for the loser to keep biting at the heels of the actual nominee up until August instead of actually attacking the other party.

Posted by Reality Man | May 14, 2008 1:28 AM

Eward, how well did those contested conventions in 76 and 80 turn out? Nobody denies that Clinton has the legal right to stay in.

Posted by Daniel Koffler | May 14, 2008 1:30 AM

In three special Congressional elections so far -- IL-14, LA-06, and now MS-01 -- the Republicans used ads featuring Obama and Pelosi to attack the Democrats running in those very Republican CDs.

In all three elections, the Democrats WON.

Please, Republicans, keep tying our folks to Obama! It's helping them win big-time.

Posted by Phoenix Woman | May 14, 2008 1:38 AM

Yes, we should take the opinions of someone who still calls him "Osama" seriously.

Posted by 55 | May 14, 2008 1:38 AM

Warren Tera

You sure are full of yourself. It is the Kentucky voters that will decide how they will vote in November.

Posted by EWard | May 14, 2008 1:44 AM

The difference is that Hillary would probably win Minnesota and he'd probably lose West Virginia. Also, Obama could very easily lose Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, maybe Michigan, Wisconsin... whereas Hillary's definitely a favorite in the first two and last two.

Posted by Asher | May 14, 2008 1:53 AM

Asher, you do realize that Obama won Wisconsin by 18 points, right?

Posted by 55 | May 14, 2008 2:03 AM

Reality Man, you are correct. The candidate that is behind has every right to keep on campaigning. It isn't just a matter of pledged delegates. Hopefully, Hillary will fight all the way to Denver.

Daniel

In 1976, both Reagan and Ford fought bitterly over the nomination. I believe that Ford had won more primaries. Nevertheless, the MSM did not call for Reagan to drop out. Reagan bowed out gracefully at the convention and he campaigned for Ford.

In 1980, Kennedy and Carter were bitter rivals for the nomination. Kennedy treated Carter with disdain. I have to admit that Carter was a weak President and candidate in 1980. However, no one told Kennedy to drop out or called him names.

Posted by EWard | May 14, 2008 2:08 AM

The point is that you can win MINUTE and lose the presidency (Gore, Kerry,etc.) But you can't win the presidency without West Virginia.

I'm not sure what "Minute" is, but Gore arguably won the presidency without West Virginia, and Kerry would more easily win with a few shifted votes in Ohio, or with a few more shifted votes in Iowa, New Mexico, Nevada, and Colorado, than he does with any scenario involving West Virginia.

Thank you. It was Norah O'Donnell, of all people, who made the point at the end of three hours of exit-poll-smoking that WV Democrats vote like Republicans in the presidential election.

Only true in the last two presidential elections. Prior to that, West Virginia was more Democratic than the country as a whole in every election from 1940 to 1996 except 1972.

That being said, the factors that have moved West Virginia over to the Republican column appear to be part of long-standing and probably irreversible trends which have affected similar areas in other states. That on an electoral map which no longer really applies West Virginia was a very strongly Democratic state does not really mean that it is actually essential for the Democratic candidate to win West Virginia.

What is much more important is a Democratic candidate who can hold on to Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Oregon (especially Wisconsin, which has been very close for several cycles now), and can win narrowly Bush states like Iowa, Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada.

That Clinton seems like she would do better than Obama in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida is perhaps worth discussing (although I tend to suspect that Black turnout in the event of a Clinton nomination would be so tepid as to put Clinton's supposed advantage in serious jeopardy.) That she would do better in West Virginia seems pretty close to irrelevant. It would be a nice bonus of nominating her, but it's not actually much of a reason to do so.

Posted by John | May 14, 2008 2:09 AM

I won the thread, yay!

This is a sign the American people want me to stay in the race. I am taking it all the way to the convention.

Posted by Eric | May 14, 2008 2:25 AM

Dean vs Hillary

How many Democratic votes did Howard Dean win in 2004? There is no comparison between Hillary and Dean.

Posted by EWard | May 14, 2008 2:53 AM

"Reality Man, you are correct. The candidate that is behind has every right to keep on campaigning. It isn't just a matter of pledged delegates. Hopefully, Hillary will fight all the way to Denver."

Nobody is talking about having her whacked or something, so I'm not really sure what you're complaining about. However, if after the last primary ballot was cast Dean was still attacking Kerry, it would have taken the party longer to rally around the nominee and Kerry would have likely done even worse in November. Clinton isn't making the case for herself, and I wouldn't have a problem with her continuing to campaign if that is what she was doing, as much as just attacking Obama. The longer she does that, the less likely she makes it that any Democrat will be taking the oath of office in January. As an elected representative with a D next to her name, that is supposed to matter more to her in the end than whether or not she is the nominee. She is making the perfect the enemy of the good and is frankly being childish.

Plenty of people called Kennedy names back in 1980. What are you smoking? You simply don't know what you're talking about. To back yourself up, you bring up two examples of primaries in parties that led to the parties in both examples losing. You don't seem to understand what the purpose of evidence is. Picking out any random data point that is similar isn't evidence for your argument if the evidence itself argues in the opposite direction.

Posted by Reality Man | May 14, 2008 2:55 AM

That being said, the factors that have moved West Virginia over to the Republican column appear to be part of long-standing and probably irreversible trends which have affected similar areas in other states.

Agreed completely. Consider Georgia: Dem governors since Reconstruction, and usually at least one Democratic Senator, even if that one might be Zell Miller. That paradigm got thrown out in the fixed election of 2002 -- you can be skeptical of Diebold, but Cleland and Barnes were fucked over in that state's vote -- and you really can't see Saxby Shameless losing this time round: he's in the mid-50s in the polls against any primary challenger.

Obama makes GA worth an investment -- though not as much as NC -- but you just can't imagine it going blue in 2008, the way it did in 1992.

(Trivia point: West Virginia voted for Dukakis, 52-48ish.)

Point is, the map of 2000 and 2004 needs to be retired: the Florida/Ohio pivot of those years will go with it.

I honestly think that the Obama campaign is trying something fairly brave, but game-changing: it's imagining what a 70% turnout election would change the electoral college map, and aiming through its voter-registration efforts to get that extra 10% on its side.

Which is why you're seeing states with GOP legislatures scrambling to get stricter Voter ID rules in place, in order to disenfranchise the older, poorer and darker-skinned.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | May 14, 2008 3:17 AM

Reality Man

Hillary is under no obligation to stop attacking Obama. You are under the illusion that her supporters are not voting for him because of her attacks. Wrong! He is unqualified to be President.

Talk about arrogance, he refuses a revote in MI and FL and now he plans to campaign in Fl. We know that he plans to declare victory on May 20. For someone that claims he is a uniter, Obama is out of touch with voters.

The MSM has changed the norms of this race. Every single hour they are calling for her to drop out. Guess what, it makes her supporters dig in and more determined to make his campaign pay for this injustice.

Every time her supporters try to make a point you call us whiners. That is a foolish move on the part of his campaign. No one is going to step aside for Obama.

If he is the nominee, Obama will not receive the majority of our votes. This race is personal and divisive and the Obama supporters have put their foot in their mouth. This will not be a repeat of 1996. If I have to join forces with Limbaugh and company, so be it.

Posted by EWard | May 14, 2008 3:54 AM

Hee Haw Country!

Posted by Tim | May 14, 2008 4:02 AM

To Petey, Eward, and all of the Clinton supporters who read this: good luck to you and to your candidate with her, at this point, quixotic campaign for the nomination. As an Obama supporter, let me say that you've all put up a good fight and have been worthy adversaries. While I do think that the whole thing is over, I see no reason for you to give up the fight. I mean that honestly, since I no longer see you as a threat. With victory comes magnaminity and graciousness.

Posted by Rancor | May 14, 2008 4:06 AM

We are disgusted with the Democratic Party since they are throwing the election to Obama. We owe no allegiance to them. By tossing Hillary aside in favor of an inferior candidate, the Democrats have lost their credibility!

Posted by EWard | May 14, 2008 4:11 AM

"the eventual nominee can somehow completely replicate the social and political conditions prevailing in pre-WWI America"

Wasn't that..... (drumroll)....

The GILDED AGE?

Haven't you read about how we're living in the SECOND GILDED AGE?

Union-busting's rampant and reactionaries run the Supreme Court. We're involved in a messy foreign war of conquest (see Philippine Insurrection).

And we're getting tired of these expensive gasoline cars, and considering these nice quiet electric cars.... ;-)

Seriously, the current period has more in common *policically* with the pre-WWI period than with the post-WWI period.

Incidentally, "EWard":
"he refuses a revote in MI and FL"
No, that was HILLARY CLINTON who refused a revote. Obama called for a revote, but Clinton adamantly refused, demanding that they be seated "as-is" -- unti it was too late to organize a revote. *Then* she started asking for a revote; Obama said he'd like it but it didn't seem possible.

Get your facts straight.

Posted by Nathanael Nerode | May 14, 2008 4:18 AM

I got it!

Petey is MOTHMAN!

(Points for the movie reference, and more points for actually having hung out with John Keel whose book was the source for the movie.)

Posted by Richad Steven Hack | May 14, 2008 4:57 AM

Eward, I know how you feel. It's a shame this entire primary season ended up such a clusterfuck. And there's plenty of blame to go around for that. I even understand how you feel about Obama as an "inferior" candidate. He wasn't my first choice this primary season. At first I didn't think he was even all that good of one, either. But you choose from the candidates you have, not the candidates you wish you have. And after Iowa, he seemed to me the best remaining viable candidate. And I grew to like him quite a bit, despite the fact that on paper he's extremely flawed.

And I'd be lying if I didn't say I had doubts even now, especially after your candidate gave him such a drubbing last night. There are real reasons for concern. But, after taking everything into consideration, I'm still optimistic about him as a candidate against McCain and as a future president.

There are good arguments for both candidates I think. But it looks like the process, as flawed as it ended up being, is going to give the edge to Obama. And while I don't feel bad for Senator Clinton (and I don't think, to her credit, she would ask anyone to), I do feel bad for a lot of her supporters. I know how hard it is to watch a candidate who you've invested so much in lose so narrowly. I think nearly all Democrats know what that feels like after the last two presidential elections.

Anyway, congrats on your win tonight. It's all almost over now, and pretty soon, hopefully, we can all start looking ahead.

Posted by Rancor | May 14, 2008 5:00 AM

I want Barack Obama to win more than I've ever wanted any candidate to win, but I'm going to say that all this disparaging of poor West Virginian racists is counter-productive. That many West Virginians harbor pretty racist sentiments doesn't disqualify them from personhood or, more importantly in this situation, citizenship. These men and women may not share my loveydovey multicultural values or higher-ed experiences, but they have are, by and large, relatively reasonable people who have legitimate concerns for themselves and this our country. Also, they vote! Shitting on them for disagreeing with me isn't going to convince them of anything but my worthless elitism. I hate being considered a member of the "out-of-touch elite," and I hate considering working-class West Virginians stupid rednecks. We're all Americans, and we all vote. Calling a person racist or stupid or out-of-touch doesn't change minds or cancel out votes.

Posted by katie | May 14, 2008 5:47 AM

Time to fisk "EWard":

Hillary is under no obligation to stop attacking Obama. You are under the illusion that her supporters are not voting for him because of her attacks. Wrong! He is unqualified to be President.

This is a perfectly acceptable justification for casting your vote for Hillary. It is not a justification for decrying the actual outcome, which is determined by the number of delegates.

Talk about arrogance, he refuses a revote in MI and FL

False. Obama and Clinton could not agree to her completely unfair terms, i.e. seating the delegates as is. Go figure.

and now he plans to campaign in Fl.

So?

We know that he plans to declare victory on May 20. For someone that claims he is a uniter, Obama is out of touch with voters.

Oh, sure. Out of touch with the majority who voted for him. And like Hillary wouldn't declare victory about three weeks before it was remotely justifiable if given the opportunity.

The MSM has changed the norms of this race. Every single hour they are calling for her to drop out. Guess what, it makes her supporters dig in and more determined to make his campaign pay for this injustice.

"MSM" blah blah blah. If you wanna dig your heels in go for it, you're only hurting your own party. But whining about the MSM is what Republicans do. Given your comment below about aligning with Rush Limbaugh you don't sound like a Democrat worth having anyway. And btw in this case the "MSM" can only be accused of having reason on its side. Deal with it.

Every time her supporters try to make a point you call us whiners.

Nothing says "whiner" like complaining about being called a whiner. Whiner.

That is a foolish move on the part of his campaign. No one is going to step aside for Obama.

No, you'll even vote for McCain, just to show 'em! Bully for you.

If he is the nominee, Obama will not receive the majority of our votes.

(Thank you, Nostradamus.)

This race is personal and divisive and the Obama supporters have put their foot in their mouth. This will not be a repeat of 1996. If I have to join forces with Limbaugh and company, so be it.

QED. Gee, I wonder how this campaign got "personal and divisive." I don't think you're even hearing yourself, EWard.

Posted by Bill | May 14, 2008 6:44 AM

"Also, they vote! Shitting on them for disagreeing with me isn't going to convince them of anything but my worthless elitism. I hate being considered a member of the "out-of-touch elite," and I hate considering working-class West Virginians stupid rednecks. We're all Americans, and we all vote. Calling a person racist or stupid or out-of-touch doesn't change minds or cancel out votes."

You miss the fact that for the bulk of the Obama supporters, the goal is to beat Clinton, not to win the general election or to accomplish anything in a potential administration.

They want to win over the party, not to win over the general election or to accomplish anything in government.

They are selling hope, not a better nation.

The Obama campaign is basically frivolous, and this isn't the right year for a frivolous campaign. Team Obama know this - but just don't care. It's all about personal ambition for them.

Posted by Petey | May 14, 2008 6:51 AM

It is a sad day when a fellow Dem uses the southern strategy in the primaries. This is what the Dems have been fighting against without the fear of loosing the GE. It was the opportunity given to Hilary, to make History, and guarantee her place in history as Edward was saying - "If you are not voting for Hilary because she is a woman, or for Barack because he is black, dont vote for me"

Posted by jezz | May 14, 2008 7:07 AM

The Obama campaign is basically frivolous, and this isn't the right year for a frivolous campaign.

Yeah, that would explain why his campaign is doing so poorly.

Posted by Marc | May 14, 2008 8:33 AM

Bill took care of most of the frisking. Just a few more things:

"Every time her supporters try to make a point you call us whiners. That is a foolish move on the part of his campaign. No one is going to step aside for Obama."

Except you are whining. Sometimes you have to call a spade a spade. Crying "if I don't get my way, I'll take my ball and go home" is whining. There was a fair fight for this candidacy and she lost. Nobody has stolen it from her. Obama didn't cheat by winning all of those states and delegates and putting together a better ground game than her.

"If he is the nominee, Obama will not receive the majority of our votes. This race is personal and divisive and the Obama supporters have put their foot in their mouth. This will not be a repeat of 1996. If I have to join forces with Limbaugh and company, so be it."

I highly doubt you talk for the majority of Clinton supporters. You are not a good representative of them, in part because you mistake assertion for an argument based on evidence. The vast majority of Clinton supporters say they will vote for Obama in November, which just shows you aren't even in touch with the vast majority of Clinton supporters. The dead-enders like you are a vocal minority that screams loud but exists only on the internet, much like Ron Paul supporters. A lot of McCain supporters in 2000 said they would never vote for Bush, but once the GOP came around to the fact Bush had won (and McCain knew he had lost mathematically long before the convention), they voted for Bush in droves.

In addition, the way she is attacking Obama is not helping her. Instead of making her more electable and bringing more votes and superdelegates to her, all it does is raise both of their negatives. Party politics is a team sport. Instead of bringing her closer to the White House, she just ends up alienating more Obama supporters, independents and moderate Republicans whose support she would need. Her behavior right now is like the benched former first-string QB who couldn't hack it and now keeps on trying to trip his young replacement because if he can't have the starting job, no one can. The party is more important for her. A big reason she is losing now is that the Clintons have put themselves before the party, via triangulation and voting for the Iraq War. This is payback.

You have had it pointed out to you repeatedly that Clinton pledged to not campaign in FL and MI and that she agreed those states would not count. She hired the very people, like MacAuliffe and Ickes, who voted to strip those states of those delegates to run her campaign. Read what MacAuliffe said back in 2004 when he stripped MI and FL of half of their delegates for pulling the same stunt. He wasn't exactly those two states' biggest fans. If she really believed in her arguments, she would fire MacAuliffe and Ickes. She won't because she thinks her supporters are stupid enough not to notice.

One last thing: Obama has more supporters. He has won more states, delegates and votes. If the superdelegates throw this to Clinton and alienate Obama's younger group of supporters, they will see Democratic turnout plummet in November and McCain sworn in in January. They will alienate a younger generation of activists and hardcore Dems and tell African-Americans that they no longer need their votes. How would Clinton win the general in such a scenario? That's reality. You can either face reality of continue to masturbate on your blog.

Posted by Reality Man | May 14, 2008 9:01 AM

Petey blathers:

You miss the fact that for the bulk of the Obama supporters, the goal is to beat Clinton, not to win the general election or to accomplish anything in a potential administration.

An obvious lie. Even a douche like you knows this is a disingenuous statement.

They want to win over the party, not to win over the general election or to accomplish anything in government.

Winning over the party from the Clintonites is a good and worthy aim. The second phrase is a repeat of a lie.

They are selling hope, not a better nation.

And you're free to scorn hope. Just stop pretending that's ALL it is.

The Obama campaign is basically frivolous, and this isn't the right year for a frivolous campaign. Team Obama know this - but just don't care. It's all about personal ambition for them.

Accusing one candidate for president of being more personally ambitious than any of the others (especially when one of the others is named Clinton) is about the stupidest argument you can possibly make. Calling a campaign that is generating the kind of turnout Obama's has "frivolous" is willfully blind if not malicious. God what an insufferable douchebag you are.

Posted by Bill | May 14, 2008 9:04 AM

The way to avoid frivolity and missed opportunities is, of course, to return the Clintons to the White House. School uniforms for everyone!

Posted by Gabriel | May 14, 2008 9:19 AM

I haven't been following the comments that closely lately... did Petey retire "trust-fund scumbag"? It was such a witty bon mot, I never tired of seeing it, even several times in the same thread!

Posted by Glenn | May 14, 2008 9:36 AM

You miss the fact that for the bulk of the Obama supporters, the goal is to beat Clinton, not to win the general election or to accomplish anything in a potential administration.

Actually, we're all secret Republicans. We're all sitting here smoking cigars and figuring out how to best spend our trust funds.

Posted by Persia | May 14, 2008 9:46 AM

Nobody denies that Clinton has the legal right to stay in.

Posted by Daniel Koffler | May 14, 2008 1:30 AM

Right. She has the legal right to stay in, but now, when there is no mathmatical way in reality other than a coup by the superdelegates subverting the will of the people, it's a moral call. And we all know how Clintons do with morality, do we??? Slurp, slurp.

Posted by Monica | May 14, 2008 10:15 AM

No one has ever beaten a presidential candidate with the kind of powerful kung-fu grip that McCain boasts. The Dems will be in a world of pain unless they can learn to use nunchucks.

Posted by edsbowlingshoe | May 14, 2008 10:33 AM

Is this thread still on?

My experience with WV is limitted to a weekend I spent in Morgantown, so I guess it's not representative, but I am still calling b.s. on "WV is full o' racists". Admittedly it's a college town, but it sometimes seems that I saw more interracial couples in my one weekend in Morgantown than I've seen in my whole stay in the NYC area.

I guess it doesn't have much bearing on arguing against the "HRC voters are racist" as I reckon HRC probably got more votes from members of my wife's synagogue than Obama did, but I've heard more racially insensative things from members of my wife's congregation (where she seems to be the token black person) than I've heard during my stay here in the South (Tally, FL).

And, if anything, as diverse as Queens, for example is, the degree to which people live segregated lives (and look at ya funny if ya don't -- my wife has been asked, by other people of color who see her and don't realize she's Jewish because of her race ... even though she dresses, speaks, etc. in such a stereotypically Jewish manner, "why do you live in Forest hills, there's so many Jewish people there" and people have said things to me like "oh, you wouldn't know about the Bronx, you're white") in NYC seems to far exceed the segregation still present (and it, alas, is) here in the until-very-recently-Jim-Crow South.

Yes, racist attitudes very much affect Red State voting patters (a lot of what seems to be going on, IMHO, is sublimated racism: people "know" they shan't hate blacks anymore, so they take the same hatred -- and same rhetoric even -- and apply it to Muslims and gays. But they've internalized the new social rule of "racism is bad" that they really indeed do not hate black people anymore) ... but in terms of non-redirected racist attitudes, I feel it just as much (if not more so) in the North than in the South.

So let's be wary of the "all Southerners are racist" stereotypes. At the very least a little precision is helpful to stick to (in my not so humble opinion) true statements like "many Southerners adopt political positions heavily influenced by racist tropes which have been redirected to other targets".

Posted by DAS | May 14, 2008 10:39 AM

Petey's gone all ad hominem all the time 'cause he's got nothing in the way of facts.

"As the Clinton campaign sagely points out "no Democrat has won the White House without winning West Virginia since 1916" and therefore Obama's primary loss shows that despite his large lead in the polls over John McCain, he can't possible win the election."

For me that is the last straw. Everybody and their mother knows and has said the primary is over, and here is the Clinton campaign still being pissy. If I were Obama, I wouldn't pay their debt, I would do all within reason to isolate and alienate and snub the Clintons from now until the end of time. This statement means it's become personal. After Indiana, Clinton said she would work for the Democratic nominee? Bullshit. Screw her and screw her stupid supporters. Maybe Obama and people like Matt should turn a cheek and take the high road in their public rhetoric, but other supporters shouldn't.

Posted by Peter K. | May 14, 2008 11:45 AM

It occurs to me that Clinton's campaign refers to winning WV in the general election, not in the primary. Duh.

Anyway, this is really a legitimate criticism. Obama does poorly with a certain swing demographic. And this will be worrisome in the general campaign.

However, this fact doesn't come close to making the case that the superdelegates should overturn every other aspect of the primary contest and usurp Obama's hard-earned victory. This is the Clinton campaign grasping at straws.

Posted by Trieu | May 14, 2008 2:05 PM

I live in Minnesota and don't believe Hillary would be a sure thing here in Nov. She would likely have difficulty in Wisconsin and Iowa as well. Her problem isn't so much that democrats who support Obama won't vote for her, rather the large number of independents and republicans who have supported him here indicate they won't vote for her. Its also likely the new voters he brought into the process would stay home.
This thread shows how divisive we "progressives" remain, and the need for us to start the healing.
I don't see the benefit in her campaigning past next Tuesday, unless she wins Oregon. She would still be in position to be the nominee if Obama falters after that.

Posted by tom A | May 14, 2008 3:07 PM

"I've squandered my resistance for a pocketful of mumbles; such are promises. All lies and jest, still the man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest." - Paul Simon, The Boxer

Posted by Donald from Hawaii | May 14, 2008 4:38 PM

If you want her out then beat her , its that simple . Quit whining too

Posted by al | May 14, 2008 4:57 PM

"If you want her out then beat her..."

Okay - gimme the stick.

'Cause that's the only way this asshole is going to get out of the race - when someone physically beats her out of it.

Like I said before, she's going to first try to extort her way on the ticket by demanding to be VP so she can screw Obama over for the next four years in preparation for her run in 2012, then if she doesn't get that, she's going to fight on to the convention and then beyond with lawsuits in an effort to force Obama to lose the election.

This is a Mafia extortion racket tactic, at best, and fits the Clintons to a tee.

Fuck her.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | May 15, 2008 4:34 AM

Clinton Wins WV

Comments (147)

Search

Books by Matthew Yglesias

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Weekly Archives

Categories