You're forgetting those national polls are sooo 2007. A lot has happened since 1/1/2008. The win tomorrow in New Hampshire should have Obama +5/+10 in the next national polls.

I'm sure Obama's campaign is making enough money to handsomely stay afloat.

You don't truly think Clinton can lose Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina and still win the nomination? It would take some pretty horrible slip up from Obama or his campaign.

Dr. Joyner, your pairing of that photograph with that headline creates ... cognitive dissonance, at least for me.

Heh. It seemed so ... appropriate.

why you think Obama will not ultimately have the Democratic nomination. Can you expand on that?

She's got more money and better poll numbers than he does. I expound more in my Obama mania post.

Good post, although one or two of the comments nearly bury it. But I'm curious (as were some others, apparently) as to why you think Obama will not ultimately have the Democratic nomination. Can you expand on that?

Chris I think you touched a nerve with Beth. She's paraphrasing you on her racist, bigoted, zeenofobic blog:

Meanwhile, Mark Penn seems to have the political acumen of a 13 year-old.

Republicans that don't support Obama aren't necessarily bigoted, racist, and/or xenophobic. Possibly, they're just incompetent like you. e.g. Hillary Clinton's middle name is not Rodham - it's Diane. This said, your explanation regarding why you used Barack's middle name is flawed. I hope you're 15 and not a real adult. If so, this world is slightly more screwed than I imagined.

:)

only the current incarnation of the GOP, replete with xenophobia

No, silly, it's because I want to elect a President of the UNITED STATES, not of the UN. Sorry if you think that's xenophobia, but that's your problem.

And Derrick, thank you for confirming PRECISELY what I knew you Obamaniacs would say. If you don't support Obama, you're a racist!!!1!1 Whatever, you have no idea what you're talking about or whom you're talking about, and I frankly don't need to defend my own anti-racist credentials to some tool on teh intarwebz. I live in the real world, and my life speaks for itself.

And where did I say anything about him having a Muslim middle name? I merely said it, as I would say "Hillary Rodham Clinton" or whatever. Apparently it's an issue for you.
As a matter of fact, I've mocked those who have tried to make it an issue. Not that someone as laughably prejudiced as you deserves any response.

Cheers!

Don't also forget that Beth thinks he would elect Jesse Jackson as his SOS because you know Jesse is black and Obama is black so it makes sense, because black people with two completely different philosophies who don't even support one another would give one a cabinet position? Beth's great reasons for being against Obama are basically that he's black, he has a Muslim middle name and foreigners like him. That's like the trifecta of racism, bigotry and xenophobia.

Goodness knows at a point when we are about to break our military and are supposedly facing some monolithic global jihadist threat, the might of which is said to rival the cold war soviets, we surely wouldn't want to elect a president popular with them damn "furriners."

is refreshingly cerebral

Gag me. What Obama offers is a symphony of vacuous platitudes, bolstered by an interesting life story. Nothing more.

Jeff Harrell is another Republican on Obama's bandwagon. Frankly, I'm surprised that these honestly intelligent people are falling for Obama. I understand the allure of electing a black man with an interesting personal history to the Presidency--it's a fundamentally American trait to want to see someone like him succeed. But really, I think that for Republicans, we CAN do better. There are plenty of people like Obama who have actual conservative (or even centrist, which Obama is not) politics that we can support.
I also understand the wish for "unity," about which Obama likes to speak. I absolutely do NOT believe Obama is the man for it, nor, really, can any of the current candidates do it. Bill Clinton was supposedly a likeable guy (not to me) with an "interesting" personal history and tended to govern (after the addition of Dick Morris) more to the center. There was absolutely NO unity during those days, although it was nothing like it is now. I just don't think we're going to go from this toxic, BDS-afflicted environment--especially during a war to which half the public is bitterly opposed!--with the election of one man or woman (okay, especially that woman). It's going to take a lot more than Barack Hussein Obama and his platitudes for most to humanize "the other side" again.

At the very least, Obama ought to spend some more time in the Senate (I'd be happier seeing a Republican replace him, but it IS Illinois). He wasn't even there yet to vote on the Iraq War Resolution, fer crying out loud! He's almost a blank slate for most people, which causes them to project all sorts of virtues onto him. I scoff at these messiah fantasies.

BTW, I saw Laura Ingraham gushing over Obama last night on teevee. She was saying that the foreign press absolutely adores Obama, and that he's the "world candidate." That alone is enough reason to draw back in disgust. And speaking of the "world candidate," I wonder, who'd be his Secretary of State? Jesse Jackson? You know he's dreaming of the job--he's virtually campaigned for it half his life by hobnobbing with America's foes. Furthermore, it's not like Obama is opposed to "dialogue" with the likes of the Iranian mullahs, Chavez, the Norks, etc. No wonder the anti-American foreign press loves him.