If you want to know if the Democrats have a real problem as regards their nominating process this year, all you have to do is stop and think in terms of Negatives and Positives as regards candidate ratings.
Hillary came out of the box with higher negatives than any other recent prospective candidate I can recall. At the same time, if you buy the media narrative, Obama is and has been nothing but a big positive.
But a funny thing happened on the way to the Presidential debate forum - Obama lost Pennsylvania to Hillary by ten points.
We can speculate all we want as to why - Race, organization, a lack of experience on his part. But the reasons really don't matter when it comes to picking a President. All that matters is who wins. And the Democrats are desperate to regain the Presidency in a year when everything says they should.
So, why isn't this All Star, Barack Obama putting away a female candidate with such large negatives? He should be cleaning her clock, assuming he is everything the media would have you believe.
I'll leave it to readers to hash out the details, but the fact is, Obama's star had to have lost a large amount of glow in the eyes that matter, those of the Super Delegates, with his big loss in PA.
They can, as I said previously, bow to political correctness and nominate a sure loser. Or, they can at least hope to have a shot with Hilary. But for now, at least, the Dems look headed for another full blown meltdown when they lose the Presidential race in November, something no political pundit thought they could do this time around.
And ultimately the blame lies squarely on the very type of divisive politics they've been playing for years - pitting one interest group against another. Serves them right, as far as I'm concerned.
And party that would select that buffoon Dean can't really be all that much to begin with. The Democrat Party of today is sad, just really pathetically sad.


A key Dem, Ms Pelosi, lied about a "quote" from the bible. An econut presumably put one over on her. One of the many reasons they are in trouble is Pelosi's do-nothing (but fashion earmarks) Congress.
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 12:07 PM
A key Dem, Ms Pelosi, lied about a "quote" from the bible. An econut presumably put one over on her. One of the many reasons they are in trouble is Pelosi's do-nothing (but fashion earmarks) Congress. Sorry, here's the source:
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200804/CUL20080423b.html
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 12:09 PM
Hey Dan!
Paul here from The Thinker. Perspectives: The Dems have turned into everything that American's (say they 'hate;' but really 'love'). Seriously when one looks at the reckless lying of a candidate and numbers go down; whilst at the same time another candidate has lost their halo and their 'Let's Change America' rhetoric in and of itself is meaningless; suffice it to say I agree with your assessment:
"And ultimately the blame lies squarely on the very type of divisive politics they've been playing for years - pitting one interest group against another. Serves them right, as far as I'm concerned."
Blind leading the blind...God help us all!
Paulo
Posted by: Paulo | Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 12:16 PM
More news that your idiot leader probably hasn't heard.
http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/April2008/24/c8883.html
That equates to about $8/gallon for regular unleaded. Good stuff.
I wonder if George is going to read that new book that his crazy-eyed wife is hawking?? It might be better than My Pet Goat!
Posted by: chris | Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 12:33 PM
"That equates to about $8/gallon for regular unleaded. Good stuff."
Man I'm glad I bought those futures!!! Let's plant some grass.
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 12:41 PM
"Ms Pelosi, lied about a "quote" from the bible."
Fred, I imagine that openning a Bible would be equal to pressing a cross against a vampire's face to Nancy. But at least give her credit for knowing that stewardship is in there......as is global warming.
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 12:50 PM
Recruit chris writes home: "More news that your idiot leader probably hasn't heard."
I'm waiting for any of the panderers running for President or a Congressional office to tell the truth. We need to produce and refine more oil close to home, i.e, Alaska and off Florida, starting ASAP.
I'll seriously consider voting for this honest person regardless of party.
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 12:51 PM
"Blessed are they who believe in man-made global warming for they are in need of a good blessing."
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 12:53 PM
"We need to produce and refine more oil close to home, i.e, Alaska and off Florida, starting ASAP."
I'd say the whole gulf and let's uncap thousands of wells in Oklahoma and other states.
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 12:54 PM
Hey Harpie, your heroes are coming to my area. Hilda will be an hour north convincing the Marines that she's strong on defense (then on to Fort Bragg) and Bill is coming to UNC-Wilmington (a Ron Paul hotbed) Gotta give credit for coming into hostile territory. Now our man Obie, banking on 21% black voters is far too busy in Indiana so he's sending a representative to speak at a local bar. Johnny Mac will be here for the commissioning of a submarine.
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 01:29 PM
"--- ---"
And we know also from the Bible that global warming is real ...
...except that it won't be man-made, but God-made:
"-----
But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
------"
(2 Peter 3:10, KJV)
Posted by: seekeronos | Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 01:44 PM
"But for now, at least, the Dems look headed for another full blown meltdown"
Not quite.
"But for now, at least, the GOP is in a full blown meltdown."
How can you possible see it any other way. Bush has just set a record for the highest disapproval rating, they lost the Senate and Congress, and they have George Bush the second as their candidate.
Put the bong away.
Posted by: jharp | Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 02:07 PM
Ok, so putting aside the climate skepticism (yes, yes, Seek/Fred, thermometers are Satan's penis), and the rather bizarre claim about Pelosi lying about the bible, we've still got Dan's top tier analysis of the Pennsylvania Race.
Firstly, let us analyze the context. If Barack Obama was running for President of Pennsylvania, I don't think we can argue that he'd have lost. He went down to Hillary by nearly ten points, and that's more than a contestable margin of defeat. No doubt, were we to go into the General Election tomorrow, Barack would have no chance against Hillary Clinton were they the only two on the ticket in the state of Pennsylvania. Dan has whole-heartedly embraced the Clinton talking points here. Pennsylvania is the only state that matters.
Now, of course, one could point to the other 49 states - 41 of which have already voted - and notice how Obama has the majority of elected delegates, a triple digit lead in fact, from this pool. One could note that Obama is also the popular candidate by a simple head count of voters in these states. And when one adds in Pennsylvania to the mix, Obama continues to win on both fronts.
So, assuming Pennsylvania isn't the only state that matters, we can take all that yakking from Dan and put it on its ear. Still, Dan makes a noble effort at selling the Clinton agenda. Perhaps he'll have time to campaign for her in Indiana or North Carolina if he's not too busy doing whatever it is that he does.
Secondly, we should probably notice the context in which Obama lost. Entering the race, Barack was facing a 20 point deficit in the polls and an enormous established pro-Hillary voter machine. Pennsylvania borders New York and sits within Clinton's stronghold territory and her New York media market. Hillary has been campaigning in Pennsylvania since she took her Senate seat in '02. After a six week campaign war, in which millions of dollars were dumped on the state by both parties, Obama managed to cut his deficit in half. He picked up 200k voters in six weeks. That's roughly 5k voters / day that flipped to Obama. I don't know what you call that in the Reihl World, but around Texas we see that as some serious momentum.
Thirdly, voters in Pennsylvania were voting Democrat 3:1 over the GOP. Assuming half of Clinton's legions decide to flip Obama the bird and vote McCain in 2008 (unlikely, given the Clinton and McCain policy positions are about as similar as night and day), Obama still keeps Pennsylvania hotly contested in November.
So, after one of the most anti-Obama campaign arcs since Barack announced his run for President, the Big O still managed to cut his deficit in half, maintain his triple digit national delegate lead, and inflate voter turnout in his party over three-fold over. And this means he's in hot water come November - so Democrats (at the advice of one of the most rabidly anti-liberal columnists on the web) should side with Hillary at the convention in Denver, Colorado (another state Obama won).
I honestly don't know what to say except that Dan Riehl has, perhaps, the worst head for politics I've ever seen in my entire life. Hands down. Flat out. Worst. Pundit. Ever.
You do your party great credit. Keep it Riehl.
Posted by: IslamoLlama | Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 02:08 PM
"Hey Harpie, your heroes are coming to my area."
I wouldn't say they are my heroes though I like them both. My first choice was John Edwards.
Posted by: jharp | Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 02:09 PM
"My first choice was John Edwards."
You defy all attempts to respect you. YUCK!!!
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 02:15 PM
John Edwards? Then Hillary Clinton, with Obama bringing up the rear, huh, jharp? Interesting. Let me see, you told Willie you didn't belong to a party, but I'm not sure if that is true. All Democrats, all the time, with you, jharp. Oh, well, we knew you were a Democrat from the beginning.
Hey, Willy, how's it going?
Posted by: templar knight | Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 03:23 PM
"Hey, Willy, how's it going?"
Life is good my friend.
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 03:29 PM
"Life is good my friend."
Life is good. There are many things wrong with the World, but my little corner of same is the best it's ever been. I had to take off this afternoon just to get my senses back. We have drilled 5 wells in the past three weeks in 2 different states. I'm being stretched mighty thin, and one of the wells was inside the city limits of a fairly large city, and the city bureaucrats are giving us hell. I guess they want $6 a gallon oil, as they don't seem to appreciate our efforts to solve the oil crisis. Haha.
Posted by: templar knight | Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 03:39 PM
"Uh, that would be $6 a gallon gas...not oil. Sorry.
Posted by: templar knight | Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 03:40 PM
"thermometers are Satan's penis"
Hahaha!! The West Point Code-Writer will now be forced to pray to King Jesus for your eternal damnation for that one.
Posted by: chris | Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 03:57 PM
"--- ... to pray to King Jesus for your eternal damnation for that one. ---"
No. That's not what Jesus wants.
But I will pray for your salvation, and for the Llama's salvation, too.
TK: Good to know that there is still oil in them hills! Here's hoping that the city bureaucrats wake up and smell the crude.
Posted by: seekeronos | Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 05:35 PM
"inside the city limits of a fairly large city."
They have derricks on the capital grounds in OKC. Whose so damned special?
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 05:38 PM
What did Pelosi and gang do about gas prices this week? Nothing, they debated about reefs, oh wait that's next week. They may as well be talking about reefers.
Posted by: tally | Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 07:42 PM
"What did Pelosi and gang do about gas prices this week?"
The same thing they did 104 weeks ago when Nancy told us all that her party had a concise plan to bring "runaway" gas prices under control.
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 07:54 PM