See? The argument does in fact carry over.

How are things in Louisianas 6th? And in Haster's old district.

How about New York State Senate 48th district?

Turnout for the Democrats has been so huge that even fox analysts are admitting, on camera, that they are stunned.

yeah, well, if Lake County is an indication of how genuine those voters are, you may be in for a bit of a stunning, yourself.

Fundamentals for the GOP suck. They are losing special elections in districts that should be completely safe.

Bush has basically screwed everyone except billionaires. Including Republicans.

McCain is not going to look very good when the spotlight hits him. He is on record admitting he is weak on the economy, and he does not seem to understand core issue in Iraq, such as the difference between Shia & Sunni.

I am not happy at all about the campaign Hillary has run. I would be totally bummed if she should somehow get nominated. Then I would get out and work to get her elected. This country cannot stand any more incompetence and corruption from the GOP. I suspect most Democrats will do the same...

There is a term for the 60-hour people, like you and me, James. It is "elitist". Or you could use Paul Begala's "egghead". Whatever you prefer.

I rather like "elitist egghead," myself.

There is a term for the 60-hour people, like you and me, James. It is "elitist". Or you could use Paul Begala's "egghead". Whatever you prefer.

Well, if that's not the most candid statement of Democratic electoral strategy I've ever heard, then I don't know what is.

It's not just a Democratic strategy, the GOP has been using the same thing for as long as I can remember. Heck, politicians have been successfully using the strategy throughout history.

Angry people are the easiest to swing, and all you have to do is tell them who they should be angry at. The people who support Clinton for rational reasons will be harder to swing because you have to appeal to their intelligence, but for them Obama is a much shorter swing than McCain. All in all, I don't see Obama having a difficult time bringing the majority into the fold.

Well, if that's not the most candid statement of Democratic electoral strategy I've ever heard, then I don't know what is.

It now looks likely Obama will be the Democrats' nominee for president of the United States, and whether or not you like him, whether he wins or looses against McCain, its got to be a good day for the country. Even Bithead has to admit that.

Actually, no, I don't.

The more bloodletting that goes on, on the left, the better it is for the country.

Strikes me that the pundits, talking heads, bloggers, and ether net discussants are missing a point. Obama’s roots are as a street organizer, and he has put together a formidable political machine. How formidable? Look at his bank account.

The money is not top down, but bottom up. Once a member of the great unwashed puts a couple of bucks down on his or hers favorite candidate, they are committed to vote. As for the gray beards of the Democratic party, the supper delegates, they are not going to pass up Obama’s organizing skills, nor will they pass up his money machine. The folks he has attracted is the future of the party.

Full disclosure: My money went to Senator Dodd, but Opama’s getting closer to my wallet. The deficit, the war, health care, and after McCain’s last speech, the Supreme Court are on my mind…

Moved from wrong thread. - jhj

This is the angriest bunch I've ever seen in 40 years of watching elections. I have my doubts they can be swung, frankly.

Angry people are the easiest to swing, and all you have to do is tell them who they should be angry at. The people who support Clinton for rational reasons will be harder to swing because you have to appeal to their intelligence, but for them Obama is a much shorter swing than McCain. All in all, I don't see Obama having a difficult time bringing the majority into the fold.