At any time other than in the midst of a heated electoral battle, it's hard to imagine that Nancy Pelosi would attract much controversy by opining that the Democratic Party's nominee for president should be the candidate who wins the most votes. The House speaker has done just that, last week drawing an angry backlash from wealthy supporters of Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Most Americans -- presumably including the 26 million who have participated with unprecedented enthusiasm in the Democratic primaries and caucuses -- still view this country as a representative democracy. Take a look at history, though, and the power of the popular vote in determining the next occupant of the White House starts to look a lot less absolute.

The last time the Democrats had a truly competitive fight on their hands, in 1968, the man who eventually won the nomination, Hubert H. Humphrey, garnered just 2.2% of the popular vote in the primaries. He relied instead on the 37 states that still allocated their nominating delegates by backroom fiat instead of the ballot box -- a strategy that may well have clinched his nomination even if Bobby Kennedy had not been assassinated.

The lack of serious intraparty competition in the intervening 40 years -- despite the central role now accorded to primary/caucus voting -- has been largely the result of a playing field tilted to favor establishment candidates such as Walter Mondale in 1984 and Al Gore in 2000. Iowa and New Hampshire -- both predominantly white, conservative states averse to maverick candidates like Jesse Jackson or even Howard Dean -- set the tone. The pile-up of states on Super Tuesday, requiring lavish funding and a high public profile, usually knocks out what is left of the competition. And, as an insurance policy, the party leaves any really close races in the hands of non-elected superdelegates, the issue central to the Hillary Clinton-Barack Obama showdown now.

The will of the people has been even more compromised when it comes to general elections for the presidency. In fact, on every occasion in American history when the race for the White House has been close enough to be contested, the candidate with fewer votes has prevailed.

It happened in 1800 -- admittedly, an age before mass suffrage rights -- when Thomas Jefferson managed to tie Aaron Burr in the electoral college. Jefferson eventually won the election in the House of Representatives, thanks to the distorting effect of the "federal ratio" -- the rule that gave Southern slave owners an additional 3/5ths vote for each adult they enslaved.

It happened in 1824, when the House threw the race to John Quincy Adams even though Andrew Jackson won more votes and more electoral college delegates. It happened in 1876, when carpetbagger Republican administrations in Louisiana, Florida and South Carolina refused to recognize the victory of the Democrat Samuel Tilden and essentially threw the election to his Republican rival, Rutherford B. Hayes.

And, of course, it happened in 2000, when the two major parties, the authorities in Florida and the Supreme Court all, in their own ways, prevented a full recount of the votes in the Sunshine State. And thus the keys to the White House went to George W. Bush, the candidate lagging half a million votes behind in the national vote tally.

Given this long history of dogged, dirty, win-at-any-cost electioneering, Clinton's determination to keep fighting in the face of seemingly insurmountable electoral arithmetic makes a lot more sense.

When her surrogates argue that carrying big states such as California and Ohio is more important than being ahead in the overall popular vote, or when they argue that pledged delegates are not really pledged at all, they are following a well-worn playbook compiled by both parties down through the years -- which is to say and do anything that might push your candidate ahead.

In the end, the key to winning is not the number of votes but the efficacy of a candidate's political campaign. If the Clinton camp can create the perception that voters from the early primaries are now suffering buyers' remorse, and that the party's grass-roots supporters want her after all, she still has a chance. Conversely, if she comes off as a sore loser willing to risk her party's chances in November to further her personal ambition -- a perception already dragging down her approval ratings -- her gambit will most likely fail.

It shouldn't be this way, of course. Democracy should be about the will of the people, pure and simple, as Pelosi has pointed out.

American politicians are generally very good at the rhetoric of deferring to that popular will. When their careers and their futures are on the line, however, it's a whole different story, and always has been.




By Andrew Gumbel, Los Angeles Times, March 31, 2008

NEW ALBANY, Ind. - Amid mounting calls from top Democrats for Sen. Hillary Clinton to step aside and clear the path for rival Sen. Barack Obama in the presidential race, strategists are warning of damage to the party's chances in November if women believe that a mostly male party establishment is unfairly muscling Clinton out of the race.

"Women will indeed be upset if it appears people are trying to push Hillary Clinton out of the way," said Carol Fowler, the South Carolina Democratic chair who is backing Obama. "If you are going to ask her to withdraw, you'd better be making a strong case."

Clinton probably will end the primary season narrowly trailing Obama, but he is unlikely to have the 2,024 delegates needed to win outright, meaning that the nominee will be determined by roughly 800 "superdelegates."

Debra Starks, 53, thinks sexism is playing a role in urging Clinton out of the race. "She's a strong woman and needs to stay in there," Starks said at a Clinton rally.

Clinton insists she's in it to the end, saying a "spirited contest" is good for the party.

The Associated Press, March 31, 2008

Both Charles Krauthammer and Zbigniew Brzezinski have practically identical views of American interests -- and match those views to their divergent prescriptions. While Krauthammer and Brzezinski would probably object to the notion that they have the same view, their visions of the future of the Middle East are based on some of the same virtually meaningless geopolitical buzzwords.

For example, Brzezinski talks of creating "regional stability with all of Iraq's neighbors, including Iran"; Krauthammer speaks of forging "regional stability" that cements American interests. What's the difference? Brzezinski speaks of ending the U.S. involvement in Iraq "responsibly" to create "long-range stability" in the Middle East; Krauthammer wants the U.S. to "cement a long-term allied relationship with the most important Arab country in the region." (Krauthammer says that is Iraq; Brzezinski doesn't name one.)

It all comes down to "stability." Each defines it differently and then condemns any policies that he claims don't pursue it.

But I reject a purely pragmatic approach when it comes to foreign policy, just as I wince at some faux "vision" of stability or regional security -- particularly when what we're really talking about is not a vision at all but a political stance to justify withdrawal or victory in Iraq.

I wholeheartedly agree with John McCain, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton that the Bush administration has royally screwed up Iraq, harmed U.S. standing in the world, and hurt U.S. national security. But the conversation we need to have is about a new ideology that might help guide future U.S. policy in the Middle East and elsewhere.

I start from the assumption that the need for "stability," or even the the prevention of nuclear proliferation, is not what should drive the answer. These views hardly tell us what we should do. I also believe these concepts have aligned us with the wrong forces and put the interests of others above our own.

At this point, in fact, these goals are meaningless terms that have already been used by the Bush administration to justify its doing whatever it wanted. McCain, Obama, and Clinton would do better to rethink the core concepts that identify actual American interests.

By William M. Arkin, The Washington Post, March 31, 2008

Obama, Bill Clinton Say the Contentious Race Is Good for Democratic Party

Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., has a simple message for Democrats pushing her to bow out of the presidential race before the next 10 primary contests are over: forget about it.

"One thing about me, I never give up. I keep fighting every single day!" Clinton told voters in Indianapolis this weekend.

It's mathematically improbable she will overtake Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., in pledged delegates, and her campaign has left a trail of unpaid vendors all over the country, with $8.7 million in unpaid debts.

Democratic officials are expressing concern as to the long-term damage of the protracted Democratic primary race, and several high-profile allies of Obama have called for her to withdraw.

Regardless, Clinton told The Washington Post, "I have no intention of stopping until we finish what we started, and until we see what happens in the next 10 contests, and until we resolve Florida and Michigan. And if we won't resolve it, we'll resolve it at the convention."

Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, a Clinton supporter, said that declaring a presumptive winner at this point in the race discounts upcoming primaries -- including the important Pennsylvania primary on April 22.

"They're trying to say to the people of Pennsylvania ? you don't count," Rendell said today on "Good Morning America."

By JAKE TAPPER, ABC News, March 31, 2008

Hillary Rodham Clinton's cash-strapped presidential campaign has been putting off paying hundreds of bills for months - freeing up cash for critical media buys but also earning the campaign a reputation as something of a deadbeat in some small-business circles.

A pair of Ohio companies owed more than $25,000 by Clinton for staging events for her campaign are warning others in the tight-knit event production community - and anyone else who will listen - to get their cash upfront when doing business with her. Her campaign, say representatives of the two companies, has stopped returning phone calls and e-mails seeking payment of outstanding invoices. One even got no response from a certified letter.

Their cautionary tales, combined with published reports about similar difficulties faced by a New Hampshire landlord, an Iowa office cleaner and a New York caterer, highlight a less-obvious impact of Clinton's inability to keep up with the staggering fundraising pace set by her opponent for the Democratic presidential nomination, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama.

Clinton's campaign did not respond to recent, specific questions about its transactions with vendors. But Clinton spokesman Jay Carson pointed on Saturday to an earlier statement the campaign issued to Politico, asserting: "The campaign pays its bills regularly and in the normal course of business, and pays all of its bills."

Just like with other businesses, it's common for campaigns to carry unpaid bills from month to month, but in Clinton's case, it also could serve a strategic purpose.

The New York senator's presidential campaign ended February with $33 million in the bank, according to a report filed last week with the Federal Election Commission, but only $11 million of that can be spent on her battle with Obama.

The rest can be spent only in the general election, if she makes it that far, and must be returned if she doesn't. If she had paid off the $8.7 million in unpaid bills she reported as debt and had not loaned her campaign $5 million, she would have been nearly $3 million in the red at the end of February.

By contrast, if you subtract Obama's $625,000 in debts and his general-election-only money from his total cash on hand at the end of last month, he'd still be left with $31 million.

The presidential campaign of presumptive Republican nominee Arizona Sen. John McCain reported $4.3 million in debt at the end of February, but only $1.3 million of that was in the form of unpaid bills to a dozen vendors. The rest was a bank loan, which the campaign says it paid off last week.

It's not just the size of Clinton's debts that's noteworthy. It's also that her unpaid bills extend beyond the realm of high-priced consultants who typically let bills slide as part of the cost of doing business with powerful clientele whose success is linked to their own.

Some of Clinton's biggest debts are to pollster and chief strategist Mark Penn, who's owed $2.5 million; direct mail company MSHC Partners, which is owed $807,000; phone-banking firm Spoken Hub, which is waiting for $771,000; and ad maker Mandy Grunwald, who's owed $467,000.

Clinton also reported debts more than one month old to a slew of apolitical businesses and organizations, large and small, in the states through which this historically expensive Democratic primary campaign has raged.

She owed Iowa's Sioux City Art Center Board of Trustees $3,500 for catering and venue costs, New Hampshire's Winnacunnet Cooperative School District $4,400 in event costs, Qwest $24,000 for phone service, various branches of the Iowa-based supermarket chain Hy-Vee $15,000 for food, beverages and catering, and $7,700 to Ohio and Massachusettsbranches of the theatrical stage employees' union, for equipment costs.

In fact, about a third of the nearly 700 individual debts Clinton reported at the end of February were for various types of "event expenses," including $319,000 for catering and venue costs, $420,000 for equipment, $11,000 for photography and $9,000 for security.

Event production is important to big-time presidential campaigns. It shapes how candidates look and sound, not just to the thousands of people who turn out to campaign speeches and rallies but also to the millions who catch snippets of them on television.

And word is getting around that Clinton's campaign does not promptly pay those who labor to make her events look good, said an employee of the event production company Forty Two of Youngstown, Ohio.

"I feel insulted by the way that the campaign treated this company and treated us personally," said the employee, who did not want to be named talking about a client.

The Clinton campaign paid the company $16,500 to set up a stage, press riser, sound system and backdrops at a Youngstown high school last month for a raucous union rally, where an aggressive Clinton stump speech drew thunderous applause. But the Clinton campaign has yet to pay Forty Two for two other February events, and the employee said the campaign has stopped returning phone calls, e-mails and didn't respond to a certified letter.

"We worked very hard to put together these events on a moment's notice and do absolutely everything to a 't' to make it look perfect on television for her and for her campaign," said the employee. "Sen. Clinton talks about helping working families, people in unions and small businesses. But when it comes down to actually doing something that shows that she can back up her words with action, she fails."

Forty Two also has done events for Obama's campaign, which has paid its bills promptly, according to the employee. FEC records show Obama's campaign paid the company $18,500.

Show Tyme Exhibits, another Youngstown event production company, has produced political events for years and had never had problems getting paid before Clinton, according to owner Jim Phillips.

He said he's still waiting for a payment for setting up the sound system and stage for Clinton's February tour of a General Motors plant in Lordstown, Ohio.

"It was only $607, but I'm a small guy; I could use that," said Phillips, adding, "Everyone I can tell, I do tell about it. You tell somebody something bad about somebody, they tell 10 other people."

Both Phillips and the Forty Two employee said they voted for Clinton in Ohio's March 4 primary, which she won handily, but regret their votes and are reluctant to work for her campaign again.

Their sentiments aren't universal in the event production world, though.

At the end of January, Clinton owed $38,000 to ACS Sound and Lighting of Columbia, S.C. But the company was paid in full last month and is planning to do events for Clinton in other states, according to manager Troy Gwin.

"We don't have any problem with them," he said. "I'd continue to do business after the primaries if she is the nominee. I would love to."

And Tony Galarza, director of the Missoula, Mont., branch of a national event production company, remained committed to staging an April 6 Clinton fundraising brunch at a local hotel even after a colleague in his company e-mailed a list of Clinton's campaign debts.

Galarza said he's confident Clinton will pay his company but admitted he was surprised to see so many event production companies among the campaign's creditors.

"Once I looked at those numbes, I realized how important to our economy nationally these elections are," he said. "Just the sheer numbers listed there were immense."

By Kenneth P. Vogel, POLITICO, March 31, 2008

Hillary Clinton sought to put to rest any thoughts about exiting the race in her weekend interview with the Washington Post. "I have no intention of stopping until we finish what we started and until we see what happens in the next 10 contests and until we resolve Florida and Michigan," she told the paper. "And if we don't resolve it, we'll resolve it at the convention -- that's what credentials committees are for."

Bill Clinton is doing his all to keep the ball in play, urging those still-uncommitted superdelegates to "chill out." Speaking at California's Democratic state convention, the former president asked for patience. "Don't let anybody tell you that somehow we are weakening the Democratic Party. Chill out and let everybody have their say. We are going to win this election."

Is there a hint of desperation in the air? More than halfway through the seven-week gap leading up to the Pennsylvania primary, the pause has not worked out as Clinton's campaign might have hoped. Rather than a contemplative period for the party to re-think the idea of nominating Barack Obama, it's been a lull in which his support appears to have solidified, if not grown. And the road ahead appears daunting for Clinton.

While she continues to hold a wide lead in Pennsylvania, her supporters are now trying to tamp down the expectations that she might run up the score there. Governor Ed Rendell, an early Clinton supporter, told ABC News this morning that he expected that lead to shrink before the April 22nd primary. And Obama is just getting started with his push in the state. Yesterday he drew an estimated crowd of 22,000 in an appearance at Penn State.

Clinton could still win there but if Obama can come within five points or so it may be a pyrrhic victory for her campaign. Then, pressure will mount for her to sweep the next two states of North Carolina and Indiana. Losses in both would almost certainly spell the end to her campaign. Even one loss would prove hard to overcome. Clinton needs to pile up some victories to claim the momentum at the close of this race and prove something to those superdelegates. A smaller-than-expected margin of victory in Pennsylvania and possible losses two weeks later does not equate with that need. She needs to run up the score on April 22nd and shock Obama in North Carolina. Until then, she's still in it, whether she can win it or not.




By Vaughn Ververs, CBS News, March 31, 2008

SAN JOSE -- Former President Clinton urged Democratic Party superdelegates and activists Sunday to be patient in selecting a presidential nominee and let the primary election process play out over the coming months.

A vigorous campaign between his wife, New York Sen. Hillary Clinton, and Illinois Sen. Barack Obama will not damage the party's prospects of beating the Republican nominee in the fall, Bill Clinton said in a speech to the California Democratic Party convention.

"Don't let anybody tell you that somehow we are weakening the Democratic Party," he told the 2,100 state delegates. "Chill out and let everybody have their say. We are going to win this election."

Before his speech, the former president met privately with about 16 superdelegates who will vote at the national Democratic Party convention in August on the party's nominee. The nomination is expected to be in the superdelegates' hands; neither Obama nor Hillary Clinton appear destined to win the 2,024 pledged delegates needed to secure the nod.

The former president also encouraged superdelegates not to decide prematurely on the nominee and deny voters in upcoming states the chance for their votes to count, several superdelegates said afterward.

Of the 65 California superdelegates selected so far, about 21 have not declared a favorite, party officials say. Of those who have made up their minds, Hillary Clinton leads Obama 29 to 13. Clinton won the Feb. 5 California primary by eight percentage points over Obama.

"President Clinton urged us to let the process play out," said Christine Pelosi, an uncommitted superdelegate who is the daughter of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. "It was very inspiring. The president's emphasis was clearly on electing a Democratic president."

Obama representative

The Obama campaign declined to send a nationally known surrogate to the San Jose convention to counter the former president, but enlisted San Francisco Dist. Atty. Kamala D. Harris, one of Obama's California co-chairs, to speak on his behalf.

"It is Barack Obama who has the ability to bring our nation together," Harris told the delegates. "Barack Obama will be the president who finally ends the era of fear that has been used to divide and demoralize our country."

For Harris, the state's first female African American district attorney but little known outside the Bay Area, the chance to address the convention on Obama's behalf was a big opportunity. But she acknowledged that going head-to-head with the former president -- one of the party's "heroes," she said -- was daunting.

"Can you say 'gulp' ?" she joked Saturday.

In her address, she likened her appearance before the convention to Obama's candidacy:

"When you really think about it, hasn't that been, from the beginning, what this campaign to elect Barack Obama has been about?" she asked. "Hasn't it been about the audacity to do things unimaginable?"

In response, supporters in the crowd began chanting "Obama, Obama."

Much of the drama at the three-day convention played out behind the scenes, where surrogates for the presidential candidates continued to woo undeclared superdelegates.

With 71 superdelegates (including six who have not been selected yet), California has more superdelegates than most states have pledged delegates. Winning over the 21 uncommitted votes would be as valuable as sweeping a primary in Rhode Island or Hawaii.

The superdelegates, made up mainly of members of Congress and the Democratic National Committee, are free to change their mind up until the August convention in Denver.

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, one of Clinton's most vocal California supporters, said he was among hundreds of surrogates who have been assigned certain superdelegates to pursue. It is a process, he said, that has been going on for months.

"There are some superdelegates who just smile and say, 'Don't talk to me, don't talk to me,' " Newsom said. "They are here knowing full well that people like me are out to get them. But they don't want to be part of it because they want to maintain their neutrality until the very end. I'm just glad I'm not a superdelegate."

Art Torres, chairman of the California Democratic Party, is one of the few superdelegates who has not been targeted -- because under party rules he cannot declare his choice until the national convention.

"I am very lonely," he quipped. "I haven't gotten wine. I haven't gotten cookies. I haven't gotten anything, no calls. I am one of the loneliest superdelegates in the nation."

Clinton has long had an edge in superdelegate support because of her early status as front-runner. But in recent weeks, Obama has chipped away at that lead even as he has held onto his advantage among pledged delegates won through elections. Clinton's task now is to win enough votes in the upcoming primaries to maintain momentum while luring the necessary superdelegates to her side.

Litany of issues

As he pressed Hillary Clinton's case, former President Clinton spoke in detail Sunday about many of the campaign issues important to Democrats: aiding homeowners facing foreclosure; ending the Iraq war; developing alternative energy; and creating universal healthcare.

"The American people know the country has to change," he said. "They know that we are not working at home and that our position in the world is badly out of place."

But he disputed the comments of some leading Democrats and Obama supporters that the prolonged campaign was going to hurt the eventual nominee in the race against the presumed Republican nominee, Sen. John McCain.

Recalling a bit of history, Clinton said that in June 1992, after he won the California primary and formally secured the nomination, he had been beaten up so much that he was running third in national polls behind independent Ross Perot and incumbent Republican President George H.W. Bush.

But after the Democratic convention, he said, polls showed him on top. He called the harsh campaign a "blessing in disguise." (Clinton did not mention that, in part, the polls shifted because Perot left the race during the convention only to return later.)

"There is somehow this suggestion that because we are having a vigorous debate about who would be the best president, we are going to weaken this party in the fall," he said. "Don't let anybody tell you that somehow we are weakening the Democratic Party. We are strengthening the Democratic Party."

As a former Democratic nominee for Congress from Indiana, I have a great deal of interest in the current contest for the Democratic presidential nomination. Having a doctorate in American history and having written a political biography adds even more fascination to the race for me. However, being the father of a 10-year-old daughter might be the most important factor of all.

I took my daughter to attend the Hillary Clinton town hall event at the Wigwam gymnasium in Anderson. It was at the Wigwam that I heard Robert Kennedy, a political hero of mine, speak during the 1968 Democratic primary campaign. After his speech, we were all invited to process across the stage to shake hands with him and his wife, Ethel.

A flood of memories came back while we listened to Sen. Clinton. I thought it was important for my daughter to see a woman running for president of the United States, to know that a young girl can be anything that she wants to be, including president. Hillary Clinton reminds me so much of Robert Kennedy, with her combination of idealism, toughness and experience of how to use power to get things done. She has my vote and enthusiastic support, along with the admiration of a little girl who sees that anything is possible for her in this country. It was a poignant afternoon.

By James P. Fadely, The Indianapolis Star, March 31, 2008

HARRISBURG, Pa., March 31 (UPI) -- Sen. Hillary Clinton, despite her suburban roots, has resonated with blue-collar workers who, observers say, are keeping her U.S. presidential candidacy afloat.

For several reasons -- Clinton's focus on economic problems and solutions and her highly public story of survival -- her message resonates with financially suffering voters, the Chicago Tribune reported Monday.

"For blue-collar Democratic voters choosing a candidate, the first question is usually, 'Does he or she understand my life?'" said Mark Kornblau, who advised former U.S. Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., before he left the race for the Democratic nomination for president. "I don't think it's natural and I don't think it comes from any real life experience ... but she uses language that really describes what's going on in people's lives."

The blue-collar vote in Ohio and Texas breathed life into Clinton's campaign, the Tribune said. Exit polls showed Clinton, D-N.Y., her beating Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., by 15 percentage points among voters without a college degree and won among those who earn $50,000 a year or less.

Those demographics should play heavily in May 6 primaries in West Virginia, Kentucky, Indiana and North Carolina; and the April 22 primary in Pennsylvania, where polls indicate Clinton leads, the Tribune said.

With attention focused on the Democrats' infighting for the presidential nomination, Senator John McCain is pressing ahead to the general election but has yet to sign up one critical constituency: the big-money people who powered the Bush fund-raising machine.

As he reintroduces himself to voters this week with stops like one at the Naval Air Station in Meridian, Miss., where he was a flight instructor, Mr. McCain will also attend to another crucial task by courting donors in Mississippi, Florida and Tennessee.

Building up his fund-raising apparatus is essential at this point for Mr. McCain, who struggled for much of last year to raise money. To prevail in the general election, he will need to raise substantial amounts of cash to cut into the vast fund-raising edge the Democratic presidential candidates have shown over the Republicans this election cycle.

Even though he all but secured the Republican nomination by mid-February, Mr. McCain has so far managed to enlist only a fraction of the heavyweight bundlers of campaign contributions who helped drive President Bush's two runs for the White House, an examination of Mr. McCain's fund-raising network shows.

Well over half of the top fund-raisers for Mr. Bush, who raised a record $274 million for him in the 2004 primary season, stayed on the sidelines through this year's Republican nominating contests. Others wound up working for Rudolph W. Giuliani, who signed up the most top Bush fund-raisers, and Mitt Romney, who had about the same number as Mr. McCain.

The dearth of Pioneers and Rangers, the elite fund-raisers for Mr. Bush who collected more than $100,000 or $200,000 respectively for his re-election bid in 2004, is illustrative of just how far Mr. McCain has to go to build up his financial operation.

Several former Bush fund-raisers said in interviews that they believed many more Rangers and Pioneers would mobilize for Mr. McCain, now that he was the presumptive nominee. But some also said they might not, citing reasons like personal circumstances, a lack of enthusiasm for Mr. McCain (especially compared with Mr. Bush) and exhaustion.

"It takes an enormous amount of passion," said Joyce Haver, a Phoenix businesswoman who was a Bush Pioneer in 2000 and a Ranger in 2004 and who said she was unlikely to plunge in again. "I probably don't have the passion I had last time."

Ms. Haver, who said she still believed that Mr. McCain would make a far better president than either of the Democratic candidates, said her lack of enthusiasm stemmed from a number of factors, including her frustration with politics in general and with Mr. McCain's support for the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law that many conservatives revile.

Other former Bush fund-raisers said they were simply tired after working for other Republican presidential campaigns in this lengthy contest.

Patrick Oxford, a Houston lawyer who was the chairman of Mr. Giuliani's campaign and was a Bush Pioneer in 2000, said he was unlikely to throw himself back into raising money.

"It's not because I'm not a supporter of Senator McCain," Mr. Oxford said. "I'm just worn out."

Several veteran fund-raisers for Mr. Bush also pointed out that Mr. McCain's campaign organization was forced to retrench after his candidacy stalled over the summer and is now straining under the burden of expanding into a national operation - it is still, for example, operating with just four finance staff members.

"I would hope they might be a little better organized by this point," said Bruce Bialosky, an accountant and former Bush Pioneer from Los Angeles who has not yet committed to raising money for Mr. McCain. "They geared down so much it's almost difficult for them to gear back up."

As Mr. McCain has focused on building up his campaign treasury in recent weeks, there are signs that the pace of fund-raising has begun to pick up. A recent event in New York City, led by former Senator Alfonse D'Amato, brought in $2 million, as did another one earlier this month in Florida.

Campaign finance records also show that contributions from former Bush bundlers increased significantly after Mr. McCain's candidacy began to catch on, and donations typically tend to pour in as the summer party convention nears.

Mr. McCain's advisers insisted they were on schedule for expanding their financial operation, including recruiting those who collected checks for Mr. Bush. They also pointed out that there was invariably turnover of fund-raisers from one election cycle to the next.

"We are meeting every deadline we have and exceeding them," said Wayne Berman, a former Bush Ranger and the deputy finance chairman for the McCain campaign.

Poor fund-raising nearly forced Mr. McCain from the race last summer, but it began to improve after his candidacy gathered momentum in January, helping him bring in almost $12 million that month. But he brought in slightly less in February, about $11 million, according to the latest filings to the Federal Election Commission.

In comparison, on the Democratic side, Senator Barack Obama raised $55 million in February and Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton collected $36 million. As of the end of February, Mr. McCain had collected about $60 million in contributions over all, while Mr. Obama has raised the most of any candidate with nearly $200 million.

The New York Times compared a list of 548 Pioneers and Rangers from 2004 assembled by Texans for Public Justice, a watchdog group that tracks the influence of money in politics, against a list of roughly 500 McCain fund-raisers assembled by Public Citizen, another public interest group that tracks names that emerge in news articles and campaign press releases. The analysis found that only slightly more than a tenth of Bush Pioneers or Rangers were working for Mr. McCain (though some newly minted McCain fund-raisers may not have been publicly identified yet).

In terms of personal donations, at the end of last year before the nominating contests began, Mr. Giuliani had received the most money from people who were Bush Pioneers and Rangers in 2004, followed by Mr. Romney and then Mr. McCain.

By the end of February, Mr. McCain had surged ahead, with the number of former Bush fund-raisers donating to him growing by 50 percent, to about 125 from about 85.

It appears, however, that about half of the former Bush fund-raisers did not contribute to any Republican candidate.

Figures are not yet available for March, when Mr. McCain became the presumptive nominee and embarked on a major fund-raising blitz. It is also not clear if the former Bush bundlers are giving generously to other Republican groups and candidates, especially with Mr. Bush holding a series of highly successful big-money events in recent weeks.

On April 1, the McCain campaign will set up a joint fund-raising committee with the national party, McCain Victory 2008, which will have the dual tasks of raising money for Mr. McCain and the party, which is now working on his behalf.

The McCain campaign is also rolling out its own version of a Pioneers and Rangers program, offering the title of Trailblazer to anyone who raises at least $100,000 and Innovator to those who collect more than $250,000. Campaign officials are also in the midst of selecting state chairmen and assigning them fund-raising goals.

In what was seen as an important step, the McCain campaign recently signed up Mercer Reynolds, a Cincinnati businessman who was Mr. Bush's chief fund-raiser in 2004. Mr. McCain's advisers said Mr. Reynolds had already started to bring many former Bush fund-raisers and donors in his network into the fold.

McCain officials have been in discussions for several weeks with fund-raisers from the Giuliani and Romney campaigns to discuss how to integrate their respective networks.

In an unusual move, a group of McCain fund-raisers is planning to help Mr. Giuliani raise money to settle about $2 million in campaign debts, Mr. McCain's advisers said.

The campaign has not yet established a significant fund-raising presence online, as the Democrats have, but last week alone Mr. McCain courted high-dollar donors in Salt Lake City and Las Vegas and in California in Palm Springs, Newport Beach, Los Angeles and Pebble Beach.

A fund-raising event last week at the Bel-Air mansion of Jerry Perenchio, the former chairman of Univision and a Bush Pioneer, drew about 500 people, including former top Bush fund-raisers and Jon Voight, Clint Eastwood and Nancy Reagan.

"They're calling up the old network, and we're all plugging in," said Matt Fong, a former California state treasurer and 2000 and 2004 Bush Pioneer who had not committed to any candidate until he agreed to help with the Bel Air event. "It's late, but it's happening."

The veteran political operative is relentless in his drive for Democratic superdelegates.

ARLINGTON, VA. -- Harold M. Ickes never forgets a favor, especially if he's the one who did the favor. So the veteran political operative made sure that, when the time was right, he alone would call Garry Shay, former chairman of the Los Angeles County Democratic Party. As Ickes saw it, he had helped Shay; now he was looking for Shay to help him.

And once Ickes started calling, he didn't stop until Shay said the words Ickes wanted to hear -- that he would support Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York at the Democratic National Convention in Denver in August.

Shay, as a member of the Democratic National Committee, is a superdelegate, one of nearly 800 elected officials, party leaders and activists who -- with the state primaries and caucuses now expected to end in stalemate -- may effectively end up picking the 2008 Democratic candidate for president.

And the man in charge of Clinton's feverish effort to lock up superdelegates is Ickes, whose enthusiasm for no-holds-barred politics sometimes rattles friends and foes alike. Ickes once got so carried away that he bit another political operative on the leg. Now, some 35 years later, at age 68, he has mellowed so little that it could happen again.

"It depends on how heated the circumstances are," he says.

Mythic qualities

Aggressive, profane, openly scornful of rivals, Ickes rules Clinton's superdelegate operation with an intimidating style and a mythic persona. He is "advisor, consigliere, enforcer and strategist" all rolled into one, says Dick Harpootlian, a former chairman of the South Carolina Democratic Party who backs Obama.

What's more, Harpootlian says: "He's like a shadow. You hear he's here, you hear he's there, but you never actually see him."

Ickes comes by his temperament and his passion for politics naturally. He is the son and namesake of President Franklin D. Roosevelt's famously irascible Interior secretary. And he has played the role of party maverick for decades.

He worked in Sen. Eugene McCarthy's 1968 campaign to unseat President Lyndon B. Johnson. He joined Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) in trying to deny President Carter renomination in 1980. He worked for Jesse Jackson's presidential bids in 1984 and 1988.

Unhappy about the way Jackson was being treated at the '88 convention, Ickes hatched plans that included a threat to hand out 1,700 plastic whistles to Jackson supporters so they could disrupt the proceedings. Some of his ideas unnerved even Jackson; Ickes remembers him saying, "Ickes, you want to get me run out of white man's America."

Even inside the Clinton court, Ickes does not hold back. Last year, when senior Clinton aide Mark Penn appeared not to grasp the basics of delegate selection, Ickes mockingly asked, "Could it be that the vaunted 'chief strategist' of the vaunted Hillary Clinton campaign does not understand?"

In a Clinton campaign that can seem machinelike, Ickes is conspicuous for his idiosyncrasies. A female aide said that when she noticed his dress shirt unbuttoned practically to the navel, it was like glimpsing an unzipped fly.

"I thought someone should have pulled him aside to tell him. I later came to realize that's how he wears his shirts."

Temperament and eccentricities aside, with the importance of the superdelegates increasing Ickes now carries a burden that may be second only to the candidate's own. Clinton is ahead among superdelegates, but the margin has been slipping. In December, she led Obama by 106 superdelegates. In early February, the number was down to 87. Today it is 36, according to Associated Press surveys.

Ickes runs the superdelegate operation from a third-floor war room in this suburb across the Potomac River from the capital. About 20 aides are divided into teams. One woos the uncommitted; another works to prevent defections.

The intensity of the struggle was reflected in a recent note on Ickes' office door happily declaring that three Democratic congressmen were sticking with Clinton -- Bill Pascrell Jr. of New Jersey, Gregory W. Meeks of New York and Emanuel Cleaver II of Missouri:

"Pascrell and Meeks said they were '100 percent' for Clinton through the convention, and Cleaver said he would vote for her unless he died first," the note read.

Doing his homework

In courting the uncommitted, "the first order of business" is finding out "Who is this person?" Ickes said recently over an omelet of egg white, onion and tomato. "What is his or her political history? Who does that person associate with or rely on for information they take into account when making political decisions?"

To get answers, aides sit at computers ranged along a windowless hallway outside Ickes' office. They sift websites; do Google searches; talk to friends, lobbyists, campaign donors -- tapping into what Ickes calls the sprawling network of "Clinton alumni."

"You establish a relationship and keep going back, and people become friendlier and let down their guard," Ickes said, describing the campaign's methods. "And before you know it, you can pick up useful information. None of this is insidious information; it's information about what makes a person tick politically."

Ready to pounce

In the case of Shay, Ickes remembered that Shay had wanted to increase the representation of gays and lesbians within the national party. Ickes helped him over the years, speaking out in favor of Shay's project at DNC meetings.

Initially, Shay committed to former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, so Ickes issued a standing order to his staff: Make sure that when Edwards dropped out, Ickes -- and only Ickes -- called Shay. As Edwards' fortunes sagged, Ickes began calling to chat up Shay every couple of weeks.

And on Jan. 30, just before Edwards publicly quit the race, Ickes pounced.

"Look, personal relationships, especially when you're dealing with this at the individual level, are sometimes very helpful," Ickes said later. "I have no reservations about calling in a chit. I don't know if I had a chit with him to call in, but I do think that our prior relationship and the fact that I was helpful may have been helpful in persuading him to be for Hillary."

Shay, for his part, says several factors played into his decision, including the fact that he liked Clinton's performance in the Los Angeles debate and that Barack Obama never called him. But he credits Ickes with keeping Clinton "within the forefront" of his mind, and in fact he committed to her very soon after Ickes placed the critical call.

"In politics, you try to move and close the deal quickly," Ickes said.

Eyeing the inconceivable

Only months ago, most people gave little thought to the superdelegates. Clinton seemed invincible. And for Democrats at least, the idea of uncommitted delegates picking the nominee evoked images of political bosses in smoke-filled rooms. Returning to that era was inconceivable.

But 2008 may be the year of the inconceivable -- not just the year a woman or an African American might be elected president, but the year the Democratic nominee was chosen by delegates unconstrained by the popular vote.

Ickes recognized early on how important those delegates might be. And, in assigning him responsibility for them, Clinton chose a veteran whose loyalty was proven -- and whose iron focus on the goal at hand matched her own.

Both the loyalty and the focus were on display in February 1999, when the Senate voted not to remove Bill Clinton from office.

In the White House residence, Ickes and the first lady were poring over New York state maps in preparation for her Senate bid.

A call came in informing the first lady that her husband had been acquitted, Ickes recalled. "She puts down the phone and says, 'Harold, we were talking about Buffalo.' "

With that, they went back to work.

What mere superdelegate could withstand determination like that?

Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton has set out her proposals on U.S. financial market regulation.

Below are the main aspects of her plan:

MORTGAGE LENDERS

Clinton would create a federal minimum standard for companies and people who start the process of organizing a loan, known as mortgage originators.

Standards would include subjecting such lenders to minimum licensing, supervision and capital requirements, and bringing mortgage bankers more fully under the scope of the Community Reinvestment Act.

RISK MANAGEMENT

Clinton wants to subject all institutions that are eligible to access the Federal Reserve's credit to regulations equivalent to commercial banks.

BETTER FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT

Clinton's proposals call for more transparency and oversight of "exotic financial products" such as complex derivatives. That would including ensuring that financial institutions that hold collateralized debt obligations and credit default swaps are subject to minimum capital requirements.

RATING AGENCIES

Clinton called for either a change in how rating agencies are compensated -- currently they are paid by the institutions they rate -- or new measures to ensure there was no conflict of interest.

Those measures could include requiring rating agencies to certify that their practices adhere to standards adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission; establishing an independent Risk Committee with no financial incentive to rating agencies to review rating decisions; or establishing an independent rating agency ombudsman approved by the SEC.

CREDIT CARDS AND STUDENT LOANS

Clinton proposed an immediate national annual interest rate cap of 30 percent on all credit cards, which would cover the stated rate and the effective rate.

She also called for a student borrower's bill of rights.

Reuters, March 31, 2008

WASHINGTON, March 31 (Reuters) - Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton would be "fully engaged and involved" in the Middle East as U.S. president and would maintain a full-time presence there to spur the peace process, the New York senator told Reuters.

Clinton, whose husband former President Bill Clinton took a personal but ultimately unsuccessful role in negotiating a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, said the administration of George W. Bush had committed "sins of omission and commission" by not being more engaged.

"I believe that it's important for the United States to maintain an active and involved role," she said in an interview on Sunday.

"I think one of the reasons why we are seeing a very dangerous situation there now is because the Bush administration backed off from staying involved and, where they were involved, much of their advice and proposals were counterproductive."

Clinton, who is competing with Illinois Sen. Barack Obama to be the Democratic presidential nominee in the November election, has argued that she is stronger on foreign policy and has a better chance of beating presumptive Republican nominee John McCain, a senator from Arizona.

Clinton said it was up to Israelis and Palestinians to determine what role in the peace process should be played by Hamas, an Islamist group officially committed to Israel's destruction, which won elections in Gaza in 2006 but seized control of the strip last summer amid factional fighting.

She said the next president would be able to get a better sense of what needed to be done to bring peace to the region.

"Once we get back to a president who is fully engaged and involved and doesn't walk away or impose unworkable conditions, we will, you know, have a much better idea about what is part of bringing the parties to some resolution," she said.

Asked whether she would be "fully engaged and involved," Clinton said, "Yes."

FULL TIME PRESENCE

President Clinton's 2000 effort to broker a peace agreement ended in failure and a violent Palestinian uprising ensued.

The former first lady often tells audiences on the campaign trail she would make her husband a goodwill ambassador to foreign countries if she wins, but she declined to say in the interview if the Middle East would be one of his destinations.

"I don't know (whether) that would be where he would be sent," she said.

"I think you need a full-time presence," she said, adding the absence of one was a key problem with the diplomacy of Bush and his secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice.

"We haven't had a full-time presence and everything stops unless Condi Rice is there, and I think that's a mistake," Clinton said.

"That seems to be a pattern in much of their diplomacy, and I don't think that's particularly productive."

Foreign policy analysts and Arab officials have often criticized Bush for what they regard as his neglect of the conflict and his failure to empower a special envoy to focus on the issue as Dennis Ross did under President Clinton.

Israel announced plans on Sunday to ease some restrictions on Palestinians in the occupied West Bank, responding to calls by Rice, who is visiting the region, to take steps to bolster peace talks.

Bush launched a peace effort in November with the goal of achieving an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement by the end of this year, but Middle East analysts are deeply skeptical that it will succeed.




By Jeff Mason, Reuters, March 31, 2008

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Bush administration's plans to shake up U.S. financial market regulation are "too short on action," Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said on Sunday, laying out her own set of proposals to address the issue.

Clinton, a U.S. senator from New York, called for new standards governing mortgage lenders, reform of rating agencies to avoid conflicts of interest, a 30 percent annual interest rate cap on all credit cards and more immediate authority for the Federal Reserve to regulate financial institutions.

Her comments, made to Reuters in an interview, came a day before U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson unveils proposals for broad reform of financial regulation.

"There is still a very serious gap between what the administration is proposing and the immediate crisis that we face," Clinton told Reuters.

"Although I appreciate and agree with some of the recommendations, the blueprint is simply too short on action," said Clinton, who is battling Illinois Sen. Barack Obama to become the Democratic nominee for November's presidential election.

Clinton called for new legislation to make mortgage originators -- people or organizations that start the process of organizing a loan -- subject to minimum licensing, supervision and capital requirements similar to rules that apply to banks.

She dismissed the Bush administration's proposal to establish a commission on the issue as "too little too late."

Obama has also proposed greater government regulation of the U.S. financial system and has called Paulson's proposals related to the Fed inadequate.

Arizona Sen. John McCain, who has wrapped up the Republican presidential nomination, said through a spokeswoman he would study the administration's proposals.

RATING AGENCIES, CREDIT CARDS, BERNANKE

Clinton, who has argued she is better placed than Obama or McCain to steer the U.S. economy, accused her Republican rival of doing nothing.

"We cannot afford the administration's approach of 'wait and don't see.' We can't afford Senator McCain's approach of sitting on his hands," she said.

Credit ratings agencies should stop being compensated by the institutions they rate, she said, or else face new guidelines to ensure their independence.

Those guidelines could include proving they follow independence standards adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission or creating an independent rating agency ombudsman approved by the SEC.

"We should just stop talking about conflicts of interest and failures of the rating agencies and do something about it," Clinton said.

The former first lady, who often mentions the cheap loans she took out to attend law school, took aim at credit card companies, calling for a 30 percent annual interest rate cap, which she said she would try to bring down even further.

She said the Fed and the Treasury Department should issue new rules within 90 days that apply to all institutions that have access to the Fed's credit.

"They have to regulate all of the new institutions that are not commercial banks in order to have the transparency and the accountability that you need," she said.

Clinton declined to comment on whether she would reappoint Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke if she were elected president.

"I think that he inherited some difficult problems," she said. "He's obviously aware of the move toward greater regulation, but no one is yet meeting the immediate needs in the way that I think we should."

By Jeff Mason, Reuters, March 31, 2008

When President Bush pushed big tax breaks through Congress in 2001 and 2003, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) joined Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) and other Democrats in opposing them as fiscally reckless. But now that McCain and Clinton are running for president, neither is looking to get rid of the cuts. Instead, they are arguing over which ones to keep.

The same is true of Clinton's rival for the Democratic nomination, Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.), who recently blamed the Bush tax cuts for driving the nation toward recession. But he, too, wants to preserve about half the cuts, and pile on new ones.

The direction of the tax debate is frustrating deficit hawks in Washington, who worry that none of the candidates is charting a course toward a balanced budget. Meanwhile, Bush and other politicians are telling voters alarmed by a sagging economy that keeping the cuts past their 2010 expiration date can help revive the nation's fortunes, a claim many economists say is nonsense.

Far from acting as an economic tonic, the tax cuts "are neither sustainable nor beneficial" without massive cuts in government spending far beyond what Bush or any candidate to succeed him has proposed, said Alan D. Viard, a former economist in the Bush White House who is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. The most popular cuts -- those known as "middle-class" tax cuts -- are more likely to slow economic growth than promote it, Viard and others said.

"Those are the provisions that detract from long-term growth even if you finance them with a reduction in government spending," said Robert Carroll, a former Bush Treasury official who teaches at American University. "If you pay for them with future tax increases, I think that would be awful."

The tax cuts, the signal economic achievement of the Bush administration, are among the three biggest federal tax reductions since the end of World War II, comparable in size to the Reagan tax cut of 1981 and the Kennedy tax cut passed in 1964, according to the nonprofit Tax Foundation. By the time the Bush cuts are scheduled to expire, it's projected that they will have saved taxpayers $1.6 trillion.

The cuts affected both businesses and individuals. The individual cuts, which are the focus of the current debate, are split into two main elements.

The first, growth-oriented provisions, are aimed at spurring the economy in the long term and flow mainly to the wealthy. Those provisions lowered the estate tax and will repeal it in 2009, and lowered the tax on capital gains and dividends to 15 percent. The legislation also lowered the top four income tax brackets, with the top rate falling to 35 percent from 39.6.

The second element, social-relief provisions, are aimed at providing short-term stimulus and flow to a wider spectrum of taxpayers. Those provisions created a 10 percent tax bracket at the bottom of the scale, doubled the child-tax credit to $1,000 and reduced the penalty on married couples filing jointly.

The economic impact of the cuts is unclear. A recent report by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service said "it is hard to be certain what effects the tax cuts have had on the economy because there is no way to compare actual events to the counterfactual case where the tax cuts were not enacted."

Conceived during Bush's 2000 presidential campaign as a means to return what were then huge government surpluses to taxpayers, the cuts were approved by Congress in the midst of a recession, which worsened after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Though the recession was mild, the recovery was sluggish and hampered by a deep decline in employment. Productivity ultimately rebounded robustly, but national savings plunged, and the country racked up a large trade deficit.

So how has Republican presidential nominee in waiting John McCain - according to the latest polls - managed to stay so close in the race against Democratic opponents, Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton? Conventional wisdom has held the race for the White House is the Democrat's to lose.

One explanation, of course, flows from McCain's background - a Vietnam war hero who withstood years of captivity and torture. Also, even some Democratic detractors say he is a likable, charming figure. And beyond that, he's been able to act presidential in a relatively low-key campaign, benefiting greatly from the protracted and increasingly bitter nomination battle between Obama and Clinton.

Recent polling shows large numbers of Democrats who back either Clinton or Obama would vote for McCain if their candidate does not win the nomination. One survey, for example, shows 28% of Clinton supporters would cast their ballot for McCain ahead of Obama. Among Obama supporters, 19% would back McCain over Clinton.

Those figures are particularly distressing inside the Democratic party because the crossover effect in McCain's favor intensifies as the Illinois and New York senators focus on one another over McCain with five months remaining before the August party convention.

While there is no certainty the animosity between Clinton and Obama voters would hold steady after one of them wins the nomination, it points to the potential for a noticeable Democratic turnout for McCain, who already has significant support from independents - U.S. voters without allegiance to either party.

"The country remains very evenly divided. The demographics have not changed that much since 2000 and 2004, which were close presidential races" won by Bush, said Jenny Backus, a Democratic consultant.

Brian Gaines, at the University of Illinois Institute for Government and Public Affairs, likewise cautions against expecting significant state by state shifts away from patterns seen in those years, which put Bush in the White House and kept him there for a second term.

Gaines points to the small number of states that swung between parties in those years.

New Mexico and Iowa, for example, threw their support behind former Vice President Al Gore against Bush in 2000. Those states switched allegiance and voted for Bush over Sen. John Kerry four years later. The small New England state of New Hampshire swung the opposite direction.

Former Bush strategist Matthew Dowd says McCain's strong standing so far is the result of some very good fortune on two fronts.

First, "he wrapped up the (Republican) nomination early with the least polarization." Second, he says, is the continuing and "disturbing Democratic battle" that could leave whomever wins the nomination as a "polarizing and damaged" candidate.

Dowd also says McCain has emerged as the presumptive nominee unbruised from the relatively short Republican nomination battle.

"McCain didn't really win. Instead the others (Republican rivals) lost. Interestingly, nearly every factor that created this opening for McCain has not been attributable to him, except that he was the candidate who remained standing."

So that's, briefly, how McCain got where he is today. And it now would appear a certainty that his future will be defined by his own insistence on linking his candidacy to American success in Iraq.

And with violence surging again in the oil-rich nation, McCain's argument that the U.S. troop "surge" has worked could be turned against him. Extreme violence again grips the country as Shiites fight for control of the southern city of Basra, the country's second largest and its major oil port with access to the Persian Gulf.

And one of the prime reasons the American troop increase has worked, especially in Baghdad, was the cease-fire ordered by Muqtada al-Sadr, the radical Shiite cleric who heads the Mahdi Army militia. That deal could unravel because of renewed conflict with the Iraqi military, backed by American forces.

Rocket and mortar fire blamed on Mahdi Army militants again rains down on Baghdad's Green Zone, the American nerve center in the war, which just entered it's sixth year.

McCain's strong backing for a continued and robust American presence and claims of success in Iraq are now colliding with an Iraqi reality that's beginning to mimic the extreme violence of late 2006 and early 2007, before all the 30,000 additional U.S. "surge" forces reached the battle zone.

In fact, Dowd, the former Bush strategist, sees the Iraq linkage as a key weak spot for McCain.

Recalling his recent trip to Baghdad, McCain's eighth, Dowd said the Republican nominee-in-waiting should instead have been "putting a stake in the ground on some forward-looking issue."

He said voter opinions on Iraq are not much subject to change. "Iraq is a rearview mirror issue. The winner will do it by looking forward."

And the week just passed suggests the prescience of that argument.

McCain, in what was termed a major speech on the economy, offered only vague ideas about reversing what increasingly looks to be a significant recession in American. Both Obama and Clinton hammered their Republican opponent for his lack of expertise and experience with the economy and linked him to Bush, who many say began paying attention to the mounting crisis too late and then doing too little.

The Associated Press, March 30, 2008

Clinton said Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York wasn't damaging the party by staying in the race even though she is behind in delegates and unlikely to overtake the Illinois senator based on the contests to come.

"There is somehow the suggestion that because we are having a vigorous debate about who would be the best president, we are going to weaken this party in the fall," he said Sunday at the state Democratic Party convention.

"We're going to win this election if we just chill out and let everybody have their say," Clinton said.

Obama said Saturday that the decision about whether to drop out is for Hillary Clinton to make.

"My attitude is Sen. Clinton can run as long as she wants," he said in Pennsylvania.

Also on Sunday, surrogates for Obama and Hillary Clinton spoke out about a proposal by New York's former governor that the two senators should run together on the fall presidential ticket, regardless of which one wins the nomination, to avoid "a Democratic disaster."

Former governor Mario Cuomo, who has not endorsed either candidate, said in an opinion piece Sunday in The Boston Globe that Clinton and Obama should cut a deal that puts both of them on the ballot in the fall. If one won't defer to the other in the primary race, they should at least announce that whoever loses would be named the vice presidential candidate, he wrote.

"The joint statement announcing their agreement would rock the nation and resound across the globe," Cuomo wrote in a piece headlined, "How to avoid a Democratic disaster."

If the two Democrats keep battling one another through August's Democratic convention in Denver, "the 2008 primary may be the story of a painfully botched grand opportunity," Cuomo wrote.

Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, a Clinton ally, said on ABC's This Week that he could not speak for Clinton, "but I would love that. I think that this duo, regardless, is a history-making duo."

Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, an Obama ally and the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee, said on ABC that the combination "would be terrific in a lot of people's minds" but that decision would be Obama's to make.

USA Today, March 30, 2008

PHILADELPHIA - Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell predicts that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's lead over Sen. Barack Obama will shrink before the April 22 primary.

Rendell, a Clinton supporter, spoke Monday morning on ABC-TV's "Good Morning America." He appeared with Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa, an Obama supporter. Casey agreed that Clinton would likely win, saying Obama is "certainly the underdog in our state."

Rendell also said the Obama campaign doesn't want a revote in Michigan and Florida because Obama's supporters know Clinton would win. He predicted that she would likely win by enough votes to emerge as the popular vote leader.

Casey said any revotes in Florida and Michigan should be up to the state parties.

The Associated Press, March 31, 2008

NEW ALBANY, Ind. - Debra Starks has heard the calls for Hillary Rodham Clinton to quit the presidential race, and she's not happy about it.

The 53-year old Wal-Mart clerk, so bedecked with Clinton campaign buttons most days that friends call her "Button Lady," thinks sexism is playing a role in efforts to push the New York senator from the race. Starks wants Clinton to push back.

"The way I look at it, she's a strong woman and she needs to stay in there. She needs to fight," Starks said at a Clinton campaign rally. "If you want to be president, you have to fight for what you want. If she stays in there and does what she's supposed to do, I think she'll be on her way."

Amid mounting calls from top Democrats for Clinton to step aside and clear the path for rival Barack Obama, strategists are warning of damage to the party's chances in November if women - who make up the majority of Democratic voters nationwide, but especially the older, white working-class women who've long formed the former first lady's base - sense a mostly male party establishment is unfairly muscling Clinton out of the race.

"Women will indeed be upset if it appears people are trying to push Hillary Clinton out of the way," said Carol Fowler, the South Carolina Democratic Party chair who is backing Obama. "If you are going to ask her to withdraw, you'd better be making a strong case for it - both to the candidate and the public."

Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy last week became the first leading Democrat to openly call on Clinton to abandon her bid and back Obama, a sentiment shared by many activists worried that a drawn-out nominating contest only bolsters Republican nominee-in-waiting John McCain.

Other Obama supporters have echoed that view while stopping short of asking Clinton to withdraw.

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson on Sunday called Obama's lead all but insurmountable, while Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry said the contest would be reaching "a point of judgment" very soon.

"I don't think it's up to our campaign or any individual to tell Hillary Clinton or their campaign when that is," Kerry, the 2004 Democratic nominee, said on ABC's "This Week" on Sunday. "But there will be, I think, a consensus about it, and I think it's going to occur over these next weeks."

To be sure, Clinton campaign officials concede her path to winning the nomination is not at all clear.

She almost certainly will end the primary season narrowly trailing Obama in the popular vote and among pledged delegates unless the nullified primaries in Florida and Michigan are counted - an unlikely scenario at best. But Obama is unlikely to end the race with the 2,024 pledged delegates needed to win outright either, meaning the nominee will be determined by roughly 800 "superdelegates" - elected officials and party insiders who can back whichever candidate they want.

Most observers believe the superdelegates are unlikely to risk an intraparty uproar - not to mention the ire of black voters thrilled to support a black candidate - by siding with Clinton if Obama maintains his lead among pledged delegates.

But Clinton advisers believe many superdelegates remain at least persuadable, due in no small part to the influence of women voters on the party and in the general election.

"My e-mail is bursting with women who are furious, and it's grown in the last week," said Ann Lewis, Clinton's director of women's outreach and a longtime Democratic activist.

"These women are the volunteer infrastructure of the Democratic Party who've been proud to support Democratic officials for what they believe and stand for," Lewis said. "They are very angry that people they've worked for so hard would be so dismissive of Hillary and, by extension, of them and what they value."

Indeed, the gender gap in most of the primaries thus far has been stark.

In California, Clinton bested Obama by a margin of 59 percent to 36 percent among women. She beat him by 54 percent to 45 percent among women in Ohio, an important general election battleground state.

Obama, in turn, has walloped Clinton among men in nearly every state. But he's prevailed among women in just a handful of places, including his home state of Illinois and states with large black populations.

For his part, the Illinois senator - whose seemingly disrespectful crack of "You're likable enough, Hillary" during a debate with Clinton may have cost him the New Hampshire primary - said Saturday he did not believe Clinton should end her campaign.

"My attitude is Senator Clinton can run as long as she wants," Obama said in Pennsylvania, which holds its primary April 22.

Nine more primaries follow, ending June 3.

Clinton insists she's in it to the end, saying a "spirited contest" is good for the party and ultimately will produce a stronger nominee.

"There are millions of reasons to continue this race: people in Pennsylvania, Indiana and North Carolina, and all of the contests yet to come," she told reporters Friday in Hammond, Ind. "This is a very close race and clearly I believe strongly that everyone should have their voices heard and their votes counted."

Campaigning across the state Saturday, Clinton was greeted by large, heavily female crowds that shouted "You go, sister!" and "We've got your back!" in support of her pioneering candidacy. Indiana votes May 6.

Marie Wilson, president of the White House Project that trains women to run for office, noted that women typically have rallied around Clinton when she's appeared most vulnerable - from the revelations of her husband's dalliance with White House intern Monica Lewinsky to January's New Hampshire primary after the bruising loss to Obama in Iowa.

"Women have always been asked to step aside if it was somehow for the greater good. In this case, Clinton, and a lot of her female supporters, clearly feel that she would make the better president and that it would not be for the greater good for her to step aside," Wilson said.

By BETH FOUHY, Associated Press, March 30, 2008

To Bill and Hillary Rodham Clinton, Richard Mellon Scaife qualifies as a charter member of the "vast right-wing conspiracy," having bankrolled an elaborate multimillion-dollar campaign throughout the 1990s to unearth damaging information about the couple.

But in a striking about-face, Mr. Scaife now says he has changed his mind - at least about one half of the duo.

"I have a very different impression of Hillary Clinton today," he wrote in an opinion article published Sunday, amid her campaign for president. "And it's a very favorable one indeed."

His sudden conversion from fervid Clinton basher to lukewarm Clinton fan occurred after Mrs. Clinton, a Democratic senator from New York, sat down for a 90-minute interview with reporters and editors of The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, a newspaper owned by Mr. Scaife, the billionaire heir to the Mellon banking fortune.

Pennsylvania will hold its Democratic primary on April 22, and the Tribune-Review, the second-largest daily newspaper in Pittsburgh, has yet to endorse a candidate. Given Mr. Scaife's record, Mrs. Clinton could not have expected a rosy reception.

But Mr. Scaife, who attended the meeting, wrote in The Tribune-Review that the senator "exhibited an impressive command of many of today's most pressing domestic and international issues." Her answers, he added, "were thoughtful, well-stated and often dead on."

His compliments left some Clinton aides and allies stunned. "I never thought I would utter these words, but I would like to shake his hands for keeping his mind open despite the predisposed prejudice toward her," said Lanny Davis, a longtime Clinton supporter who served as President Clinton's lawyer during the late 1990s.

At the height of his anti-Clinton days, Mr. Scaife donated $1.8 million to The American Spectator magazine for what became known as the "Arkansas Project" - an unflattering excavation of the Clintons' personal lives in Arkansas.

His objective was to publicize, if not eventually validate, accusations about the supposed involvement of the Clintons in corrupt land deals and Mr. Clinton's extramarital affairs, among other things.

But once Mrs. Clinton began running for president, Mr. Scaife - and his thick checkbook - remained on the sidelines, surprising many who predicted he would leap at the chance to dredge up new, potentially scandalous information about her.

That apparent indifference seems to have morphed into tepid enthusiasm for her.

During the meeting at The Tribune-Review, Mr. Scaife said in his article, he found common ground with Mrs. Clinton on the need to pull troops out of Iraq; on the bumbling federal efforts to rebuild New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina; and on the "increasing instability in Pakistan and South America."

Aides to Mrs. Clinton said they had not known what to expect from the March 24 meeting with Mr. Scaife and the staff of his newspaper. But sitting next to Mr. Scaife, Mrs. Clinton quickly broke the ice, remarking that she had agreed to the meeting because "it was so counterintuitive, I just thought it would be fun to do." The line drew laughter from those in the room.

There is, of course, a healthy dose of skepticism over Mr. Scaife's motives. Some wonder if he is rooting for the candidate whom some Republicans view as easier to defeat in the general election.

"I wouldn't trust Scaife's motives in this," said Robert M. Shrum, a longtime Democratic consultant who is not aligned with any campaign this year.

Mr. Scaife could not be reached for comment Sunday. Asked about Mr. Scaife's article, Kathleen Strand, a spokeswoman for Mrs. Clinton, said, "As she showed in New York and as a senator, Hillary Clinton is in the solutions business and has demonstrated the ability to bridge old divides and get things done. Winning over Mr. Scaife is just another example."

Mr. Scaife wrote that he was not ready to endorse Mrs. Clinton over Senator Barack Obama of Illinois in the Pennsylvania primary. Mr. Obama, he noted, has yet to meet with the Tribune-Review staff.

Word of the meeting came as the Clinton campaign continued to insist that the senator would stay in the race, despite Mr. Obama's lead in delegates. On Sunday, one of her top backers, Gov. Edward G. Rendell of Pennsylvania, said he would "love" to see Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton on a ticket together.

Hillary Clinton Vows Fight To Convention, Obama Picks Up Another Superdelegate

Hillary Rodham Clinton, who has feasted on adversity in the Democratic presidential primaries, is rejecting calls from some key Barack Obama supporters to drop out of the race for the good of the party, declaring she will stay until the last state primary votes are counted, even if it means what some democrats fear will be an ugly public battle at the August national convention.

Former President Bill Clinton, underscoring his wife's determination against statistically long odds of overcoming Obama's pledged delegate lead, said in California Sunday a "vigorous debate" was good for the party and those who want to see the former first lady quit the contest should just "chill out."

"We're going to win this election if we just chill out and let everybody have their say," Clinton said.

A crowd of about 20,000 was chilled as supporters waited in cool temperatures for Obama to speak on the campus lawn at Penn State University, where the Illinois senator agreed that the tough campaign was healthy if frustrating.

"As this primary has gone on a little bit long, there have been people who've been voicing some frustration," Obama said.

"I want everybody to understand that this has been a great contest, great for America. It's engaged and involved people like never before. I think it's terrific that Senator Clinton's supporters have been as passionate as my supporters have been because that makes the people invested and engaged in this process, and I am absolutely confident that when this primary season is over Democrats will be united."

After Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy last week became the first leading Democrat to openly call on Clinton to abandon her bid and back Obama, the front-runner said Clinton should stay in the race as long as she wanted. He also said he had not talked to Leahy before he issued his statement on Clinton leaving the race. But Leahy's sentiment is shared by many activists worried that a drawn-out nominating contest only bolsters Republican nominee-in-waiting John McCain.

Other Obama supporters have echoed that view while stopping short of asking Clinton to withdraw.

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson on Sunday called Obama's lead all but insurmountable, while Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry said the contest would be reaching "a point of judgment" very soon.

"I don't think it's up to our campaign or any individual to tell Hillary Clinton or their campaign when that is," Kerry, the 2004 Democratic nominee, said on ABC's "This Week" on Sunday. "But there will be, I think, a consensus about it, and I think it's going to occur over these next weeks."

Obama picked up the endorsement of Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar Sunday night, giving him another superdelegate supporter.

In a statement provided to The Associated Press, Klobuchar said Obama "has inspired an enthusiasm and idealism that we have not seen in this country in a long time."

In a statement, Obama said he's grateful for Klobuchar's support. According to the Obama campaign, Klobuchar is the 64th superdelegate to endorse him since the Feb. 5th Super Tuesday contests.

Last week, Obama picked up the support of Sen. Bob Casey Jr., D-Pa., giving the candidate a boost heading into the Pennsylvania primary on April 22.

Richardson, D-N.M., who chose "loyalty to the nation" over his long-standing ties to the Clintons in backing Obama, told Face The Nation host Bob Schieffer on Sunday that while superdelegates should play a key role, the party "big-shots" should not ultimately determine the party's nominee. "It should the voters."

As she has fought through three-months of primary voting, Clinton has been able count on a deep well of support from women voters, many of whom see the attempt to push her out of the race now as the work of a male-dominated party structure.

In California, Clinton beat Obama by a margin of 59 percent to 36 percent among women. She bettered him by 54 percent to 45 percent among women in Ohio, an important general election battleground state.

Obama, in turn, has walloped Clinton among men in nearly every state. He has prevailed among women in just a handful of places, including his home state of Illinois and states with large black populations.

As Obama crossed Pennsylvania, which votes on April 22, he pounded his message of reform and said again that McCain was running for U.S. President George W. Bush's third term.

McCain, the Arizona senator and Vietnam war hero, gave a major foreign policy speech last week trying to blunt Democratic attempts to paint him as a candidate who would view the world through Bush's pre-emptive foreign policy lens.

"Our great power does not mean we can do whatever we want whenever we want, nor should we assume we have all the wisdom and knowledge necessary to succeed," said in the carefully honed speech to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council. "We need to listen to the views and respect the collective will of our democratic allies."

Nevertheless, McCain has not backed away from his support for the unpopular Iraq war and has, in fact, said his candidacy would likely stand or fall on the outcome. Violence has flared anew in Iraq despite the U.S. troop surge that McCain said has been a success.

CBSNews.com senior political editor Vaughn Ververs reports that McCain has launched a new tour to reintroduce himself to the American electorate, but he's running his campaign in a way that seeks to separate him from the many woes facing the GOP.

"John McCain, it appears, is going to be a party of one," says Ververs in an analysia on the Arizona Senator's latest campaign moves.

Clinton, in vowing to continue her campaign until August if necessary, returned to the open Democratic Party sore of the negated primary votes in Michigan and Florida.

She won both contests, but the national party had said in advance the contests would not count because the state parties ignored the prohibition against holding the votes too early. Obama had taken his name off the Michigan ballot for that reason and neither candidate focused campaigning in those states.

But Clinton trails Obama by 1,624 to 1,499 in national delegates, including both those pledged as a result of state primaries and caucuses as well as superdelegates - elected and party officials who can vote for whomever they wish.

Clinton now insists the Michigan and Florida votes be added to her tally. She won in both states.




CBS News / The Associated Press , March 31, 2008

HARRISBURG, United States (AFP) - US Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton faced increasing odds Monday as a new opinion poll showed rival Barack Obama consolidating his nationwide support.

A Gallup tracking survey indicated the Illinois senator extending his lead over Clinton among Democrats nationally to 52 percent versus 42 percent, Obama's largest lead of the year so far.

This marks the first time either candidate has held a double-digit lead over the other since early February, when Clinton led Obama by 11 percentage points, the polling firm pointed out.

On Sunday, the New York senator vowed to stay in the White House race to the bitter end as party elders floated ideas to avert a paralyzing struggle between her and Barack Obama.

In a Washington Post interview, the former first lady said: "I know there are some people who want to shut this down and I think they are wrong.

"I have no intention of stopping until we finish what we started and until we see what happens in the next 10 contests, and until we resolve Florida and Michigan."

The two states were stripped of their delegates to the Democrats' August convention when they advanced their primaries into January. Clinton won both contests and needs the results to stand to have any chance of overhauling Obama's lead in the national popular vote.

The Clinton-backing chief executive of Pennsylvania, which is the next state to vote on April 22, said it was a "disgrace" that Obama's campaign was pressing for him to become the nominee with weeks of voting to go.

But Governor Edward Rendell, speaking on ABC television, also said he would "love" for the two star Democrats to join forces against Republican candidate John McCain for November's general election.

Clinton, who is behind Obama in terms of elected delegates and states won, is under mounting pressure to bow out of the nominating race so that the Democrats can take the fight to McCain.

Obama however on Saturday said "Senator Clinton can run as long as she wants."

Former president Bill Clinton said his wife could still win the Democratic race and insisted that party unity would prevail.

Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean is warning the party needs to unify soon to avoid handing November's election to McCain.

Meanwhile, former Vice President Al Gore, one of the party's most senior statesmen said Sunday that he was steering clear of the nomination fight for now.

"I'm trying to stay out of it," Gore told CBS television's "60 Minutes" news broadcast, even as fears continued to mount that the bitter nomination fight between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama threatens to tear the Democratic Party apart.

Tennessee's Democratic governor, Phil Bredesen, meanwhile returned to his idea of a gathering in mid-June of the nearly 800 party luminaries known as "superdelegates" who are likely to decide the nomination.

The superdelegates would convene after the last primaries in Montana and South Dakota on June 3 with the aim of crowning a nominee well before the August 25-28 convention in Denver, he said on Fox News Sunday.

"I think it's hurting us, hurting us tremendously," he said of the protracted battle between Obama and Clinton, which polls suggest is helping drive up support for McCain.

Bredesen said the Democrats would eventually find a standard-bearer, "but if it's the nominee of a divided party and an emotionally exhausted party, there's just not time to conduct the kind of campaign we need to have."

Obama, while refusing to back the calls for Clinton to quit, also said the nominee needed enough time before the convention to select a running mate and allow the party to regroup for the larger battle in November.

Clinton needs a big win in Pennsylvania to boost her argument that only she can win hefty states that Democrats need to recapture the White House.

She is leading Obama by double digits in most polls here, but that gap could narrow as he steps up his campaigning on the approach to the primary.

The Illinois senator fed a calf with a giant bottle of milk on a stop Sunday at the Penn State Agriculture Facilities, before holding a packed rally at a branch of the state university.

"You guys look good," Obama told reporters forced to wear blue plastic boots to keep disease out of the dairy complex. "I bought some new shoes," he said, explaining why he escaped the barnyard chic look.

Jean Montgomery, a bowling alley owner from the town of Altoona, said she believed Obama's visit might be helping change many minds.

"I think it's wonderful he came," she said. "He's very friendly. I'm not real political. Probably now that he came in I will support him."

AFP, March 31, 2008

A golden rule in the game of American (or any modern professional) politics is that if you are behind in a campaign and you're running out of time, you "go negative". Twenty years ago I actually took a class in professional campaign tactics at Harvard University's John F Kennedy School of Government. We examined case studies of campaigns in recent years and saw the very precise metrics that the professionals use to gauge how much you lose if you throw mud at someone - because you look like a sleazebag - compared with how much damage you can inflict. The general conclusion is that even though your negatives can go up, the other guy always does worse. So fling away.

Now Harvard is a quite marvellous university, but whatever version of this class it is now teaching needs a little revision in the wake of the past couple of weeks. Hillary Clinton started throwing some stink bombs at Obama months ago; then, after New Hampshire, she threw the kitchen sink; and in the past week, as cable news threw the boiler, she gave it an extra push.

"I wouldn't have Jeremiah Wright [Obama's preacher friend who made embarrassing/incendiary comments] as a pastor," she told Richard Scaife in an interview with the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, which just happens to be in Pennsylvania, which just happens to be the next primary state.

Clinton wins even more chutzpah points when you recall who Scaife is. He is the far-right media magnate who made a fortune in the 1990s running the most irresponsible antiClinton stories in The American Spectator, who broke Troopergate, who promoted the notion that Clinton had her best friend Vince Foster murdered and fanned the idea that Bill Clinton was a drug dealer. Still, Clinton managed to sit down with him and discuss the real enemy: Obama. Machiavelli would understand, although one has to think he would be a teensy bit more subtle about it.

At the same time, in the past three weeks Clinton has pounded on about her foreign policy "experience". She even said that John McCain, the Republican nominee, had more capacity to pass what she calls the "commander-in-chief test" than Obama, her Democratic rival. As for her own experience, she reminded us, as I'm sure you recall, how she ended the cold war, tore down the Berlin Wall, brought peace to Northern Ireland, prevented the Bosnian genocide, negotiated the Kyoto accords, saved Rwandans from mass murder and transformed the Middle East into a feminist nirvana. Or something like that.

She did all this at the same time as working day and night to provide healthcare for all Americans. I'd say that Christopher Hitchens's memorable 1999 book on the Clintons, No One Left To Lie To, clearly needs a new foreword.

Last week she hilariously had to rein back from claims that she had had to duck sniper fire, skip a greeting ceremony and resolve a border issue in the Balkans after arriving in Tuzla, Bosnia. The blogs spotted the whopper first (of course) and then the networks followed. It was all made up - as incontrovertible video evidence and eyewitnesses showed - and the border issue to which she referred was resolved before she even arrived. Although she had previously told this tall story several times in the past, she first blamed her one-off gaffe on being "sleep deprived" and then said she "misspoke".

"Misspoke" is a classic Clintonism. What does it mean? You can say that you genuinely forgot, or got muddled up or fibbed. But Clinton cannot ever admit an actual mistake or confess a deliberate exaggeration. It was the same way in which Bill Clinton could never actually say that anything he did was ever "wrong". At most it was always "inappropriate".

However, the anti-Obama negatives still work, right? We waited for the polling. Those of us hoping for Obama to win went into a defensive crouch. His speech on race was amazing. But you can't win American elections sounding like Reinhold Niebuhr. And sure enough, one of the candidates did see a sudden plummeting in public esteem.

But it wasn't Obama. Clinton's personal rating sank to 37% in the NBC/ Wall Street Journal poll last week. It was her lowest rating since 2001 - just after her election to the Senate. Did Obama suffer too? Yes, he did. His positive ratings slipped from 51% to 49%; his negatives rose from 28% to 32%. But in polling terms that's almost statistical noise. Nationally, by Friday, Gallup had Obama's national lead over Clinton at eight points - his largest ever measured by Gallup.

When you look at critical Pennsylvania, where the next primary takes place on April 22, recent polls show no serious movement in the past two weeks with Clinton's average lead still about 12%-16%. Over the past few months the direction has all been in Obama's favour. He is on a six-day campaign tour there and on Friday he won the endorsement of Bob Casey, the Pennsylvania senator. Casey matters because he is the son of the former Pennsylvania governor of the same name, who was one of the most socially conservative and pro-life white Catholic Democrats in the country. If Clinton's only hope is now to appeal to white conservative working-class Democrats, she just lost one of their heroes.

However, she still has a chance and her tactics have not entirely backfired. The latest Pew polling, which dug beneath the horse race numbers, found something fascinating - and troubling for Obama. People always think that social conservatism and old-fashioned prejudices against blacks are Republican monopolies. They never have been. Until the 1960s the Democrats were overwhelmingly the pro-segregation party. And in analysing white work-ing-class Democrats last week, Pew found the following: "White Democrats who hold unfavourable views of Obama are much more likely than those who have favourable opinions of him to say that equal rights for minorities have been pushed too far; they also are more likely to disapprove of inter-racial dating and are more concerned about the threat that immigrants may pose to American values. In addition, nearly a quarter of white Democrats (23%) who hold a negative view of Obama believe he is a Muslim."

This is now Clinton's best hope of beating Obama. The woman who has a great and admirable record on racial issues, whose husband was described as the country's "first black president", the candidate with the strongest Hispanic support . . . now needs the votes of older conservative whites, who are uncomfortable with the idea of a black president and suspicious of Latino immigration.

Some candidates at this point would feel so divorced from their own core principles and values that they would see the mathematical near-impossibility of winning and withdraw. One recalls that great line from Robert Bolt's A Man for All Seasons, when Thomas More reproaches the man, Richard Rich, who betrayed him for petty political advancement.

"Why Hillary, it profits a woman nothing to give her soul for the whole world. But for Pennsylvania?"

By Andrew Sullivan, The Sunday Times, March 30, 2008

The attacks on Sen. Barack Obama's credibility, ethics and experience that pushed Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton to a convincing victory in swing-state Ohio and helped her cling to Texas came back full circle Wednesday. Within hours, the Obama campaign struck back at Clinton's perceived penchant for secrecy and by evening had Mississippi surrogates accuse her of making "derogatory comments" about the South.

"She talked about change you can Xerox," said top Obama strategist David Axelrod. "Well you can Xerox your tax returns." Calling Clinton a "habitual nondiscloser," Axelrod suggested the tax documents might reveal shady sources of the $5 million Clinton loaned her struggling campaign last month.

Fasten your seat belts, Democrats, this race has just begun - again. "Little Super Tuesday" turned out to be no more decisive than big Super Tuesday a month ago.

Although both campaigns agree that Obama has a possibly insurmountable lead of pledged delegates - the kind elected by voters - veteran election hands say he cannot cinch the majority needed for the Democratic nomination on those delegates alone, any more than Clinton can.

Nor can he win the nomination by losing big primaries, despite heavily outspending Clinton, in states like Ohio that decide national elections.

Michigan and Florida

Suddenly, there is renewed interest in redoing the Michigan and Florida contests. On Wednesday, the governors of both states said they would consider it. Both campaigns indicated they were open to the idea.

With a combined 376 delegates at stake, these states could now decide the race. It would be the height of irony: After being stripped of their delegates as punishment for holding early contests, they would now be rewarded with the chance, potentially, to choose the Democratic nominee.

Without question, the race will continue at least through the Pennsylvania primary seven weeks away, a blue-collar state that heavily favors Clinton, with stops at a Wyoming caucus Saturday and a Mississippi primary Tuesday where Obama is expected to prevail. Expect seven weeks of hard-hitting attacks from both candidates that mine every perceivable weakness.

The Obama sally in heavily African American Mississippi arrived late Wednesday, when the campaign's state chair, former Gov. Ray Mabus, called attention to "Sen. Clinton's derogatory comments," referring to a newspaper quote from last October where she expressed shock that neither Iowa nor Mississippi had elected a female governor, senator or member of Congress, adding, "How can Iowa be ranked with Mississippi?" Hattiesburg Mayor Johnny DuPree accused Clinton of a "dismissive attitude toward the South."

Emotions hardening

Emotions appear to be hardening among partisans in both camps, replacing the sense of elation of just a few weeks ago when Democrats enthusiastically said they would be thrilled with either candidate.

"I think the Clinton people decided that going negative was going to pay a benefit for them; maybe it did," said Rep. George Miller, a Martinez Democrat and superdelegate who backs Obama. "But she cannot raise questions that she's the only fully vetted candidate and then not release her tax returns when she's loaning her campaign $5 million and her husband is engaged in business deals with various (people) of questionable character in different countries of the world."

"That's the door she chose to open, and I think Obama clearly has to defend himself," Miller said. "If she wants it to be a question about who's vetted, then she has to participate in that vetting, too."

Clinton backers see a route to the nomination that leads through the final contest in Puerto Rico on June 7, and new contests in Michigan and Florida, which Clinton "won" before - although the votes didn't count - and will probably agree to compete in again, given that their concentrations of blue-collar, Latino and elderly voters that seem to favor her. If she remains behind in pledged delegates, then the decision will be up to superdelegates, the elected officials and party insiders who are automatic delegates free to vote as they choose. Clinton backers believe superdelegates will base their decision not only on pledged delegates, but also on momentum and electability.

'Very, very variable'

"What the Obama people are doing is saying, 'Oh, it's mathematically impossible,' " for Clinton to win the nomination with pledged delegates, said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a California superdelegate and Clinton backer. "I don't think this is mathematics. I think this race is about people, how people look at the election, how they see the future, the candidate that they see can help them with their future. So I think it's a very, very variable thing. I think last night was a big turning point."

Feinstein described "a conditioning going on to say superdelegates can't do this, superdelegates can't vote their conscience." She noted that Massachusetts voted overwhelmingly for Clinton, yet its two senators and superdelegates, Edward Kennedy and John Kerry, "went for Obama. They exercised their conscience."

Conventional wisdom says the coming fight will be so ugly that Sen. John McCain, now the official Republican nominee, will stroll into the Oval Office while Democrats are not looking.

But GOP political guru Karl Rove warned Republicans that quite the opposite could happen. The riveting Democratic contest is already obliterating news coverage of the comparatively soporific GOP campaign. Rove said McCain will drop off front pages as long as the fight continues.

Record-shattering voter turnout in state after state backs up Rove's suggestion. Three million votes were cast in the Texas Democratic primary, triple the earlier record. Another 3.2 million voted in Ohio, another record. In Virginia last month, Obama's victory margin exceeded McCain's total votes, even when former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee was still in the race and McCain was appealing to a large military population.

McCain trails in new poll

A new Washington Post/ABC News poll now shows McCain trailing both Obama (by 12 points) and Clinton (by 6), as moderates and independents shift to the Democratic contest.

"This is a policy debate that the American people want," regardless of the negative attacks, said Rep. Ellen Tauscher, a Walnut Creek Democrat backing Clinton. "It's clear because they're coming to the polls in record numbers on the Democratic side ... and they are making their preferences heard. They're doing it in record-setting ways. That says to me they like what's going on. Not only do Democrats like it, but apparently disaffected Republicans and independents do, too."

The Democratic fratricide, however bad it is now, will be no worse than the onslaught that can be expected from Republicans later, veteran campaign operatives said. Better to find out what arguments prove devastating to either candidate in the primaries than discovering the glass jaw in the general election, they said.

Congressman Miller, the Obama supporter, described the hardening of feelings on both sides as a natural outgrowth of the disappointments inherent in any campaign, especially among those new to politics. He predicted that Democrats will unify come fall.

"I'm not too worried about that over the long run," Miller said. "Yes, that's happening now. Does that continue to the detriment of Democrats in October, November? No. I think they understand what needs to be done in this country in terms of getting rid of the Republican White House and George Bush's third term, and a hundred years of war in Iraq. I think they understand that pretty clearly."

Clinton herself has hinted at one way to unify the party: sharing the ticket with Obama - with her at the top.

By Carolyn Lochhead, San Francisco Chronicle, March 5, 2008

CHICAGO - The duel between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination isn't ending soon and neither is their competition for cash.

Coming off her wins in Texas, Ohio and Rhode Island, the former first lady sent a letter to supporters saying the victories had come "against all odds" and asking them to keep the cash flowing in order to meet a fund-raising goal of raising $3 million in 24 hours.

Both the Clinton and Obama camps have been pointing to the amounts of money their are hauling in as evidence their campaigns have enthusiastic backers.

The New York senator has reported raking in $35 million in February. Obama's team says its Febuary tally is closer to $50 million though they don't have an exact figure yet.

Obama campaign manager David Plouffe told reporters on Wednesday that the Illinois senator's team would have more to say about its February totals soon. One of the problems is that it takes time to count all that cash, he said.

"Candidly, we're in the middle of these big contests and we have a lot money to process and we want to make sure we have the most accurate count of donors and average contributions," Plouffe said.

What's helping to fuel donations is the two-front battle Obama has been fighting against Clinton and Republican nominee Sen. John McCain.

"We've got not just Clinton banging on us every day but Sen. McCain so we need resources to deal with that," Plouffe said.

Clinton's fundraising has picked up sharply since January, when she raised $14 million to Obama's $36 million and loaned her campaign $5 million from her own pocket.

By Caren Bohan, Reuters, March 5, 2008

Barack Obama remains favourite to win the Democratic nomination, but his advantage over Hillary Clinton has diminished.

Thanks to Texas and especially Ohio, there is a gleam in Mrs Clinton's teeth once more. Just as in New Hampshire, just as on Super Tuesday, she has checked his supposedly irresistible momentum. Will commentators now stop saying that anything about this race is "inevitable"? The answer, inevitably, is no: we are as slow to learn as Mrs Clinton is to know when she is beat.

Mr Obama is still the favourite because he continues to lead in pledged delegates, allocated by the primaries and caucuses. Overturning this lead appears, as a matter of arithmetic, to be beyond Mrs Clinton. However, this by no means assures Mr Obama the nomination. The winner is going to be chosen, in effect, by the party's unelected "superdelegates", who can vote as they like.

The two campaigns will bring every pressure to bear. Mr Obama will say his lead in elected delegates obliges them to vote his way. Mrs Clinton will strive to neuter - I mean neutralise - that position. She will call for the disqualified delegates of Florida and Michigan (which broke the rules on the timing of their primaries) to be reinstated; she will call for Mr Obama's caucus victories to be given less weight (arguing that the caucuses are not proper elections); above all, if she leads in the popular vote, she will say that this trumps Mr Obama's delegate lead. This last seems especially important and it is now within her reach.

If you include Florida and Michigan (where Mr Obama was not even on the ballot, but so what?) then she already leads in the popular vote. Excluding Michigan but not Florida, she is within 300,000 votes of catching Mr Obama. Without either of those states, she is within 600,000 votes, out of a total cast of nearly 25m. Pennsylvania and the other remaining states give her a reasonable shot at closing that gap. If she does, watch the zeal with which she adopts upholding "the will of the people" as her watchword, elected delegates be damned. If she does not, her chances are less, but there will be other angles to work.

What went wrong for Mr Obama this week? The main answer must be Mrs Clinton's remarkable tenacity. For once, her posture and her strategy have fully conformed to each other: she has been fighting hard, while making the case that the country needs a fighter in charge. She has also talked up her supposed advantage on national security, using an advertisement that asks voters who they want picking up the White House phone at 3am to deal with some emergency. John McCain also approves of that message, but this fight can wait.

And pity Austan Goolsbee, Mr Obama's brilliant economic adviser, who dropped his boss in it by apparently assuring Canadian diplomats that Mr Obama's tough talk on the North American Free Trade Agreement was political positioning and no cause for alarm. The timing could not have been worse, since no state is more sensitive to the supposed hurricane of destruction unleashed by imports than Ohio. Unfortunately, Mr Goolsbee's steer was probably wishful thinking on his part. In any event, Mr Obama will now need to toughen up his anti-Nafta line even more, if that were possible.

Months more of vicious intra-party strife, and a tainted winner at the end. Of course, John McCain, as of Tuesday the anointed Republican nominee, is still favourite to lose in November. Many commentators regard it as inevitable.

By Clive Crook, The Atlantic, March 5 2008

Her dogged fighting to stay in the race pays off with victories as new problems surface for Obama.

COLUMBUS, Ohio - Hillary Rodham Clinton, on the ropes only a week ago, forced her way back into the Democratic primary race after a week of adopting the role of a savvy political fighter who would not quit, winning primaries in Ohio, Rhode Island and Texas.

By rebuking the news media and going after rival candidate Barack Obama on national security, Clinton scored big points, but she remains well behind Obama's lead in delegates after his earlier 11-state winning streak.

At the Columbus Athenaeum before a boisterous throng of supporters, under a shower of red, white and blue confetti, Clinton took the podium, calling out: "Why thank you, Ohio!"

She said her victory represented all those who "have been counted out but refused to be knocked out." The New York senator and former first lady reminded the crowd of the saying: "As Ohio goes, so goes the nation."

Backed by her daughter, Chelsea, and prominent Ohio supporters, Clinton vowed to continue on to Pennsylvania, which holds its primary April 22, and beyond.

"After eight years of George Bush, we sure are ready for a president who will be a fighter and a doer," Clinton said before being drowned out by cheers.

Obama was the projected winner in Vermont, but Clinton was the projected winner in Rhode Island.

Speaking to supporters in San Antonio, Obama said, "John McCain and Senator Clinton echo each other in dismissing this call for change. They say it is eloquent but empty; speeches and not solutions. And yet, they should know that it's a call that did not begin with my words. It began with words that were spoken on the floors of factories in Ohio and across the deep plains of Texas; words that came from classrooms in South Carolina and living rooms in the state of Iowa; from first-time voters and lifelong cynics; from Democrats and Republicans alike.

"These Americans know that government cannot solve all of our problems, and they don't expect it to," he said. "But we also believe that there is a larger responsibility we have to one another as Americans."

Union vote goes to Clinton

However, the support of several labor unions did not help him in Ohio. According to exit polls, Clinton held the union vote there.

"I really think that Ohio was the place she had the best chance of winning and the place she had to win," said Ohio State University's dean of political science, Paul Allen Beck. "Ohio is very important for her."

Clinton's supporters' mood surged early in the night, as exit polls showed that Clinton had won the support of most union members.

In Texas, Clinton did well among Latino voters - a key group for her, exit polls suggested. Ohio and Texas both saw enormous turnout, and Ohio dealt with snow, ice and flooding and even had to move some polling stations to higher ground.

Clinton's fortunes shifted with two negative news developments concerning Obama, a first-term senator from Chicago, and Clinton signaled last week and confirmed Tuesday her strategy was to continue on to Pennsylvania.

A turning point in the campaign came last week, when Clinton chastised NBC reporters at a debate in Cleveland, pointing to a skit by Saturday Night Live that lampooned the news media for having a love affair with Obama.

Next came a report that an Obama campaign official privately told Canadian authorities not to take seriously Obama's tough talk on renegotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement, which has been a contentious issue in Ohio.

Obama's campaign at first denied the report, but The Associated Press obtained a copy of a memo in which a Canadian official described the conversation. Though both the Obama campaign and the Canadian government disputed the characterization of the memo, the fallout has given critics and pundits the ability to say Obama isn't as immune to politics-as-usual as he has seemed.

Finally, Obama's campaign has had the distraction of the Antoin "Tony" Rezko trial, which opened Monday. Rezko, a friend and significant donor to Obama's campaigns over the years, was indicted in October, charged with collecting almost $6 million in government kickbacks and other crimes. Obama bought property from Rezko when it was widely known the Chicago dealmaker was under investigation.

The confluence of events, said John Gilliom, chairman of political science at Ohio University, "created the first sort of perfect storm of negative media that Obama has had to deal with."

Caucus abuses alleged

The Clinton campaign charged its rivals with irregularities in Texas and Ohio.

The campaign alleged Obama supporters locked out Clinton backers in caucus sites across Texas and allowed people to sign in as attending the caucuses hours before they took place.

Ace Smith, state director for Clinton, said the conduct, which he said is documented, was "truly an outrage" and the campaign would not rule out legal action.

By Chuck Plunkett and Karen E. Crummy, The Denver Post, March 5, 2008

Buoyed by primary victories in three states last night, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) presented herself today as the Democrat most likely to defeat the Republican nominee for president in November and raised the prospect of joining forces with Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) -- as her vice presidential running mate.

Making the rounds of the morning television news shows following her victories in Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island, Clinton attributed her revitalized candidacy to an assessment by Democratic primary voters that she would be better able than Obama to take on Sen. John McCain (Ariz.).

McCain, who sealed the GOP nomination last night with wins in the three states plus Vermont, went to the White House today for lunch with President Bush, who formally endorsed him afterward in a joint appearance in the Rose Garden. Bush hailed his former rival for showing "incredible courage and strength of character and perseverance" in reviving a formerly moribund campaign.

"He's going to be the president who will bring determination to defeat an enemy and a heart big enough to love those who hurt," Bush told reporters with McCain standing by his side. McCain said he hoped that Bush would campaign for him and help with fundraising "as much as possible . . . in keeping with the president's heavy schedule."

The Arizona senator declined to discuss the possibilities in choosing a running mate, avoiding the question of whether Republicans should pick a woman or a minority in view of the fact that the Democratic presidential candidate will be either a woman or an African American. MCain said it had not been appropriate to consider vice presidential choices before securing the nomination, and "now we'll begin that process."

Asked on the CBS "Early Show" about Democrats who want to see her and Obama on the same ticket, Clinton said: "Well, that may, you know, be where this is headed. But, of course, we have to decide who's on top of the ticket."

She added: "And I think that the people of Ohio very clearly said that it should be me. And after all, no one in recent history has won the presidency who did not win their party's primary in Ohio."

Obama, who also appeared on the morning shows, played down his losses, pointing out that he still leads in the number of states won, in the total popular vote in the nominating contests and in the all-important count of delegates to the Democratic National Convention in Denver.

He declined to discuss the prospect of joining forces with Clinton, telling reporters before flying from San Antonio to Chicago that it was "very premature to start talking about a joint ticket."

"Senator Clinton is tenacious, and she keeps on ticking," Obama said on ABC's "Good Morning America." But given his 12 consecutive victories through Vermont last night, he said, "I think it's going to be very hard for her to catch up on the pledged delegate count." He also said Clinton's lead in unpledged superdelegates has narrowed "drastically" in recent weeks. "So I think that we'll be in a very strong position to claim the nomination."

In yesterday's primaries, Clinton easily beat Obama in Rhode Island with 58 percent of the vote, won Ohio by 54 percent to 44 percent and held on to take Texas by 51 percent to 47 percent. Obama handily won in Vermont by 60 percent to 38 percent.

In Texas, the biggest prize of the night in terms of delegates, Obama was leading Clinton this morning in the results of last night's Democratic caucuses, which followed the primary voting in a system dubbed the "Texas two-step." The Texas primary allocates 126 delegates, and the follow-on caucuses account for 67. In addition, the state will send 35 unpledged delegates to the national convention, for a total of 228 delegate votes.

In its latest tally of total delegates, the Associated Press reported today that Obama leads Clinton by 1,562 to 1,461, a count that includes unpledged superdelegates. Despite her victories last night, Clinton has cut Obama's lead in delegates by only 12, with 12 more delegates yet to be awarded from the contests, AP said. At the national convention, 2,025 delegate votes are needed to secure the nomination.

COLUMBUS, OHIO -- They rehearsed the chant for weeks. Finally, in a stately ballroom, they yelled it:

"Hil-la-ry -- our no-mi-nee. H-R-C - to vic-to-ry!"

Students from Ohio State University, alongside hundreds of other ebullient supporters, watched and cheered Hillary Rodham Clinton's exuberant victory speech Tuesday night at the Columbus Athenaeum after she won Ohio's Democratic primary.

"We're going on, we're going strong, and we're going all the way," Clinton told the crowd packed into the Olympian ballroom.

"Ohio has written a new chapter in the history of this campaign, and we're just getting started."

When CNN called Rhode Island for Clinton earlier in the evening, the crowd in Ohio let out ear-piercing screams of delight as they watched the result on a big screen in front of the stage.

As the image on the screen shifted to Texas, where Obama was then leading, yells gave way to jeers.

Then, shortly before 11 p.m., CNN called Ohio for Clinton.

Supporters in Columbus jumped up and down, impulsively hugging everyone in sight.

Mary Kay Barnes, 42, and Bonnie Silvaroli, 49, had tears in their eyes, watching the results.

"We just wanted her to win so bad," said Barnes, who had driven 2½ hours to be at the party.

"We love her."

Jennifer Lawson, a third-grade teacher, had come to the conference center wearing a black T-shirt with a primary battle cry written in white: "Meet Me in Ohio."

"E-lated," she said of Clinton's Ohio results, elongating the word with relish.

"Our country is ready for a change," she said.

"A change that is rooted in experience."

Supporters continued to arrive throughout the rainy night, handing over their Clinton campaign buttons to go through metal detectors and airport-like security at the entrance to the conference center.

Inside, the mood was buoyant, pumped up by people such as Erik Meinhardt, 20, a second-year philosophy and political science student who led 16 university students in Hillary chants.

The senator from New York inspires as much excitement as the senator from Illinois, he said from his perch on a packed bench behind Clinton.

After weeks of volunteering, of going hoarse from shouting, the rewards were sweet: a victory in his state and a shout-out.

"We're going to stop Obama's momentum," he said.

You'd think Hillary Clinton was Margaret Thatcher, and her husband Karl Rove, the way some Democrats rag about them.

You'd think Barack Obama was Clarence Thomas without the scowl, the way some Democrats rail about him.

Is this any way to hold a party?

Many Democrats fear it's a perfect plan for frittering away a presidency that a wasted and weary foe had all but handed to their side.

Will Rogers was right, in other words. You are a member of no organized political party when you're a Democrat. Give the melting-pot party half a chance and it'll boil over and burn down the kitchen.

Three dire points of view, all supportable anecdotally and all surely delightful to Republicans and their simpatico pundits. When Dems are treating their brethren and sisters as though they were the GOP, maybe there's hope after all for the party of a discredited president, shuffling along tortoise-like with an older version of the guy that president long ago beat.

My take at this point: The Dems need to chill and the Republicans better enjoy this while they can.

I am by no means a historian, but I could rattle off no few cases of bitter primary battles that did not prefigure defeat in the general election. Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, for example, an odd couple that's hard to top without crossing race and gender lines.

For Barack and Hillary to kiss and clasp fists overhead, either as running mates or as reconciled rivals, may take every bit of the diplomatic schmaltz Bill Clinton displayed in Northern Ireland back in the day -- and Bill's not the broker, but the joker, in this deck.

Yet for all the sniping, all the spending, all the whaling away at each other's supposed vulnerabilities (interracial appeal, experience, war stance, sportsmanship), it is doubtful either has alienated the other's troops to the point of defection.

Hillary is understandably frustrated at what she perceives to be African-Americans' knee-jerk allegiance to one of their own; but she's the last person in America who should fail to appreciate the current potency of the word "first" -- at the beauty parlor or the Haughville barbershop. Nor should she or Barack see gender and race as anything more than new weapons in an old war in which all is fair. Or at least, as Richard Dreyfuss' pianist character says in the movie "The Competition," as fair as these things get.

The real war, of course, awaits outside for whoever steps from this fractious house come summer. Will it be a divided house? Will 2008 be another Dixiecrat 1948 or Mississippi Freedom Party 1964? I wouldn't advise John McCain to bet on that; and besides, the Dems won both those elections. Somehow, I don't see any faction being sufficiently embittered, after all these months of making history, to sit home when history sounds the call again in November.

This fight, I predict, will fulfill the old saw that what doesn't kill you makes you stronger. My Democratic friends may hate it that my Republican friends are loving this; I say, why let the fogeys have all the fun?

The Indianapolis Star, March 30, 2008

Not giving all the voters a say would be un-American, she declares

Some party members call the Democratic presidential primary fight trouble. On Saturday, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton called it good for democracy.

And that's good news for Indiana Democrats, a couple thousand of whom cheered Clinton on Saturday when she said she's staying in the race for president, including through Indiana's primary election May 6.

Clinton, speaking to an enthusiastic crowd in the Ben Davis High School gymnasium on the second day of a two-day campaign sweep through Indiana, said, "There are some folks saying, 'Well, we ought to stop these elections.' "

The crowd booed its disapproval, then roared a cheer as Clinton defied those naysayers.

"I didn't think we believed that in America. I thought we of all people knew how important it was to give everyone a chance to have their voices heard and their votes counted, and we're going to give Indiana that chance on May 6th," Clinton said. "Because, you see, I have this old-fashioned idea that the more people who get a chance to vote, the better it is for our democracy."

Clinton has come under increasing pressure in recent days to put an end to her campaign. She's trailing Illinois Sen. Barack Obama in the number of pledged delegates, though neither has the 2,024 delegates necessary to clinch the nomination.

With Sen. John McCain having locked up the Republican nomination, some Democratic leaders are getting anxious to end the intraparty fight to focus on the real objective: beating McCain to win the White House.

But in four campaign stops in Indiana on Friday, and again on Indianapolis' Far Westside on Saturday morning, Clinton said that far from wrapping up her campaign, "I am going to be back (in Indiana) time and time and time again."

Later Saturday, Clinton made a campaign stop for a discussion on the economy at the Southside Inn Restaurant in New Albany. Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, and their daughter, Chelsea Clinton, have made numerous trips to Indiana over the past two weeks. Obama has so far made one.

Saturday, while Clinton was speaking at Ben Davis, Obama was campaigning in Pennsylvania, which holds its primary April 22 and where Clinton has been leading in the polls. His campaign also was laying the groundwork here, opening 11 offices across the state, including one near Downtown in the former Indianapolis Public School 9.

Even without the candidate present to draw supporters, a few hundred people showed up there Saturday morning to pick up voter registration kits for a weekend canvassing drive.

David Suess, 39, brought his 6-year-old son, Max, to the old school for the opening of the office. When father asked son whom he supported for president, Max answered, "Obama."

"Obama's the first candidate for me in a very long time who seems to genuinely want to get beyond the divisiveness of the past," Suess said. "He seems to appeal to our inner angels."

State Rep. Gregory W. Porter, D-Indianapolis, is among about 25 Democratic lawmakers backing Obama.

"The enthusiasm for this gentleman is phenomenal," he said. "It's an American movement, an American dream. He has truly galvanized this nation."

Indiana Democrats may be as split as Democrats are nationally between Clinton, the first woman who could become president, and Obama, the first black candidate with that potential.

"Bread-and-butter issues"

While Porter was praising Obama, state Sen. Jean Breaux, D-Indianapolis, was introducing Clinton to the revved-up crowd at the high school.

"In the final analysis, this is not about race or gender or ministers or memories," Breaux said, referring to the two controversies that have stirred the Democratic primary recently: the comments by Obama's former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and the comments Clinton made about landing in Bosnia to sniper fire.

"It's about issues, bread-and-butter issues," Breaux said.

And it was those issues Clinton focused on during her trip to Indiana.

"I think this election, particularly here in Indiana, is about jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs, and how we're going to ensure that the economy works for everyone," she said.

She promised to provide health insurance that people can afford, make college more affordable, help families affected by mortgage foreclosures, invest in building manufacturing and eliminate tax incentives that benefit companies that ship jobs overseas.

"That's not being anti-business," Clinton said. "That's being pro-American."

Instead of using tax dollars to subsidize oil companies, she said, the nation should launch a drive, similar to President John F. Kennedy's challenge to go to the moon, to develop high-mileage vehicles that boost manufacturing at the same time they reduce America's dependence on foreign oil.

"We invented the car. We can invent the 21st-century car," she said.

Clinton told the stories of two Hoosiers: Steve Bruce, Fishers, and Kathy Herrell, Peru, who joined her onstage. They spoke about the concerns they and their families have about an uncertain future as jobs become more scarce and prices for food and fuel rise.

Clinton also took questions and comments from the audience. Jeffrey D. Thomas, a 38-year-old Mooresville truck driver, told her why he was backing her for president.

Thomas, who said he was a devout Christian who reads the Bible daily, said Clinton reminds him of Queen Esther, the biblical figure who helped save the Jews from annihilation in the ancient Persian Empire. Like her, he said, "you were brought to this position to make a difference and to make a change."

Clinton, visibly moved, responded that the story of Esther is one of her favorite Bible stories.

"I'm very honored by what you said," she said. "God bless you."

Afterward, Thomas said he was moved, too. He said he takes "a lot of flak" for being a religious Christian who also is a Democrat. But, he said, he believes there is no contradiction and sees Democrats as the party that supports the working class.

Locals cite her experience

Brent Miller, a 24-year-old Indianapolis student in the audience, said he does not think Clinton should bow to pressure to end her campaign.

As a young black man, Miller might be expected to back Obama. Instead, Miller, who is studying marketing and political science at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, is supporting Clinton.

Miller said the difference is that Clinton's experience trumps Obama's oratorical flair.

"I believe there's a difference between inspiration and effectiveness," Miller said.

Miller said that if Clinton isn't the Democratic nominee, he could support Obama -- but never McCain.

"It's a shame, because I liked him before," he said of McCain. "But he's been kind of kowtowing to the right now. And he doesn't seem to want to end the war, and I'm not sure that he doesn't want to start more. I couldn't sleep at night."

But Kathy Roberts, a 50-year-old Franklin mom who came to the event with her female partner and their five children, 15-year-old twins and 9-year-old triplets, said that if the Democrats don't pick Clinton, she "probably" will pick McCain.

With all the problems this nation faces, she said, she wants someone with experience and isn't convinced that Obama has it.

She "absolutely" does not want Clinton to drop out.

"I think she's the one. I really do," Roberts said. "Our party will be hurt if they pressure her out."

By Mary Beth Schneider, The Indianapolis Star, March 30, 2008

Former candidate dodges questions about endorsement

RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK - John Edwards is still neutral.

Edwards, the former senator from North Carolina and former presidential candidate, praised Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton yesterday at the annual convention of the Young Democrats of North Carolina.

His remarks prolong speculation about when - or if - Edwards will endorse one of the candidates in the protracted race for the Democratic presidential nomination.

"I know them both very, very well, having competed with them over and over and over," Edwards said.

"We would be blessed as a nation to have either one of them as our president. And I'll say to all of you, we'd be a lot more blessed to have either one of them as president and not have John McCain as president."

After his speech, Edwards deflected reporters' questions about which candidate he favors.

"When I have something to say, I'll let you guys know," he said.

Edwards' speech yesterday before hundreds of Democrats - most of them in their teens and 20s - was one of his few public appearances since he dropped out of the presidential race at the end of January.

He is one of a handful of nationally prominent Democratic politicians who have not endorsed either Clinton or Obama, and both candidates have vigorously courted his endorsement.

Some commentators have speculated that an Edwards endorsement could be a key factor in North Carolina's May 6 primary. The state's 115 delegates are being heavily contested by Clinton and Obama, both of whom visited the state last week. On the other hand, a poll released last week suggested that an Edwards endorsement could actually do more harm than good.

In the poll, conducted by the Democratic firm Public Policy Polling, 31 percent of Democratic voters said that if Edwards endorsed Clinton, it would make them less likely to vote for her. Only 12 percent of voters surveyed said that an Edwards endorsement would make them more likely to vote for Clinton.

The poll did not ask a similar question about the effect of an Edwards endorsement on Obama.

The Clinton and Obama campaigns, as well as numerous candidates for state office, used the Young Democrats convention as an opportunity to get their messages out.

Chelsea Clinton spoke on behalf of her mother and then took questions from the audience for more than an hour. In response to one question, she talked about incidents of gender bias she witnessed on the campaign trail.

"I didn't really get how much sexism there still was in this country," she said.

At one cam­paign rally, she said, someone approached her and expressed doubt that a woman could be commander in chief. At another, a heckler yelled out, "Iron my shirt!"

Chelsea Clinton also addressed the touchy subject of her mother's position on the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Former President Clinton was a big proponent of NAFTA, which has come under fire among many blue-collar Democrats, including in North Carolina, who believe that it caused manufacturing jobs to move overseas.

During her run for president, Hillary Clinton has distanced herself from NAFTA, saying that she raised questions about it within her husband’s administration and promising to renegotiate the deal as president.

Asked yesterday about her parents' opinions on NAFTA, Chelsea Clinton responded that it is an issue of disagreement within her family, saying that she and her mother do not agree with her father on NAFTA.

Mayor Cory Booker of Newark, N.J., an Obama supporter, spoke on behalf of Obama.

Speaking with reporters afterward, he said he believes that the race is virtually over, referring to Obama's small but nearly-insurmountable lead in pledged delegates, which are allocated to the candidate based on the results of primaries and caucuses.

"I really think he's already clinched the nomination," Booker said. "I don't see how Hillary can catch up at this point, mathematically. Something would have to happen in terms of a perfect storm of events to make that happen. I really see Obama with a comfortable lead."

Neither Obama nor Clinton will have enough pledged delegates to win the nomination outright at the Democratic national convention; the eventual winner will also have to rely on the votes of superdelegates, who are Democratic elected officials and other party officials.

HOUSTON -- Less than a month ago, Texas Democrats turned out in huge numbers for the presidential nominating contest between Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama, confident that, no matter who won, the party would have a popular, well-financed candidate.

But that exuberance is gone now.

Across the state this weekend, tense confrontations -- even shoving matches -- erupted as partisans for Clinton and Obama battled over how to interpret the March 4 election results and how to choose delegates to the Texas Democratic convention.

At one particularly raucous session Saturday at Texas Southern University, a leading Clinton backer, U.S. Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee, was booed by hundreds of Obama supporters, and police were called later to break up heated exchanges that left some in tears.

"It's bedlam," said Houston lawyer Daniel J. Shea, a Clinton backer.

Democrat-on-Democrat clashes over delegates have been playing out in Iowa, Colorado, Florida and other states -- the latest indication that the feel-good nomination race of the era has veered into a political ditch.

The contentious battle in Texas shows the high cost of this unending campaign. To hold his delegate lead, Obama has kept a team of 65 paid organizers and lawyers in the state this month, while Clinton has 45.

As the feud rages -- even in states that voted weeks or months ago -- each side has its own game plan for victory. For Obama, it means highlighting his lead in delegates to the party's national convention in Denver. For Clinton, it means lengthening the campaign so that she can use every tactic to narrow her delegate deficit and to win upcoming primaries in her bid to raise doubts about Obama's electability in the fall.

The candidates have also become far more combative, and that hostility has party leaders worried. In a year that looked to be a Democratic romp, Obama and Clinton are burning money, erasing goodwill and eviscerating each other's reputation while the presumptive Republican nominee, John McCain, prepares to kick off his general-election campaign with a nationwide tour designed to highlight of military and congressional experience. On Saturday, Clinton told the Washington Post that she was prepared to take her campaign all the way to the party convention in August.

"This thing has turned from being an adventure to being a grind," said Robert M. Shrum, a Democratic strategist who managed John F. Kerry's 2004 presidential campaign.

Polls published last week showed some of the dangers: McCain has gained ground against both Democrats, and at least 20% of each Democratic candidate's supporters now say they would consider abandoning the party in November if their candidate is not the nominee.

The potential for anger is more pronounced -- and the consequences more dire -- than in most campaigns because this contest is being waged along the fault lines of gender and race, with the would-be first female president versus the would-be first black president.

That was starkly evident Saturday at one convention in Houston, where mostly white Clinton supporters repeatedly challenged the credentials of black Obama backers in a heavily black district that had voted overwhelmingly for Obama. Democratic leaders, who had been thrilled by the massive turnout in early-voting states, now fear the consequences not only in the presidential race but also in state and local ones.

"When you have a divided party, I think it hurts you up and down the ticket," said Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen, a Democrat, who said his party cannot afford to lose seats in an evenly divided state Senate and a state House controlled by a narrow Democratic majority. "Somebody who's mad enough at one of the candidates to want to vote for John McCain is more likely to [vote] down that side of the ballot."

Bredesen has circulated a plan to stave off a potentially divisive national nominating convention in August by holding a "primary" earlier this summer among the nearly 800 superdelegates -- the party's elected officials, leaders and activists -- whose votes could decide the race and forestall the type of delegate fights now unfolding in Texas.

Another party elder, former New York Gov. Mario Cuomo, proposed Saturday that Clinton and Obama avert a "disaster" by agreeing to share the ticket, with the delegate winner running for president and the loser for vice president.

"If, on the other hand, the candidates refuse to work out a way to keep both constituencies firmly in the Democratic camp for the general election," Cuomo wrote in the Boston Globe, "the 2008 primary may be the story of a painfully botched grand opportunity to return our nation to the upward path and [instead] leave us mired in Iraq and government mediocrity."

Such concern prompted one prominent U.S. senator, Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, an Obama supporter, to call Friday for Clinton to step aside, while Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean urged the candidates to find a resolution by July.

The acrimony was on sharp display Saturday in Texas as Democrats met in 280 district conventions, part of the complicated system the state uses to determine the makeup of its delegation to the national convention.

Clinton won the primary in Texas, but Obama won the caucuses that followed after the polls closed. It was those caucus results that were being challenged Saturday at conventions that drew thousands of boisterous participants.

Even after Saturday, individual delegates can still be challenged. The count will not be secured until the state party convention in early June, and possibly not even then.

While party leaders openly fret about the potential harm in the November election, the ongoing battles in Texas and other states come with political benefits for Clinton -- particularly in states that held caucuses in which Obama was far more successful.

Not only do Clinton aides believe that scrutinizing the caucus process can help them squeeze out more delegates, due to math or certification errors, but they believe that a drumbeat of complaints about the caucuses bolsters Clinton's argument to superdelegates that they are not as legitimate as primary elections. In addition, the fighting delays the official delegate count, which helps keep Obama's lead from growing too fast and gives Clinton more time to raise questions about his electability.

Both the Clinton and Obama teams encouraged supporters to get to Saturday's conventions amid reports that dirty-trick e-mails told delegates the conventions had been canceled or moved. Thousands of Texas households received a recorded phone call from former President Bill Clinton reminding delegates of the importance of attending.

Definitive results were not available Saturday evening from the often chaotic district conventions. Nonetheless, both campaigns declared victory. Clinton field organizer Michael Trujillo said preliminary results showed a likely two-delegate shift toward Clinton, thanks to successful challenges in southern and rural Texas. The Obama campaign said Saturday's conventions confirmed that Obama still had the overall lead in the Texas delegation.

During the day, supporters of both candidates said they were disturbed by what they considered intimidation and cheap tricks from the other side.

Valerie Zavala, 38, said that as soon as she identified herself as a Clinton supporter, Obama backers demanded to know why she had even bothered showing up. "There's a lot of hostility," she said. "I see a lot of tension."

Adib Faafir, an Obama supporter, suspected that trickery by Clinton backers had blocked his chance of participating. He held up his cellphone to show a text message telling him to show up for the convention at a local school miles from the actual location. By the time he arrived at the correct address, he was out of luck.

"Only two of the people from my precinct have showed up, and they wouldn't let me register," he said.

The Clinton campaign had announced last week that it would not be officially challenging delegates. But behind the scenes, Clinton staff encouraged and counseled individuals in the challenge process.

Each side accused the other of gaming the system to its advantage.

Trujillo didn't bother with diplomatic niceties, charging that the "abundance of pure cheating from the Obama side escapes the imagination."

Obama's top field organizer, Temo Figueroa, said it was Clinton who had created the prospect of a nominating fight lasting to the convention, a nightmare for party leaders.

"The new rules are that she is not going to quit," he said. "She is going to fight over every single delegate, and the fight may go to the last vote and the last delegate."

ARLINGTON, VA. -- Elizabeth Edwards, the wife of former Democratic presidential contender John Edwards, said she and John McCain have one thing in common: "Neither one of us would be covered by his health policy."

Edwards lodged her criticism of the presumptive Republican presidential nominee's proposal Saturday at the annual meeting of the Assn. of Health Care Journalists.

Under McCain's plan, insurance companies "wouldn't have to cover preexisting conditions like melanoma and breast cancer," she said.

McCain has been treated for melanoma, the most serious type of skin malignancy. Edwards in 2004 was diagnosed with breast cancer, and announced a year ago that it had returned and spread into her bones, meaning it no longer could be cured.

McCain's plan focuses on offering new tax breaks for individuals who buy their own health insurance. But critics say the Arizona senator's proposal avoids giving insurers requirements on whom they must cover and how much they may charge.

His plan would make it difficult for people with preexisting conditions, but who aren't covered by a government- or job-sponsored plan, to buy individual coverage, Edwards said.

Cancer survivors are routinely denied insurance when they try to purchase it as individuals, health experts say.

Edwards also criticized McCain's proposal because it would allow companies to sell health insurance across state lines. The senator's campaign website says the effort would give consumers more options and promote competition throughout the healthcare system.

But Edwards said the plan would allow insurers to move their headquarters to states in which consumer protection laws are weak. Giving an example to back up her claim, Edwards noted that many credit card companies are based in Delaware, where the state's laws are more accommodating to corporate interests, she said.

"Hard-fought state-by-state protections would be lost," Edwards said. "They mask this proposal as a cost-saving technique. This is giving insurance companies a pass."

Douglas Holtz-Eakin, senior policy advisor to McCain, said Saturday that Edwards' comments were disappointing and that they revealed she did not understand the comprehensive nature of the senator's proposal.

Holtz-Eakin said McCain's policy would harness "the power of competition to produce greater coverage for Americans." Because McCain's plan would lower the cost of healthcare through competition, Holtz-Eakin said, it would reduce costs for consumers with or without preexisting conditions.

Regarding her own health, Edwards is "actually doing really well," she said. "The cancer is still there, but it's under control."

She declined Saturday to make an endorsement in the presidential race. But Edwards said she favored Hillary Rodham Clinton's healthcare plan over Barack Obama's.

"Sen. Clinton's plan is a great plan" that closely resembles John Edwards' proposal, she said. Clinton's plan mandates that every American be insured. Elizabeth Edwards said only universal healthcare would resolve one of the problems plaguing the healthcare system -- its soaring cost.

"Until we get rid of the need for hospitals and other providers to cover the costs of people who are not covered . . . the overall cost is not going to go down," she said. "The only real cost savings comes when you have universality."

In North Carolina, meanwhile, John Edwards praised Sens. Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Obama (D-Ill.) in his first public speech since dropping his White House bid two months ago but declined to endorse either candidate.

"I have a very high opinion of both of them," he said at the Young Democrats of North Carolina convention. "We would be blessed as a nation to have either one of them as president."



By Rong-Gong Lin II, Los Angeles Times, March 30, 2008

GIRARDVILLE, Pa. - Former President Clinton said Saturday that Democrats calling for his wife to drop out of the presidential race should "just relax" and let the remaining states vote.

Clinton, marching in a belated St. Patrick's Day parade in Girardville, a tiny town in northeastern Pennsylvania's coal region, said it wouldn't be fair to deprive Democratic voters in states like Pennsylvania of the opportunity to vote for the candidate of their choice.

"We just need to relax and let this happen. Nobody's talking about wrecking the party," Clinton said. "Everywhere I go, all these working people say, 'Don't you dare let her drop out. Don't listen to those people in Washington, they don't represent us.'"

Clinton was responding to a statement by Sen. Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat who supports Illinois Sen. Barack Obama. Leahy said Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton can't win enough delegates to capture the nomination and should drop out and support Obama.

Clinton told reporters along the parade route that Leahy doesn't want his wife to compete in upcoming contests because "she might win." Polls have shown Sen. Clinton with a big lead over Obama in Pennsylvania, which votes April 22 and is the biggest remaining electoral prize.

"I think the idea that a state as important to the Democrats' future as Pennsylvania, where (Republican nominee-in-waiting) Sen. (John) McCain has always been popular and always run well, the idea that the Democrats would not want the vote to occur here I think is crazy," Bill Clinton said.

McCain has never campaigned in Pennsylvania.

"The people should just relax and let this process go on," Clinton said as he walked the 1.5-mile-long parade route wearing a shamrock-colored scarf and carnation. "It's good, it's exciting, it's good for democracy."

He drew a crowd estimated at well over 20,000, with people lining up 10 deep to shake hands and get autographs.

In a brief speech outside St. Joseph Catholic Church, Clinton told the throngs that his wife supports investments in clean-coal technology in hard-hit coal states like Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Ohio and West Virginia.

Like many towns in the coal region, Girardville, population 1,800, has struggled to recover economically from the demise of widescale anthracite mining.

"If we led the world to the moon, we ought to be able to lead the world to clean coal," Clinton said. "I know a certain candidate who is absolutely committed to that."

By Michael Rubinkam, Associated Press, March 30, 2008

The last time Indiana got any memorable visits during a presidential primary was 40 years ago, when Robert F. Kennedy stopped there on the day Martin Luther King was shot.

But this year, Hillary Clinton and her family have practically become Hoosiers, according to Republican Secretary of State Todd Rokita. Barack Obama has also visited, and he'll no doubt be back before the state's May 6 primary.

Rokita predicts Indiana - like just about every other state that has voted this year - will enjoy a primary turnout it hasn't seen in generations. It's a fever he hopes will catch on in the fall.

"Once you vote, you've committed a threshold act of civic engagement," he said. "And you've earned yourself an ownership interest in the result."

With unusually high voter turnout in the primaries and caucuses across the country, Rokita and other secretaries of state are bullish about what might happen this fall. "I would not be surprised if we hit at least 80 percent" in November, said Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, referring to the percentage of registered voters who come to the polls. Brunner, a Democrat, called the March 4 turnout of about 45 percent "unprecedented" for a primary.

"Part of it is that the country's in hard times, and that motivates people to vote," she said. "The other thing is that this is an election where we don't have an incumbent president, and I think that generates excitement about candidates on both sides of the aisle."

Others aren't so sure that the enthusiasm generated during the early part of the year will translate to the fall.

Curtis Gans, director of the Center for the Study of the American Electorate at American University, noted that primary turnout set records in 1972 as well. By the fall, when it was clear Richard Nixon was cruising toward a landslide win, turnout was paltry.

"Lots of things can happen," Gans said. If Obama wins the Democratic nomination, he said, some of Clinton's base supporters could stay home. And the same could be said of Obama's base if Clinton wins.

Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia cautions that the strong primary turnout for Democrats this year isn't necessarily a predictor of what will happen in November.

"It's a good sign for Democrats," he said, "but by no means does it guarantee victory."

The Dayton Daily News analyzed voting information from the 43 states that have held elections this year, using information from the Federal Elections Commission, secretaries of state, state political parties and Professor Michael McDonald of George Mason University, a voting turnout expert. The analysis found that close to 50 million people have voted so far, with Pennsylvania, Oregon and North Carolina among those still waiting their turn. Even Michigan and Florida - which were stripped of their delegates by the Democratic National Convention after both held primaries before DNC rules permitted - saw mammoth increases in voter turnout among Democrats.

Excitement about the candidates and issues has fueled some of the high turnout, McDonald said, but grass roots organizations are also using more sophisticated methods for mobilizing people and getting them to the polls.

Though 2008 probably exceeds all other primaries in "absolute numbers," McDonald said the best way to measure turnout is by the percentage of each state's voting-eligible population that cast ballots. But by any measure, voter participation in 2008 has been extraordinary.

Not since the early 1900s, when political "ward bosses" made sure their people voted, has primary turnout been this high, McDonald said.

"If all things continue the way they are," he said, "this will be something we've not seen in the last century of American politics."

After every protest was answered and every objection rejected, a hectic and sometimes heated El Paso County Democratic Party convention ended 12 hours after it started with support for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton increasing her support in El Paso to more than 94 percent.

Of the 127 state convention delegates elected by those attending the convention Saturday at the Don Haskins Center, 120 Clinton delegates were elected and only seven Sen. Barack Obama delegates were elected.

Those 127 delegates, along with an additional 50 or so delegates seated by a committee, will go to Austin in June to represent El Paso at the state Democratic convention.

In Austin, the El Paso County delegates will caucus with the delegates from the rest of the state to finally decide which presidential candidate gets Texas' final 67 delegate votes.

"This is exciting; I'm ready to go," said Margarito Arrellano, a business owner who was elected a state delegate by his peers in Canutillo and Anthony, Texas. "Just to watch the process and to be here is exciting. This is the first time I attend, so getting elected a delegate is exciting."

Like the majority of those who showed up Saturday, Arrellano voted for Clinton.

About 2,000 Democrats attended the convention. All were elected as delegates or alternates at their precinct conventions March 4, and each was looking forward to voting a third time for either Clinton or Obama.

But before anyone could actually vote, several problems had to be resolved:

*The long lines at the entrance caused party officials to extend registration for an extra hour so delegates and alternates could check in.

*Several precincts had to re-caucus because they didn't do it properly March 4.

*Every voter who registered as a delegate or alternate first had to be certified as eligible, a process that took longer than expected.

And a protest filed by Obama supporters alleging El Paso County Democratic Chairman Danny Anchondo was misinterpreting a ruling on how to replace missing delegates had to be settled.

Obama supporter and precinct delegate John Padaline maintained that if a Clinton delegate was missing, an Obama alternate could step in, or vice versa.

Anchondo ruled that it was not possible for Obama alternates to replace Clinton delegates, and vice versa. His ruling drew some boos from the crowd, which asked for a public vote.

When the vote showed only 137 people objected to the ruling, an overwhelming cheer engulfed the center and the convention proceeded, albeit amid warnings from Obama supporters.

You could call the North Carolina Democratic presidential primary The Battle for Bubba.

In the opening weeks of the Democratic presidential primary, white male voters -- those who are Democrats and unaffiliated -- appear to be the swing voters, and the key target of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama.

Both Obama and Clinton start the primary contest with significant bases of support in North Carolina.

In Greensboro on Wednesday, Obama's crowd was predominantly African-American.

Among those in the crowd was Pamela Glass, 46, an administrator of the fledgling civil rights museum in Greensboro.

Glass has long admired Clinton. "I'd love to see the world run by a woman," Glass said.

But she is backing Obama. Glass likes Obama for a lot of reasons, she said. But the fact that he could become the first African-American president is huge.

"I am curious to see what he would do once in office, because he is African-American," Glass said.

White women dominated the Clinton crowds at Wake Tech and in Fayetteville on Thursday.

"I think there should be more women holding political office," said Ginny Rathbun, 69, a retired teacher from Fuquay-Varina. "We'd have a different society if we had women in charge."

"I like Obama," she said. "But I think he is a little wet behind the ears."

The split is evident at not just rallies. Public opinion polls show strong black support for Obama and strong backing by white women for Clinton -- although it should be pointed out there are white women backing Obama and blacks supporting Clinton.

With so many blacks and white women already taking sides, the key battle in the primary May 6 will be for white men.

A recent survey by the independent Public Policy Polling firm found that Obama leads Clinton 47-43 percent among white men likely to vote in the Democratic primary. As pollster Tom Jensen notes, Obama has won other states when he is competitive with Clinton for the votes of white men.

If Clinton is going to have a chance to beat Obama in North Carolina, she has to do better with Bubba.

Last week, the Clinton campaign had a definite blue-collar flavor.

Clinton launched her campaign at a community college, talking about bread-and-butter economic issues such as jobs and the cost of gasoline.

It is why her spouse, former President Bill Clinton, spent Friday in the foothills of Western North Carolina -- a largely white area -- fishing for the Bubba vote. At his side was one of North Carolina's chief Bubbas, former Secretary of State Rufus Edmisten.

That is also why Bill Clinton referred to his wife in un-PC terms as "a girl" as he talked during a recent appearance in Cary about her support from retired military brass.

Obama is also working hard for the Bubba vote.

On Friday, Obama began running his first TV commercial in North Carolina. It seems clearly aimed at Bubba.

"Ordinary people all across the country are struggling from paycheck to paycheck," Obama says in the ad. "If the plant moves to China, and you have been working there 20 to 30 years, and you suddenly have the rug pulled out from under you, and you don't have health care, and you don't have a pension, you are on your own."

Clinton and Obama may be non-traditional candidates. But both are shopping for traditional voters in North Carolina.

By Rob Christensen, The News & Observer, March 30, 2008

WASHINGTON - In the past year, Speaker Nancy Pelosi has embraced her role as the Democratic Party's top official, managing a complex congressional agenda with a mixture of passion and pragmatism.

Now she is taking on an equally difficult role in the protracted presidential race between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. As a leading superdelegate, uncommitted to either candidate, she is giving plenty of advice to the two campaigns. Pelosi also is the ultimate referee - wielding the gavel as chair of the national convention in Denver in five months.

The San Francisco congresswoman is preaching a pragmatic message to Democrats who have been energized, but also torn by this year's close race.

"We have to keep our eyes on the prize, which is the general election in November," Pelosi told a group before leaving recently for a trip to Britain and India. "We are all very passionate about our politics, but we have to be very dispassionate about how we approach winning."

She has advised the party's almost 800 superdelegates not to overturn the verdict of primary and caucus voters, giving great weight to the leader in elected delegates when voting ends in June. She chastised the Clinton campaign for suggesting that Obama was less qualified than Republican John McCain to be commander in chief.

Those moves were seen as favoring Obama, who leads 1,620 to 1,471 in delegates, according to a recent New York Times tally. But political analysts said Pelosi's prime motivation is to ensure a fair process that does not alienate a huge influx of activists in the party and helps Democrats increase their majorities in Congress.

"She worked hard to become a powerful speaker with national stature, and does not want to jeopardize her party in Congress," said Julian Zelizer, a Princeton University historian and editor of 2004's "The American Congress: The Building of Democracy." "She has spoken out on the presidential race, but she has also been cautious. She knows she has to stay neutral - for now."

As speaker, Pelosi has overseen a 35-vote majority in the House, with House Democrats split between Clinton and Obama. She embraced the passion of anti-war Democrats, but when votes to set a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq failed, a pragmatic Pelosi turned from Iraq to emphasize economic issues this year.

Pelosi has not taken a position on whether, or how, Michigan and Florida will have delegations at the convention because she may have to rule on that question in Denver. The Democratic National Committee disallowed the results of voting in those two states for violating the party's national primary schedule.

Pelosi also knows that if the Obama-Clinton battle goes all the way to the convention, "that would be the disaster of all disasters for the party," said Norman Ornstein, a longtime analyst and author of several books on Congress.

So expect Pelosi, along with such party leaders as Al Gore and John Edwards, to advise superdelegates to back the leading candidate well before the convention, several analysts said. In doing this, the first female speaker will be following in the tradition of other influential speakers.

Speaker Sam Rayburn helped broker peace, and a joint ticket, between John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson in 1960, Zelizer recalled. Speaker Tip O'Neill gave crucial support to Walter Mondale in 1984, and urged him to select Geraldine Ferraro as his running mate.

Pelosi is "a more glamorous, telegenic version of Sam Rayburn, with some of the same personal skills but her own style," said Barbara O'Connor, director of the Institute for the Study of Politics and Media at California State University at Sacramento.

"I do think she wants to avoid a brokered convention at all costs," O'Connor added.

Ornstein predicted that Pelosi, Gore and other leaders will urge all delegates to coalesce around the leader in June "to avoid a party meltdown."

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, a California Democrat who will attend the state convention, says superdelegates should back the leader in delegates and popular votes. Lofgren has endorsed Obama, but said she would back Clinton if she took the lead in June.

"The speaker has maintained a scrupulous neutrality" between Obama and Clinton, Lofgren said, and that enhances Pelosi's influence if she and other party leaders need to step in later.

"She worked hard to become a powerful speaker with national stature, and does not want to jeopardize her party in Congress."

By FRANK DAVIES San Jose Mercury News, March 30, 2008

Our position: Indiana's economy has struggled, but free trade isn't the culprit.

It's a bit of political rhetoric sure to win applause in manufacturing-dependent states such as Indiana.

Barack Obama said last month that trade deals like the North American Free Trade Agreement "ship jobs overseas and force parents to compete with their teenagers to work for minimum wage at Wal-Mart.''

Obama's rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, Hillary Clinton, has been equally as disparaging of NAFTA, even though it was enacted during her husband's administration.

But are NAFTA and other free-trade deals really the threat to American workers that critics claim them to be?

Tim Solso, CEO of Columbus, Ind.-based Cummins Inc., is a passionate defender of free trade. He points not to jobs lost but jobs created by open markets.

He can start with his company. Cummins not only has a robust and growing business in nations such as China, but it's also creating high-level jobs in Indiana.

To bolster his argument, Solso points to foreign-based companies such as Honda and Toyota that are creating thousands of jobs and pumping hundreds of millions of dollars into the state's economy.

Most research into the economic effects of free-trade deals support the contention that they have been an overall boon to the nation and its workers. For instance, between 1999 and 2007, U.S. exports to the 11 nations covered by free-trade agreements increased by 75 percent, according to the U.S. Department of Commerce.

The United States is the world's largest exporter, with 25 percent of last year's growth in gross domestic product attributed to exports.

Those statistics aren't meaningful only to economists. They translate into jobs, with about one in five U.S. manufacturing positions and nearly 1 million agricultural jobs dependent on exports. And, according to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, jobs directly tied to exports pay as much as 18 percent more than other positions in the United States.

But haven't many American workers, especially those in Indiana, been pummeled as jobs have evaporated? The loss of manufacturing jobs has undeniably been very difficult for many families, and their communities.

Much of the attrition, however, is the result not of free trade but of higher productivity, including better use of technology.

In addition, U.S. automakers, responsible for many of the job losses, have been hobbled by legacy costs owed to retired workers. They also were slow to adjust to consumers' changing demands.

Indiana unquestionably has struggled in recent years as jobs vanished and salaries fell below the national average. But free trade isn't the culprit.

The Indianapolis Star, March 30, 2008

How would you like a no-expenses-paid Denver vacation when restaurants are sure to be crowded, streets clogged and security tight at every turn?

To 2,500 Democrats, it sounds like the trip of a lifetime.

From schoolteachers to college students, from state workers to state legislators, Democrats across California are signing up in droves to become one of 241 locally elected delegates to the Democratic National Convention in Denver.

The fluidity of the Democratic presidential race between Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, plus the opportunity to select the first African American or female major-party nominee, has drawn record interest in a party activity once dominated by the politically connected.

"I'm clearly an outsider to become a delegate, but the main reason I signed up is this is historic," said the Rev. Tim Malone, 51, a Davis activist who is African American and running to become an Obama delegate. "I'm still stunned that Barack Obama is leading right now. I'm shocked. I'm older, and I'm one of those folks who thought I'd never live to see the day."

Any registered Democrat can run in special delegate caucuses April 13 in each of California's 53 congressional districts. Unlike the "superdelegates," the party officials and others who have garnered substantial attention in recent weeks because they can vote for whomever they want, local delegates are expected to carry out the wishes of voters in the Feb. 5 primary.

The prize is hardly a junket. Local-level delegates have to pay for their own flight, lodging and meals, which the party has estimated at $2,500 apiece.

Conceivably, one could just show up the day of the April 13 caucuses, give a 30- to 60-second speech and sufficiently inspire a crowd of several hundred Democrats. But longtime Democratic activists say winning a delegate seat often requires bringing your own votes, and organized political networks like unions or advocacy groups have a built-in advantage.

That hasn't stopped people like Tamie Dramer from getting creative.

Dramer, 38, is running on a family slate in the 5th Congressional District with her partner, Eric Sunderland, and their 18-year-old daughter, Andee Sunderland. They plan to lure supporters by bringing their grill and holding a tailgate party outside the Obama caucus.

"We might as well feed them," said Dramer, a Sacramento affordable housing advocate. "We're going to put a couple tables out and see who shows up."

Dramer and Eric Sunderland were supporters of former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina before he dropped out of the race in late January, though their daughter had backed Obama all along.

"I feel that (Obama) is honest, I feel like he has integrity," Dramer said. "I appreciate that he's been against the war since the beginning."

Dianna Francis, 45, signed up to become a Clinton delegate when she visited the state party Web site to become a volunteer and saw a solicitation to go one step further.

She said she prefers Clinton for her experience and the possibility of having the first woman as president.

"I saw the applications and said, 'I'll just do this,' not knowing what it meant," Francis said. "I'm still very confused about the process, but I'm excited about it, and I think it will be fun. ... I was telling one of the ladies that I carpool with that this was happening, and she said, 'We caucus?' "

The state Democratic Party is processing mounds of applications and expects a record number of competitors, said spokesman Bob Mulholland. By his estimate, fewer than 10 percent will actually win a seat.

A veteran of state and national conventions and a superdelegate himself, Mulholland said it's hard to become a local delegate without building a coalition of support beforehand, though that coalition may not always be what you'd think.

"Once in a while, we'll get some young person who gets the fraternities to show up," he said. "As long as they're registered Democrats (in that district), they can vote. Most of the people who have gone to the caucuses have gone on behalf of groups such as a union or Democratic club. It's a lot of wheeling and dealing because you're not going to become No. 1 on your looks."

By Kevin Yamamura, , March 30, 2008

Hillary Rodham Clinton has called twice. Ex-President Bill Clinton has called once.

The Clintons also sent El Pasoan Norma Fisher-Flores a book -- in part to thank her for pledging her Texas Democratic Party superdelegate vote to Clinton and to make sure she doesn't change her mind.

As one of El Paso's superdelegates, Fisher-Flores is free to pledge her vote to the Democratic presidential candidate she chooses, and she has pledged it to Clinton.

U.S. Rep. Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas, is El Paso's only other superdelegate and he, too, has pledged his support to Clinton.

While Texas continues wading through the tedious process of awarding its 228 delegates to either Clinton or Sen. Barack Obama, 35 of those delegate votes belong to several Texans who are free to do with their votes as they chose.

Most of the superdelegates are longtime Democratic Party members or high-ranking elected officials.

These delegate votes are totally separate from Texas' 126 delegates who were allocated to Clinton and Obama based on the results of the March 4 primary.

An additional 67 delegate votes will be allocated in June at the Texas Democratic Party convention, and those are awarded according to which candidate had more support at Saturday's county conventions.

The statewide results of the county conventions will not be known until June.

In the meantime, Fisher-Flores knows she will continue to get e-mails and letters from people wanting to influence her vote because Clinton and Obama remain in a tight nationwide battle and neither has the 2,025 delegate votes to win the nomination.

"At first I was getting a lot of letters and e-mails from people wanting me to switch my vote to Obama," she said. "Now, I'm getting more from people wanting me to keep supporting Hillary."

She said her superdelegate Web site has been getting 1,000 to 1,500 hits a day from people trying to influence her.

"This is a historic election on the Democratic side," she said. "The chances of having two candidates be this close in the race this long is probably not going to happen again in our lifetime, so I understand why people are interested."

Reyes said that while he isn't being lobbied much, he is lobbying other superdelegates in Texas.

"I'm on Hillary's flip committee," he said. "It is my job to find those superdelegates who aren't committed, meet with them, answer their questions and try to convince them to join winning side."

Because Reyes has made it clear that he supports Clinton, he said, no one on the Obama side has contacted him to try to switch.

"Loyalty is everything and my position is clear," Reyes said.

Texas presidential delegates
How delegates in Texas are distributed:

* Of Texas' 228 delegate votes, 126 are tied to the popular vote and will be given proportionately to the candidates based on election-night results. El Paso's three delegate votes are awarded percentage-wise to the winner of the presidential race in El Paso.

* An additional 35 delegate votes are classified as superdelegate votes, which means the person designated a superdelegate can pledge his or her vote to whomever he or she chooses. In El Paso, U.S. Rep. Silvestre Reyes and longtime Democrat Norma Fisher-Flores are superdelegates.

* An additional 67 delegate votes will be allocated in June at the Texas Democratic Party convention, awarded according to which candidate had more support at Saturday's county conventions.

By Ramon Bracamontes, El Paso Times, March 30, 2008

Gertrud "Geri" Clauson doesn't consider herself a radical, but when her neighbors at the Riddle Village retirement community in Media read this, they might. After all, how many people alter their political identity at age 94?

Born in 1913 - before women had the right to vote - Geri was a loyal registered Republican for 73 years.

Now she's a Democrat who wants to elect a woman president.

"It isn't that I don't want to be a Republican anymore," the blond-haired, mauve-nailed nonagenarian told me last week. "I want to vote the way I want to vote this time."

This time - as in the first, and possibly, last time?

Geri doesn't say if thoughts of mortality pushed her to change political parties. When you're pushing 95, you live for the moment.

And to this tuned-in voter, who needs headphones she calls "my TV ears" to follow politics on MSNBC and Fox News, the moment belongs to Hillary Clinton.

Living history

Sharyn Clauson cautioned that between her mother's hearing loss and health problems, she may not be the world's best interview.

"You wouldn't know it now, but I used to be able to talk very well," Geri says after I arrive in her ornately decorated apartment.

"It's so hard for me to remember things," she admits. "I remember, then I forget what I want to say."

Eventually, bits of her electoral history surface, from casting her first vote in 1934 during the Depression to marrying a staunch conservative who forbade their only daughter from attending a John F. Kennedy rally near their home in Oxford Circle.

At Temple, Geri majored in English with a focus on 19th-century novels like her favorite, Pride and Prejudice. After she became a "traditional" wife and homemaker, the extent of her public politicking was working on "social change" with B'nai B'rith and once, decades ago, hosting a kaffeeklatsch for Arlen Specter.

As for crossing party lines, the only time Geri recalls doing it before was to vote for Ed Rendell for mayor and governor.

While this year's presidential campaign has energized the young, it also has thoroughly infatuated a woman so old she has never revealed her age to neighbors because "I don't want people trying to figure out how many years I have left."

Geri was so swept up, she joined 86,710 other registered Pennsylvania voters who have switched their party affiliation to Democrat this year.

"What I realized," Geri told Sharyn after asking for help with the paperwork, "was that I always could vote, but my mother couldn't. When I had a little girl, I could take you into the booth. When my mother had me, she couldn't."

Sharyn was surprised by her mother's political coming of age at such an advanced age.

"My mother," Sharyn now suspects, "was a closet feminist."

One woman, one vote

The more Sharyn probed, the more it became clear that her mother is channelling a lifetime of slights and hope into one vote.

"Now there's a glass ceiling," explains Sharyn, a 61-year-old retired teacher. "Before, there were glass doors."

In a few weeks, Geri - a fiscal conservative who thinks Clinton, more than Republican John McCain, can restore a centrist stability to a nation adrift - will try to shatter what's left of those barriers.

Used to be, Geri had to ride a bus to vote at a firehouse. This year, her polling place is at Riddle Village.

On primary day April 22, she'll climb into her lipstick-red Jazzy Select power wheelchair, motor down the hall, and ride the elevator to the first floor to make her mark on history.

Sharyn will be out of town, not that Geri needs help.

"I don't," she insists.

And if any of her mostly Republican neighbors ask whether she's voting for Clinton just because she's a woman, Geri has a snappy response all ready:

"Why not?"

By Monica Yant Kinney, The Philadelphia Inquirer, March 30, 2008

A hands-on approach




The Philadelphia Inquirer, March 30, 2008

It's 3 a.m. and the red phone rings. The president lurches from the pillow, poised to command. The breathless aide on the line spells out the crisis:

"Sorry to wake you, sir/madam! I just got word that another friend/fund-raiser/surrogate/hanger-on has said/done something incredibly nutty/disgusting, and this could hurt/humiliate/destroy you. Angry bloggers are massed outside the White House right now, in their bathrobes, thumbing their BlackBerrys. We need to convene the proxy crisis committee and determine whether we should reject/denounce/distance/defend."

Seriously, maybe this is where we're heading. In the midst of great challenges at home and abroad, the '08 campaign seems to be awash in proxy scandals, and it seems that the three finalists are being judged not so much on their own merits - or lack thereof - as on the antics of their entourages. I'll concede that, in our own lives, we often judge people by the company they keep, but what's happening in politics these days is way out of control.

I should stipulate that the proxy problem is not new. Back in 1920, candidate Warren G. Harding had an entourage of crooked cronies, but nobody paid attention until after he was sworn in, whereupon those cronies looted public oil fields in the Teapot Dome scandal. As Harding put it: "I have no trouble with my enemies . . . it's my friends that keep me walking the floors at night."

By contrast, John F. Kennedy carefully policed his Hollywood proxies back in 1960. Frank Sinatra tried to hire a blacklisted writer for a movie project, but Jack's father put a stop to that, fearing Jack would look bad if his pal Frank seemed soft on communism. Another JFK pal, Sammy Davis Jr., was barred from performing at the Democratic convention because he was dating a white woman at the time and the Kennedys didn't want the southern delegates to link Jack to such decadence.

But the current proxy game is unprecedented. Maybe it's because the race is so tight - among all three candidates, in the early general-election matchups - so we're looking for any factor that might be a deal-breaker. Maybe it's because we're less tolerant of the hyperbole once common in politics (Abraham Lincoln was typically reviled as a "baboon"), so we frown on proxies who dredge up Barack Obama's youthful drug use or suggest that John McCain must be hostile to Catholics because a pastor in his entourage has been hostile to Catholics.

Maybe it's because the ubiquitous media, in all their new and old permutations, are poised to pounce on every verbal slip and violation of political correctness. Or - dare we offer some praise? - maybe it's because Obama, McCain and Hillary Rodham Clinton are actually candidates with many admirable qualities, so therefore we must focus on the flaws of their associates, particularly the sin of excessive zealotry.

Meanwhile, there are no consensus rules for passing judgment. What constitutes a serious proxy scandal, one that rightfully taints a candidate, and when is a candidate unfairly pilloried on the charge of guilt by association?

Who's worse: the prominent Obama surrogate (a former Iowa party chairman) who needled the Clintons by joking about the infamous stain on Monica Lewinsky's dress, or James Carville, who likened Obama endorser Bill Richardson to the apostle who betrayed Jesus? Did Obama adviser Samantha Power deserve to be banished for calling Hillary a "monster" during a momentary lapse of discretion? Did Hillary overreact last month by severing all ties - I bet you haven't even heard this one - to Chicago fund-raiser Mehmet Celebi, who co-owns a movie company that helped produce an obscure 2006 film that depicts U.S. soldiers torturing Iraqi civilians?

And what about those who say nothing at all? For all the attention lavished on Geraldine Ferraro and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, my favorite associate is Charlie Black. You may not have heard of him, probably because he doesn't say anything controversial. He's one of the most powerful lobbyists in Washington, with a roster of corporate and foreign-government clients. He merely sits on McCain's Straight Talk Express bus - he's one of the top players in the entourage - and does his day job, discreetly dialing his clients and working the kind of inside deals that one day may intersect with McCain's decisions as president. Assuming we would ever find out.

We badly need some judgment criteria, so let's try:

How close are the candidate and the proxy, personally or politically? For how long?

Did the candidate solicit the proxy's support? Is the proxy an active player in the campaign and likely to serve in the candidate's administration? In what kind of role?

Did the proxy say something crazy, racist, sexist, slanderous or un-American? Or do something criminal? Did he or she say or do it once, or frequently?

Did he or she say or do anything that undercuts the candidate's image or agenda?

Did the candidate respond appropriately, by rejecting, denouncing, distancing or defending?

Now we can make a few calls, the easy ones. Mitt Romney did well last year when he dumped aide Jay Garrity, after Garrity was caught impersonating a police officer. He dumped one of his cochairs, Larry Craig, after Craig sat with his wide stance in that airport. McCain enlisted Republican Rep. Rick Renzi as a cochair, but now that Renzi has been indicted on embezzlement charges, he is no longer on the team (although McCain initially insisted that Renzi's indictment "doesn't matter").

Beyond that, it gets murky. McCain actively wooed John Hagee, the evangelical pastor who has called the Catholic Church "the great whore," and McCain has refused to reject, distance or denounce. Yet McCain has paid no price in the polls.

Which naturally brings us to Obama-Wright. According to my criteria, that rates as a serious proxy scandal. Obama is tight with the guy, sat in his church for 20 years and gave $27,500 in deductible donations. And yet, according to the newly released NBC-Wall Street Journal poll, Obama has largely weathered the storm. He narrowly leads McCain in a November matchup, while Clinton narrowly trails - because Obama is still more popular than Clinton among independent voters.

In other words, most people probably put the proxy factor in proper perspective. They generally don't hold candidates accountable for the behavior of friends. Successful politicians, by definition, create vast networks of friends, supporters, surrogates and donors; some of them are bound to embarrass. Those who do, more often than not, will fade from memory. In the end, it is the candidates' own track records, in word and deed, that matter most.

By Dick Polman, The Philadelphia Inquirer, March 30, 2008

is the Sidney and Ruth Lapidus professor of history at Princeton University

Quietly, the storm over the hateful views expressed by Sen. Barack Obama's pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, has blown away the most insidious myth of the Democratic primary campaign. Obama and his surrogates have charged that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has deliberately and cleverly played the race card in order to label Obama the "black" candidate.

Having injected racial posturing into the contest, Obama's "post-racial" campaign finally seems to be all about race and sensational charges about white racism. But the mean-spirited strategy started even before the primaries began, when Obama's operatives began playing the race card - and blamed Hillary Clinton.

Had she truly conspired to inflame racial animosities in January and February, her campaign would have brought up the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and his incendiary sermons. But the Clinton campaign did not. And when the Wright stories and videos finally did break through in the mass media, they came not from Clinton's supporters but from Fox News Network.

Although Wright had until recently been obscure to the American public, political insiders and reporters have long known about him. On March 6, 2007, the New York Times reported that Obama had disinvited Wright from speaking at his announcement because, as Wright said Obama told him, "You can get kind of rough in the sermons." By then, conservative commentators had widely denounced Wright. His performances in the pulpit were easily accessible on DVD, direct from his church. But Clinton, despite her travails, elected to remain silent.

Instead, she had to fight back against a deliberately contrived strategy to make her and her husband look like race-baiters. Obama's supporters and operatives, including his chief campaign strategist David Axelrod, seized on accurate and historically noncontroversial statements and supplied a supposedly covert racist subtext that they then claimed the calculating Clinton campaign had inserted.

In December, Bill Shaheen, a Clinton campaign co-chair in New Hampshire, wondered aloud whether Obama's admitted youthful abuse of cocaine might hurt him in the general election. Obama's strategists insisted that Shaheen's mere mention of cocaine was suggestive and inappropriate - even though the scourge of cocaine abuse has long cut across both racial and class lines. Pro-Obama press commentators, including New York Times columnist Frank Rich, then whipped the story into a full racial subtext, charging that the Clintons had, in Rich's words, "ghettoized" Obama "into a cocaine user."

The Obama campaign and its supporters pressed this strategy after Clinton's unexpected win in New Hampshire. Pundits partial to Obama, including Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post and John Nichols of the Nation, instantly mused that their candidate lost because of supposedly bigoted New Hampshire whites who had lied to pre-primary pollsters - an easily disproven falsehood that nevertheless gained currency in the media.

Next morning, Obama's national co-chair, Jesse Jackson Jr., cast false and vicious aspersions about Hillary Clinton's famous emotional moment in New Hampshire as a measure of her deep racial insensitivity. "Her appearance brought her to tears," said Jackson, "not Hurricane Katrina."

Obama's backers, including members of his official campaign staff, then played what might be called "the race-baiter card." Hillary Clinton, in crediting both Lyndon Johnson as well as the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. for the Civil Rights Act in 1964, had supposedly denigrated King, and by extension Obama. Allegedly, Bill Clinton had dismissed Obama's victory in South Carolina by comparing it to those of the Rev. Jesse Jackson in the 1980s. (In fact, their electoral totals were comparable - and in the interview at issue, Clinton complimented Obama on his performance "everywhere" - a line the media usually omitted.)

Thereafter, Obama's high command billowed further race-baiter allegations into the media. Pointing to the notoriously right-wing Drudge Report, Obama's campaign manager David Plouffe accused the Clinton campaign of deliberately leaking a supposedly racist photograph of Obama in African garb, which actually originated on still another right-wing Web site. Finally, David Axelrod trumpeted Geraldine Ferraro's awkward remarks in an obscure California newspaper as part of the Clinton campaign's "insidious pattern" of divisiveness.

One pro-Obama television pundit, Keith Olbermann of MSNBC, fulminated that the Clinton campaign had descended into the vocabulary of David Duke, former grand dragon of the Ku Klux Klan.

(In his Philadelphia speech on race, Obama pressed the attack by three times likening Ferraro to Rev. Wright.)

Since the Philadelphia speech, the candidate and his surrogates have sounded tone-deaf on the subject of race. On March 20, Obama described his Kansas grandmother to a Philadelphia radio interviewer as "a typical white person." The same day, Sen. John Kerry said that Obama would help U.S. relations with Muslim nations "because he's a black man." Another Obama supporter, Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri, called him the first black leader "to come to the American people not as a victim but as a leader." Her history excluded and conceivably denigrated countless black leaders, from Frederick Douglass to Rep. John Lewis. Obama remained silent, refusing to take Kerry and McCaskill to task for their racially charged remarks.

Neither candidate can win sufficient elected delegates in the remaining primaries to secure the nomination, and so the battle has moved to winning over the superdelegates. Obama's bogus "race-baiter" strategy is one of the main reasons he has come this far, and it is affecting the process now. But by deliberately inflaming the most destructive passions in American politics, the strategy has badly divided and confused Democrats, at least for the moment. And having done so, it may well doom the Democrats in the general election.

By Sean Wilentz, The Philadelphia Inquirer, March 30, 2008

When he came to the Senate, his party was in the minority. Then he started his campaign.

Why won't Hillary leave the race? Does she know something we don't? The twin question was put directly to the candidate during a Wednesday conference call with a group of African-American newspaper columnists.

"I know it's very close," said Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton. "It's very close in the popular vote. It's very close in the delegate count, and we have 10 more contests." Sen. Barack Obama leads Clinton by some 700,000 votes, and his margin in the delegate count, while not conclusive, is all but insurmountable.

"Neither one of us can get to the number of delegates needed unless something totally unforeseen happens between now and the convention," she told the Trotter Group members on the line. While hoping for the "unforeseen" to break her way, Clinton has been pressing for a revote in Michigan and Florida. She got tallies in both states that had been barred from the primary for violating agreed-upon Democratic Party rules. "I've not given up."

This public strategy also has Clinton banking on a Pennsylvania victory planned, from day one, as but another gem in the big-states crown designed to get her the nomination. En route to this presumed coronation, however, the Clinton campaign was caught totally by surprise. Obama's shock-and-awe victories in the smaller states' primaries and caucuses have demoralized Clinton's large standing army once so certain of victory by conventional means.

The tactics resorted to indirectly by Clinton are beginning to resemble the politics of the backroom and the dark alley.

Ignoring those key areas where she trails, surrogates point to the blue sky where Clinton is imagined to fare better, possibly. One supporter in the Senate, for example, suggested that instead of primary votes, states won and pledged delegates, the Democratic Party should base its selection on the number of electoral votes states would cast in the November election. Though designed to favor Clinton, even this desperate calculation might not throw it her way since polls in at least one big state, California, have re-tilted toward Obama.

Still, suggestions from the Clinton camp to override the rules in Florida and Michigan and the democratic process nationwide have some party loyalists worried. The boldest assault came last week from those who've contributed much and for whom much is expected.

Some 20 major Clinton campaign contributors took aim at House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The Democratic leader has been pushing the notion that preselected superdelegates support the majority will of the voters represented by pledged delegates. The money bags blasted Pelosi's statement on ABC News that supers were "obligated to support the candidate who leads in the pledged delegates count as of June 3 whether that lead be by 500 or 2."

This projected, majority-vote scenario seems to favor Obama, and thus it earned the scorn of Clinton's contributors. "This is an untenable position," their letter to Pelosi stated, "that runs counter to the party's intent in establishing superdelegates in 1984." In this topsy-turvy Orwellian year, the party, according to these "major enthusiastic supporters," sought to achieve democratic ends by nondemocratic means.

While supporting the principle, Clinton has backed away from the threatening tone of her bankrollers. Besides wielding party etiquette, their letter swung the sickle of coercion. "We have been strong supporters of the , they warned darkly. "We therefore urge you to clarify your position on superdelegates."

Such bare knuckles give the lie to the usual claim lobbyists and fat-cat bankrollers expect nothing in return.

Such major contributors have given the lion's share to Clinton's $100-million-plus campaign chest. They clearly expect a return on their investment and seem not to be deterred by the majority of party voters. Should their candidate gain the White House, these heavy contributors would expect federal contracts, cabinet posts, ambassadorships, agency appointments, judgeships and access that would reap them billions in taxpayer dollars.

Should their candidate fail to win the top prize, they would insist upon negotiating for their spoils from the runner-up position.

Is this the real reason Clinton so divisively fights on? I dunno.

By Les Payne, Newsday, March 30, 2008

PHILADELPHIA -- An editor poked me with a stick the other day; he wanted me to write about Barack Obama's speech in Philadelphia. As a result, I spent three hours that night flopping around in bed like a fish on a dock.

It's not that I had ignored the speech. How could I, seeing how everywhere I looked in the newsroom, people were watching? But I was working on something else -- a piece about the unmeritorious way that Pennsylvania picks its judges.

Every time I started talking about judicial elections and the lack of minority representation, the conversation worked back to Obama's speech, in which he condemned the offensive remarks of his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., and then went on with naked honesty to say things about how blacks and whites see America.

"The most honest political speech I have ever heard," two people told me that day. Same exact words.

I went to sleep convinced that Obama had taken the third rail of American politics -- race -- and turned it into a balance beam from which he pronounced the most difficult truths.

And about 1 a.m., I woke up thinking that we are not ready for the truth. I don't think we're ready for Obama. I thought we were. I was naive.

When my wife and I would talk about the Democratic candidates for president, I kept telling her that her Hillary was unelectable. Hillary is just what the opposition wants. No one would energize the base like another Clinton to hate, and we'd be caught rehashing the past when the need to fix the present is so urgent.

Obama is the unelectable one, my wife, the reconstructed Southerner, would reply. Despite lip service, she argued, in the privacy of the voting booth too many white people will not pull for a person of color.

A few months later, I'm coming around to my wife's position.

After Obama's speech, I went blog hunting, and the headline on the Politico site left me dismayed: "GOP sees Rev. Wright as path to victory." They look at Obama. They see his angry pastor.

"It was a speech written to mau-mau the New York Times'editorial board, the network production people and the media into submission," said GOP consultant Rick Wilson, who was behind the 2002 ad that tied former Sen. Max Cleland, a Vietnam War-wounded Democrat from Georgia, to Osama bin Laden. "Beautifully calibrated but deeply dishonest." It didn't take long to spin poetry.

Hate was all around. It was in the words of the Clinton volunteer at a Philadelphia phone bank, who told a Los Angeles Times reporter that he was voting for Hillary because "I love the Lord and I don't want a person named Al-Barack Hussein Obama to be our next president."

In the work of an aide to John McCain, who was suspended for spreading a race-baiting YouTube video that mashes Obama's words with those of Wright, Malcolm X and the Public Enemy song Fight the Power.

And in a posting on the BooMan Tribune, a liberal Philadelphia-based blog. The writer, an Obama supporter, had scored a seat at the National Constitution Center for Tuesday's speech and afterward was walking through the Gallery when he sat down and searched for a wireless signal for his computer.

"An elderly white woman sat down next to me and was silent for a little while. Then she said, 'That's where my tax dollars go.'

"I looked up at her, not knowing what she was referring to, and asked, 'Excuse me?'

"She nodded at a group of young early-20s black people (some with a baby carriage) walking by, and repeated herself. The people she was referring to were nicely dressed and appeared to be enjoying themselves as they window-shopped in the mall. I think I just mumbled something like 'Mmmn' and returned my attention to my laptop. Then the elderly woman said, 'Do you know that Hillary is coming here today?'

"I nodded, 'Yes. I just came from seeing Obama.'

"She frowned at this news and then said, 'I'm very excited to see Hillary. She knows how to deal with (she swept her hand around to indicate the mall crowd) this.'"

Part of me wonders if this anecdote was a bit of bloggy stagecraft to advance the Obama cause. But you don't have to make up something like this. It can be found everywhere.

It reminded me of what I heard covering Europe and the Middle East from 2000 to 2003. The Kosovars blaming the Serbs. The Serbs blaming the Americans. The Palestinians blaming the Jews, the Jews blaming the Palestinians. Each nation intoxicated by its own victimhood. Drying out is difficult when it feels so right to have been wronged. You don't have to go about the hard work of moving forward that Obama talked about in Philadelphia.

I listened again to the Obama speech one morning as I walked the dog. As he explained the resentments harbored by both black people and white people -- the two separate realities -- I remembered the last time I said something to set off a minor racial incident at work. I was talking to a cherished colleague, who is black, and she was mourning the number of minorities who lost their jobs at the paper during last year's layoffs because they were among the most recent hires.

At least it will be easier for them to get jobs, I said. I was trying to say something helpful. I wound up saying something hurtful.

What made me think it would be easier? she asked. She didn't make eye contact with me for days. I insisted to myself that I was right. Wait a year, and then we'll see.

In fact, our conflict has little to do with numbers and everything to do with perception. Each convinced we were right, each a little buzzed on our victimhood.

At least we're starting to talk about this.

Presumptive GOP nominee breezes in and out of his stop in Vegas

Sen. John McCain came to town Friday, a reminder to Democrats that their plan to take the White House via the intermountain West may now be in doubt.

Nevada and other states in the region, including Colorado and New Mexico, are seen as seen as crucial battlegrounds whether the Democratic nominee is Illinois Sen. Barack Obama or New York Sen. Hillary Clinton.

Republicans have saved themselves by nominating a westerner, said Tom Schaller, a political scientist who recently wrote a book arguing Democrats should cede the south and pursue a western strategy to match their strength on the coasts and the upper Midwest. "Of the Republicans, he was their best bet," Schaller said.

McCain, who has represented Arizona in Congress and the Senate since the 1980s, will win his home state and likely take the solidly Republican states of Utah, Idaho, Montana and Wyoming.

Holding the whole region, as McCain adviser Charlie Black recently predicted, is an exaggeration, Schaller said. Still, the affable former Navy fighter pilot, who was a POW and has broad crossover appeal with independents and Democrats, will be formidable in the West. This is especially so as Obama and Clinton continue to bang away on each other, unable to turn their full attention to McCain.

But McCain's quick Friday visit to Las Vegas also showed his vulnerabilities. He finished third in the Republican contests here in January.

McCain is badly underfunded compared with his Democratic rivals, who have raised $360 million to McCain's $66 million, though he tried to rectify that with a fundraiser Friday at national Republicans' favorite Las Vegas stopover, the Venetian, whose owner Sheldon Adelson is one of the most generous conservative donors in the country.

McCain is also facing a difficult issue environment. In a recent speech on the mortgage crisis, he warned of government doing too much and said his administration would take a laissez-faire approach, not the best message for the many voters feeling economically insecure.

During a brief news conference after the fundraiser, McCain encouraged the national press corps traveling with him to contribute to the struggling local economy. (The Sun heard a recording of his comments; the news conference ended before its scheduled beginning, not atypical for the unpredictable McCain.)

McCain's typically good-humored barb was his only comment on the local economy. Obama and Clinton, by contrast, have made a point to talk about the local economy when in Nevada, and each has detailed, robust plans to deal with the mortgage mess.

McCain's strength is national security and his staunch and faithful support for America's effort in Iraq. That position isn't exactly convenient at the moment, however, as rival Shiite groups do battle in Baghdad and the southern city of Basra. There are reports of Iraqi government forces joining the rival faction. Saboteurs badly damaged the country's second largest oil pipeline.

McCain said the Iraqi government's attempt to stamp out its Shiite rival and its radical cleric Muqtada al Sadr, is a "sign of strength" of the Maliki government. He said he respects the decision and hopes the Iraqi government is successful.

The new fighting, coming after months of reduced violence credited in part to America's increased military presence, seemed to illustrate the lack of political progress in Iraq and the complexity of the ethnic and sectarian conflict. By grounding his candidacy on such a fragile situation, McCain could face these difficult moments from now until November.

Finally, McCain is not with Nevadans on some local issues. He said he followed the advice of respected college basketball coaches when he offered legislation banning college sports betting. As he noted, the legislation isn't going anywhere, but his proposal may still bother some Nevadans given the effect it would have on the local economy.

McCain has also long favored Yucca Mountain, though he's recently said he would abide by what scientists say is safe and effective. The time for delaying a solution, however, is finished, he said.

These local vulnerabilities might leave McCain on the margins, as voters tend to vote on national issues and perceptions of character in presidential races.

Given these vulnerabilities, though, Schaller said the eventual Democratic nominee needs to take on McCain in the West, which could ease the pressure for a Democratic victory in Ohio in the race for 270 electoral votes.

Nevada, New Mexico and Colorado, which is the site of the Democratic National Convention in August, are worth 19 electoral votes, or just one shy of Ohio, and enough for victory.

By J. Patrick Coolican, Las Vegas Sun, March 30, 2008

Much has been made about how Sen. Barack Obama appears to have weathered nationally the storm over the controversy about the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. While Obama is in a statistical tie with Sen. Hillary Clinton in the latest Rasmussen daily tracking poll, Gallup has him up by eight points.

But Democrats worried that Jeremiah Wright will hurt Obama with "lunch-bucket" working class voters in bellweather states or that the party infighting will hurt their nominee have to be troubled by the latest Rasmussen poll in the Show-Me State.

For Obama, the results mirror a previous SurveyUSA poll and they show Claire McCaskill's going to have a hard time making good on her pledge to deliver Missouri for Obama. But Clinton supporters shouldn't crow just yet. Unlike last week's Survey USA poll, the numbers in Missouri aren't good for Clinton either although she does fare better than Obama.

Rasmussen finds Republican presumptive nominee John McCain has opened up a significant lead over both Obama and Clinton in Missouri and now places the Show-Me State in the "leans Republican" column. (And as Missouri goes, so goes the contest).

McCain leads Obama 53 percent to 38 percent, according to results from the poll conducted Monday. That's one percentage point lower for Obama than in the Survey USA poll conducted in the height of the Wright controversy.

Clinton does better than Obama but still below where she was in the Survey USA poll, where she was in a statistical dead heat. Now it's McCain with 50 percent and Clinton with 41 percent.

McCain does well with men against both Democratic candidates but unlike Obama, Clinton has a lead among women against McCain.

But there is some good news for Democrats. Rasmussen also shows Jay Nixon ahead of both leading Republican challengers and says Missouri appears likely to go Democratic in November for governor.

By DeAnn Smith, Kansas City Star, March 28, 2008

Chelsea Clinton displays family's gift for politics at NCC-Bethlehem

BETHLEHEM - Chelsea Clinton was both self-effacing and wonky in stumping for the presidential candidacy of her mother, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., at Northampton Community College's Bethlehem campus Friday afternoon.

Clinton, 28, did not deliver a speech, but fielded student questions for more than an hour on the stage of a packed lounge in the student center.

"We need a president who understands that we need global solutions to global problems like global warming," she said in response to a question about the environment. Clinton detailed aspects of her mother's legislative record and platform, including levying a "windfall tax" on the profits of oil companies, pushing for clean coal technologies, energy-efficient management of federal buildings and fuel-efficient cars.

Clinton also described in-depth her mother's plans to make higher education more affordable, to fix the economy and help struggling homeowners, including a 90-day freeze on foreclosures.

Health care also arose frequently. "Universal health care is not a rhetorical device for my mom," she said.

She also touched on international relations and the war in Iraq, reiterating her mother's pledge to begin drawing down military personnel in 60 days in order to push the Iraqis to reconcile politically. "There's certainly no American military solution to these questions," she said of the sectarian strife there.

It was at least the 87th college at which Clinton had campaigned in more than two dozen states, she said. Though her voice was raspy, she was quick on her feet. In the midst of a question on the wage gap between men and women - during which she described the different hourly earnings across races - static from a television microphone interrupted her. "That sounded like God agrees with me," she said.

Recent campaign news also was on the mind of some students. The first student question raised concern about candidates who campaign on the basis of experience, but who are not candid about what that experience truly comprises.

Recent attention on the campaign trail has swirled around Sen. Clinton's statements that she and her daughter dodged sniper fire upon arriving in Bosnia, when Hillary Clinton was first lady. Television footage revealed the visit to be more placid, and Sen. Clinton later described it as a misstatement attributable to fatigue.

"How do we find someone we can trust?" the student asked.

"I think that's a valid question," Chelsea Clinton answered, but quickly shifted attention to her mother's dedication to the causes in which she believes. "What she has been passionately committed to she's been passionately committed to since longer than I've been alive," Clinton said.

Friday saw events reverberating on the campaign from elsewhere in the state and nationally. Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean took to the airwaves to call for a resolution to the increasingly bitter struggle between Sen. Clinton and her rival for the Democratic nomination, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill.

"You do not want to demoralize the base of the Democratic Party by having the Democrats attack each other," Dean told The Associated Press.

Meanwhile, Sen. Robert Casey, D-Pa., endorsed Obama on Friday, while another senator, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, suggested Sen. Clinton should quit the race.

Though Sen. Clinton is favored to win the Keystone State, Obama leads her in both the popular vote and, by 1,623 to 1,499, in the number of delegates nationwide.

A student started to ask Clinton how her mother would sway superdelegates to vote for her. "You're making a lot of assumptions about how people are going to vote in Pennsylvania, Indiana, Kentucky, Oregon, Puerto Rico and Guam," Clinton answered, to applause. Each of those states and territories has yet to vote. "I don't take anything for granted."

One member of the audience asked Clinton if she had plans for her own political future. "Oh gosh," she said. "My political ambition stretches as far as getting my mom elected president."

What happened to the Democratic Party?

I'm a lifelong Democrat. I've volunteered in countless Democratic campaigns. I've managed campaigns for Democrats. I was a Democratic candidate for statewide
office in California. For three years, I was Chair of the California Democratic Party. But I don't recognize the Democratic Party today.

The party I knew loved a good fight, loved debating the issues, recognized the value of a high-profile, hard-fought primary battle - and believed in giving everyone a fair shot. Today, the Democratic Party's turned into a bunch of weak-willed weenies.

What's going on? The party is blessed with two of the best candidates ever to run for president. The party's making history with the first African-American and the first woman having a serious shot at the presidency. In every state, the Democratic primary is attracting record numbers of new voters and building a huge, new pool of Democrats that will benefit all Democratic candidates in November. And how do party leaders respond? By trying to shut down the primary. This is insane!

Bill Richardson endorses Barack Obama. Good for him. But he can't stop there. He calls on Hillary Clinton to get out of the race. Patrick Leahy and Chris Dodd endorse Obama. Good for them, too. But, same thing. Both feel somehow compelled to add that Clinton should quit. Why? There is no more rationale for Clinton to drop out of the race than there is for Obama to drop out of the race.

True, Clinton hasn't locked up the nomination yet. But neither has Obama. True, even if she wins every delegate in every remaining primary, Clinton can not reach the magic 2024 delegates necessary to secure the nomination. But neither can Obama. True, Obama leads in delegates, the number of states won, and popular vote. But Clinton leads in electoral votes.

Plus, and here's the most important point: It's not over yet. Until it is, we can't be sure of the outcome. And it would be a big mistake to end it prematurely. There's been many a boxing match where one fighter won 14 rounds, only to get knocked out in the 15th.

All these Obama supporters calling on Clinton to drop out aren't helping their candidate, either. They make Obama look like he's afraid of a fight. And they themselves look like a stereotypical bunch of men telling a woman she can't hack it in politics, so she might as well get back in the kitchen.

No, Hillary Clinton should not quit this race. And neither should Barack Obama. They're both great candidates. Either one of them will make a great president. So let the primaries continue and let the voters decide. If Obama ends up the nominee, I'll do handstands on the White House lawn. But only if he wins it, fair and square.

By Bill Press, The Huffington Post, March 29, 2008

Neither Clinton nor Obama can win enough delegates before the convention

Resting up after a bruising primary battle, Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama left Texas in their rearview mirrors Wednesday and headed home to plan for three more months of political combat.

But even as the candidates tried to decipher the daunting math required to lock up the closest Democratic presidential race in a half-century, their surrogates squabbled over which candidate actually won the most delegates in Texas.

The Lone Star State's complicated delegate-selection methods gave both campaigns a plausible reason to claim victory. In final, unofficial results, Clinton won the popular vote, 51 percent to 48 percent. But Obama backers boasted that the Illinois senator had won a majority of the state's pledged delegates - a result of his ability to mobilize supporters in the evening caucuses, which account for about one-third of the delegates selected Tuesday.

"It could be our Texas version of 'Dewey Defeats Truman,' " said Waco Rep. Chet Edwards, an Obama supporter, referring to the infamous Chicago Tribune headline that misstated the 1948 election results. "After all the confetti and uncorked champagne bottles, it could turn out that Obama won Texas."

Projections released Wednesday afternoon by the Texas Democratic Party based on still-incomplete caucus returns indicated that Obama would receive 98 delegates elected Tuesday to Clinton's 95.

Clinton led Obama in delegates selected as a result of primary voting, 65 to 61, while Obama appears headed for a 37-to-30 edge among delegates selected through the caucuses.

Including elected officials and party leaders with automatic "superdelegate" status, the two candidates are dead even at 107 Texas delegates, with 14 superdelegates still uncommitted.

But whichever campaign ends up with Texas bragging rights, Clinton's narrow 12-delegate edge in Tuesday's contests in Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island and Vermont has done little to change the intricate delegate dynamics of 2008.

Bottom line: With just 600 delegates up for grabs and front-runner Obama 658 short of the 2,025 needed for victory, it is mathematically impossible for either candidate to clinch the nomination before the process is scheduled to end with Puerto Rico's June 7 caucuses.

Obama remains in the overall delegate lead, 1,567 to 1,462, according to Associated Press estimates.

With neither candidate able to wrap up the nomination during the primary season, Clinton and Obama must try to seal the deal by courting the 350 still-uncommitted superdelegates, including 14 from Texas. These party insiders get invitations to the Democratic National Convention in Denver based on their elected positions or leadership role in the party.

"The key to the nomination is the superdelegates," said University of Houston government professor Christine LeVeaux-Haley. "The superdelegates seemed to lean to Clinton before Super Tuesday. With her now proving that she is a viable candidate - again - the superdelegates who have been leaning toward Clinton will stick with her."

Going after superdelegates

To influence any undecided superdelegates, Clinton and Obama will try to build a sense of momentum over the next three months. Their goal is to be the candidate with the most elected delegates - something that is becoming increasingly difficult for Clinton to do. The former first lady would need to win more than 60 percent of the remaining primary election delegates to catch up with Obama.

"We are vigorously talking to the uncommitted automatic delegates," Clinton adviser Harold Ickes told reporters. "The Obama campaign is doing the same thing."

Clinton's aim in the next two months is to convince currently uncommitted superdelegates that she is the Democrat most likely to defeat Arizona Sen. John McCain in swing states such as Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida.

But Obama, who has won far more states and total votes than Clinton, counters by citing polls indicating that he runs stronger than Clinton against McCain. He also tells superdelegates that it is their moral obligation to back the choice of most rank-and-file Democrats.

"I cannot imagine party insiders, behind closed doors, overturning the votes of millions of Democrats," said Edwards.

Florida, Michigan re-votes?

A potential wild card is the continuing battle inside the Democratic National Committee over the seating of delegates from Florida and Michigan, two states whose convention votes have been taken away because they scheduled January primaries in violation of party rules.

But governors of both states are talking about arranging for a June re-vote if private funding can be arranged to cover the costs. For very different reasons, the idea unites Clinton and GOP leaders.

Republicans see these "do-overs" as an opportunity to drain Democratic resources and create additional tension between the two foes. Clinton's strategists eye an opportunity to erase Obama's edge.

"It could turn into the most expensive primary contest in the history of the world," said Harris County Democratic Chairman Gerald Birnberg.

In the meantime, Birnberg has some advice for the exhausted and edgy rivals: "Both of the candidates need to take about three or four days off and chill."

That's not likely to happen. Obama wants to regain the upper hand with wins in Wyoming on Saturday, where just 12 delegates are at stake, and Mississippi next Tuesday, when voters pick 33 more. With just 10 states left to weigh in, Obama hopes to avoid a catastrophic defeat and end the primary season in June with a significant lead in elected delegates.

Pennsylvania is key

Clinton is hoping for a split in the coming week's contests and then a resounding win April 22 in Pennsylvania, the last big contest currently on the primary calendar, with 158 delegates up for grabs.

It's a state that should be natural Clinton territory, with its large number of struggling manufacturing workers, high proportion of senior citizens and large number of blue-collar Catholic voters - all Clinton constituencies. The Democrat-only primary also excludes independent voters who have strongly supported Obama in other states.

And to those who think that Texas' involvement in the selection process is over, consider this: The Texas state Democratic convention falls on the same day as the Puerto Rico primary, so Texas could still come back into play as Clinton and Obama struggle to claim every single vote tied to the still-unsettled Tuesday caucuses.

By RICHARD S. DUNHAM, Houston Chronicle, March 5, 2008

COLUMBUS, Ohio (CNN) -- Campaigns are anthropomorphic, complete with a pulse and mood swings. A part of the Clinton campaign was a walking, talking basket case Tuesday afternoon.

As voters flocked to the polls in huge numbers, a tiny band of Clintonites scrambled to put together an election night headquarters (on a site selected at the last minute) in Columbus, Ohio.

The do-or-die status of the campaign and the magnitude of its election night project was taking a toll. The staff was tense and cantankerous.

No one knew if they had come for a death watch or a resurrection.

Against the din of metal bleachers being erected to hold the crowd that would be a backdrop to the candidate, staffers yelled at cameramen about electricity, positioning, etc.

The weather was awful, blowing wind, constant rain and cold. Everyone walked into the space wet and miserable.

More than 20 satellite trucks lined the streets around the site, all of them running cable for hundreds of yards into the building and onto the press platform into the cameras.

A staffer walked through, yelling that one of the trucks was on the wrong side of the building and about to be towed.

The mood swing began around 6 p.m. Clinton supporter and Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland arrived early and talked often. His optimistic outlook was far more confident than the usual pre-vote swagger.

Rob Reiner (forever known as "Meathead" from "All In The Family") stood quietly but seemed happy in the corner.

Clinton Campaign chairman (and fundraiser) Terry McAuliffe, normally ebullient, was flying so high he would not need a plane to take him home.

"Hey, Candy," he bellowed from across the room. And then no words, just a thumbs up and a grin.

He knew.

E-mail from various people inside the Clinton campaign turned jocular, upbeat, chatty.

They knew.

When the traveling press corps arrived, Clinton aides on board literally looked 10 years younger than the week before when the stumped through Ohio and Texas wondering if they would soon need a new job.

They knew.

By the time the results began to come in, the room was full. Some of the signs read "Meet Me In Ohio" as Clinton so famously said while blasting Barack Obama the week before about a leaflet she said distorted her views.

A live, loud band kept the crowd rockin'. The mood sank temporarily when the first race was called. Vermont for Obama.

Then the polls closed in Ohio. On a giant screen hanging over the crowd, CNN reported the exit polls, then the actual numbers.

And Texas began to come in. They cheered each upward tick as Clinton's numbers in Texas went from 9 percent down to 1 percent up.

They knew. Party time.

Sometime around 11 p.m., Clinton stepped onto the stage to her signature music.

The lighting was perfect. The metal bleachers behind her were full. The crowd went crazy. The confetti blasted out over the room from a balcony above. There was great "hang time" as the tiny bits of paper floated down over the candidate and into the crowd, eventually piling up to four and five inches in some spots.

Picture-perfect 24 hours after they selected the site for her election night, Clinton's advance team stood to the sides of the room and watched her.

And they knew.

By Candy Crowley, CNN, March 5, 2008

Vital state can expect a marathon of rallies, town-hall meetings, TV advertising and get-out-the vote efforts from Democrats

HARRISBURG, PA. - Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama: Welcome to Pennsylvania, a sprawling state with two large cities and a farm region larger than Massachusetts.

Its 12.4 million diverse residents like the kind of face-to-face interaction with candidates more often seen in small caucus states such as Iowa, and they're likely to get just that during the seven weeks until they vote in a primary to allocate 158 delegates to the Democratic national convention.

Thanks to Clinton's wins in Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island on Tuesday, Pennsylvania has gone from political afterthought to must-win state for the Democratic presidential contenders.

April 22 primary

With just two much smaller contests between now and the state's April 22 primary - in Wyoming and Mississippi - Pennsylvania is in for a marathon of rallies, town-hall meetings, television ads and high stakes get-out-the-vote efforts.

"We're going to get every bit, if not more, than the voters in Iowa and New Hampshire got," boasted Philadelphia lawyer Mark Aronchick, a national fundraiser for Clinton's campaign. Mark Alderman, a national fundraiser for Obama, agreed that Pennsylvania is going to "look more like the Iowa campaign than anything since Iowa."

Only Democrats can vote

One additional wrinkle in Pennsylvania: Only Democrats can vote in the Democratic primary; independents, who have strongly supported Obama in other states, are barred.

But the campaigns have until March 24 to persuade the state's 984,000 registered voters who are not members of either major party - plus any wavering Republicans - to sign up as Democrats so they can vote in the primary.

The nation's sixth most populous state, Pennsylvania bears many similarities to Ohio, where Clinton defeated Obama handily.

Two major metropolises - Philadelphia in the southeast and Pittsburgh in the southwest - bookend a vast rural region with 58,000 farms on 7.7 million acres - an area larger than Massachusetts.

It's a Rust Belt state largely abandoned by the once-mighty steel, coal and railroad industries. Today, its biggest employers are the federal government, the state government and Wal-Mart, in that order.

Only 10 percent of Pennsylvanians are between age 18 and 24, a group that Obama has captured in other states.

Political observers expect Obama will do well in Philadelphia, the state's Democratic hub, where more than 40 percent of the residents are black, and among the younger, better educated voters in the city's suburbs. Clinton, they say, may do better among more conservative, working-class Democrats in northeastern and southwestern Pennsylvania.

Polls show Clinton lead

The state has a slim track record of electing women and blacks to public office - relevant in a year when Democrats likely will have either the first female or first black nominee for president. Women comprise just 13 percent of the state legislature, in contrast to the national average of 23 percent. Blacks held 8 percent of the seats, equal to the national average.

Of the state's 29 superdelegates - the officeholders and party leaders not bound by the primary vote - 13 have endorsed Clinton while four back Obama.

Most polls show Clinton leading in the state, but the margin has shrunk in recent weeks. A Quinnipiac University poll released last week showed Clinton with 49 percent of the vote and Obama with 43 percent.

Clinton has the backing of Gov. Ed Rendell and Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter, one of the state's prominent black leaders.

The last time Pennsylvania's primary made a difference was in 1976, when former Georgia Gov. Jimmy Carter's victory cleared the way for him to win the nomination and, in turn, the presidency.

By PETER JACKSON, Associated Press, March 5, 2008

Under-30 Set is Not Convinced that Gender - or Race - Matter

Female baby boomers across the country have pinned decades of hope on Sen. Hillary Clinton's presidential candidacy, and last night their voices roared as she scored her first primary victories after 12 straight losses, with pivotal wins in Texas and Ohio.

But Clinton still trails in the delegate count and faces a tough struggle to gain the Democratic nomination. It's not unlike the struggle many old-school feminists have faced this year in weighing the role of gender in the voting booth.

Nancy Pierce, a 56-year-old school principal, says she's waited her whole life for a woman president. As the 2008 primary season dawned she looked forward to casting a historic vote.

As a feminist she was drawn to Clinton, but like Caroline Kennedy, Pierce was swayed by her children's passion for the youth and energy of Sen. Barack Obama.

She convinced herself to keep an open mind.

When a passionate young canvasser trudged through the snow to Pierce's rural New Hampshire doorstep in January, urging her to vote for Obama, Pierce was impressed.

"We live on a country road with three houses in five miles and she arrived on foot," said Pierce, who is director of the Contoocook School. "Her emotion was so powerful that when she left, I cried."

After a lifetime of fighting for women's causes, Pierce decided to follow her children's lead and back the charismatic Illinois senator. She even put an Obama sticker on her car.

But when Clinton slipped in the polls and had her teary moment in New Hampshire, Pierce wavered. "Hillary was stripped down to a real person, and I didn't know what I would do when I stepped into the voting booth."

No one was more surprised than Pierce when she voted for Clinton instead of Obama.

"It's almost as if I wanted to reach out to the next generation, but what about my own commitment over the years?" Pierce told ABCNEWS.com. "As mothers, we want something for our children, but I wanted this for myself."

The last-minute decison change typified this year's Democratic race. In Tuesday's primaries, Clinton won over voters who made up their minds in the final few days by 18 points in Ohio and 23 in Texas.

In addition to the late deciders, Latinos, working-class voters and women helped Clinton push back against Obama's recent winning streak.

With months to go before the Democratic convention, Clinton has chipped away at the glass ceiling and inspired many women who were trailblazers in the early years of the women's movement. But many of their daughters, who have arguably been the beneficiaries of the old-school feminists' hard-earned progress, say gender is irrelevant — at least when it comes to voting.

Clinton does better than Obama among older women voters by about 2-1, according to ABC polls. An estimated 61 percent of women over 65 support her campaign. But in the under-30 age group, 53 percent of women prefer Obama.

In a historic political year when barriers of gender and race are being broken, women are still trying to figure out what the Clinton candidacy means to their own identity and the state of the feminist movement.

Women Lag Men in Politics, Industry

The National Organization for Women reports that women's participation in both government and industry still lags far behind their male counterparts. Only 16 percent of the members of Congress and 18 percent of U.S. governors are women. Only 16 percent of Fortune 500 CEOs are women, and women earn only 77 cents for every dollar earned by men.

"It's heartbreaking that it has taken so much time after Geraldine Ferraro to get back to a place where the public is willing to accept a woman," Pierce said.

Ferraro, now 72 and a New York City businesswoman, was hailed as a trailblazer for women when she became Walter Mondale's vice presidential running mate on the 1984 Democratic ticket.

Ferraro told ABCNEWS.com that sitting president Ronald Reagan's supporters "tried to destroy" the Democratic ticket by investigating her family's finances and personal life.

And sometimes women are the worst offenders, Ferraro said. Barbara Bush, wife of then-Vice President George H.W. Bush, publicly referred to Ferraro as something that "rhymes with rich."

"I was only in it for four months," Ferraro said. "I didn't do the campaign travel or participate in 20 debates or have to raise money. I was really an unknown element, and I said more than once that if, indeed, my name were Gerard, I would never have gotten [the flak]."

Clinton is "absolutely a trailblazer," she said. "Does anybody doubt for one minute that a woman can raise money or debate? No one has once questioned her experience or doing the job of president."

Sexism in the Press

Even with last night's wins, the Clinton campaign still faces challenges. Ferraro said reporters have been harder on Clinton than they were on her in 1984, and some coverage has been "vicious."

"The sexism in the press is driving me crazy," said Ferraro.

Ferraro, along with others, such as former Colorado Rep. Pat Schroeder, fought hard for anti-discrimination bills in Congress. But she believes that too often younger women forget their contribution.

During a recent National Public Radio interview, a female caller told Ferraro, "I am sick and tired of raising the gender card."

"That's the problem for a lot of women out there," Ferraro said. "We were forced to remove the barriers. We do well, and they actually resent people like Hillary and me."

Women Can Be Worst Critics

Clinton's presidential candidacy presents an interesting test case not only because of her gender, but because she entered the contest with widespread name recognition and a well-defined public image. That image, colored through the years by things as superficial as her shifting hairstyles and as personal as her marital woes, might make the odds against her eventual victory even steeper.

Often Clinton's biggest critics are other women, especially when it comes to what New York Times columnist Susan Dominus calls the "messy back story" of Bill Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky.

"I have had women say to me they would never support her because she didn't leave Bill, which leaves me shaking my head," said NOW President Kim Gandy. "How can you look at Chelsea and not think she did the right thing keeping her family together?"

"It was her decision, and none of us was in her shoes," Gandy said. "Can you imagine anyone saying, upon learning that Cindy McCain had strayed, 'I am not voting for John McCain because he stayed with her?'"

And not all of Clinton's resistance comes from younger women.

Cheryl Ross, 57, of Great Neck, N.Y., said she supports Obama because of his grass-roots approach to politics and his appeal to youth. Ross faults Clinton for the "fiasco" of her health care initiative during President Clinton's first term in office.

"She keeps citing her years of experience, but I don't count her years in the White House," said Ross. "I have experience in my husband's doctor's office, but you don't want me taking care of your patients!"

Not All Older Women Swayed by Gender

Karyn Conner, a 61-year-old human relations specialist at Genentech outside San Francisco, acknowledged the significance of a Clinton candidacy but argued that neither gender nor race should matter.

"I don't care if they are peppermint-striped," said Conner, who voted for Obama in the California primary. "If they can do the job, I vote for them.

"I didn't like her from the get-go, nor did I trust her," said Conner, who voted for President Bill Clinton twice. "Her early comments on baking chocolate chip cookies were demeaning to women who stayed at home. I also don't think she would do us any favors in the Middle East. She's too pushy, and I think you need someone who is more diplomatic."

Conner's comments reflect some of the criticism lobbed at Clinton. She has been charged with whining like a woman, but being too aggressive and ambitious like a man.

That, say some old-school feminists, is an example of the double standard being thrown at Clinton.

Does Race Trump Gender?

Feminist Robin Morgan, a co-founder of the Women's Media Center, recently blogged, "When a sexist idiot screamed 'Iron my shirt!' at Hillary Clinton, it was considered amusing; if a racist idiot shouted, 'Shine my shoes!' at Barack Obama, it would've inspired hours of airtime and pages of newsprint analyzing our national dishonor."

Latino voters in Texas largely went for Clinton last night. But not Mary Mendoza.

"I really struggled with who to vote for," said the 24-year-old. "Hillary's the first woman in history to get this far. I'm really glad I am alive to see this happen."

Mendoza said she is proud that a woman is running for president but not enough to cast a ballot for Clinton

"He's younger and innovative," said Mendoza, who voted absentee for Obama from Vermont, where she teaches English to migrant workers.

"Being Latino didn't have any bearing for me," she said. "Gender doesn't really matter, either. Like a lot of women my age, I don't feel limited by men."

Race and Ethnicity Important

Still, Mendoza said, Clinton is white, and many young people are more sensitive to issues of race and ethnicity.

"An African-American candidacy is also making history, and I feel really lucky to be alive to witness doors opening," Mendoza said. "Americans have come a really long way."

Kimberly Nelson, a 23-year-old African-American, said she is a little perplexed by the swell of support for Obama. She believes race and gender are less important than the actual qualifications of a candidate. "For some reason I can't connect to him," she said of Obama.

"I see a repeat of what happened in 2000," said Nelson, a New York insurance agent. "People were so fed up they went to the extremes and voted for Bush on the abortion issue. Look at the situation we are in now [in Iraq]. It has nothing to do with abortion."

She thinks voters look to Obama for change on social issues and presents a "black candidate who is eloquent," shattering the tired stereotypes of "men in prison."

But sex and race shouldn't be factors, said Nelson. "Just because Obama is black doesn't make him a better candidate, and being a woman doesn't make Hillary a better president," she said.

Also, as a young woman, Nelson said said she hadn't felt the sting of sexism. "Women feel competent in their abilities now."

For Nelson and other young female voters, the Clinton candidacy wasn't necessarily a referendum on women's rights. The Public Interest Research Group notes that gender does not play a significant role among young women.

"When we talk to young people on college campuses, they tell us they are voting because it is a historic election and there are huge issues at play and no clear king crowned," said Sujatha Jahagirdar, program director of PIRG's New Voter Project. "Their vote really matters."

But NOW says the political life is still tougher on women.

"There is no question women are examined more closely in politics than men, perhaps because of the expectation that they will be more perfect," said NOW's Gandy.

"They look at women CEOs and say, 'If a male doesn't do well, nobody ever says, 'We'll never have another male heading the company,'" she said. "But if a female doesn't do well, they brush their hands and say, 'We tried women and that doesn't work'"

Despite the inroads made in 2008, Gandy wonders how many other women "with a record as long and deep" as Clinton's will be on the horizon if she cannot carry the victories forward.

"For decades, women have had to be extraordinary because the hopes and aspirations of an entire gender are riding how well they do," she said. "Without a doubt Hillary has blazed a trail because she has come further than any woman in U.S. history. In some ways that is a tribute to the success of the women's rights movement."

Possible Michigan and Florida Revotes; Superdelegate Votes Could Change Democratic Race

Though some expected this race to be over by now, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., is saying she's "just getting started" after regaining momentum with clear wins in Ohio and Rhode Island, Tuesday, and a win of the popular vote in Texas.

But neither Clinton nor Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., reached the magic number of 2,024 delegates to secure their party's presidential nomination. As it stands now, ABC News' delegate count has Obama with 1,566 and Clinton with 1,457.

Twelve contests remain, with 611 pledged delegates up for grabs starting Saturday in Wyoming, followed by Mississippi, Pennsylvania, Guam, Indiana, North Carolina, West Virginia, Kentucky, Oregon, Montana, South Dakota and Puerto Rico.

Can a Clear Winner Emerge? Likely, No

Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean told "Good Morning America's" Robin Roberts today that he's "not worried." He said party leaders would not force a deal, but "let the voters vote."

"I think we may well have a clear-cut winner. The discussions I'm having with the party is not about fixing the contest, the discussion is how to keep information flowing so that people don't think the process is unfair, how we unify the party," Dean said.

Despite Dean's optimism, the math does not seem to add up.

Using the ABC Political Unit's delegate calculator, in the unlikely event that Clinton sweeps the 12 remaining contests with 55 percent of the vote, she will have 1,793 delegates and will still trail Obama, who will have 1,841 delegates.

If Obama sweeps the dozen contests with 55 percent of the vote, he will end up with 1,902 delegates and Clinton will take home 1,732.

He, too, will fall short of the magic number 2,024.

To secure the nomination before the convention, Obama would need to win 75 percent of the remaining pledged delegates and Clinton would need to win 93 percent of them. Neither outcome seems possible.

"It's going to come down to superdelegates," said Democratic strategist Steve McMahon.

Superdelegates are the roughly 800 party insiders and activists who can vote any way they want at the August convention.

But many Democratic officials worry that if party insiders choose the candidate with fewer elected delegates, that could cause an uproar, bringing back memories of the turbulent 1968 Chicago convention, which Dean wants to avoid at all costs.

"I suspect Howard Dean falls on his knees every night and prays 'dear God, please don't let us go to the Democratic convention without a nominee,'" said professor Jerry Polinard of the University of Texas-Pan American.

But Dean says the competition has benefited the party. "We have a great opportunity. Almost 25 million people have voted in the primaries -- it's about 50 percent of that vote in the Republican primaries. ... That's really important to us," he said on "GMA" today.

Florida and Michigan

One option to bring more clarity to the process is to replay the contests in Florida and Michigan, allowing Obama and Clinton to compete for the 366 delegates the Democratic Party currently does not recognize. The two moved their primaries too early in the process and were punished by the Democratic Party.

Candidates did not campaign there and Obama was not even on the Michigan ballot, but the party could allow a revote in the next few weeks.

On Wednesday, the governors of those two states demanded their voters be recognized and their delegates be counted.

"It's unconscionable to me that some party boss in Washington is not going to let the people be heard. And it's wrong," Florida Gov. Charlie Crist said.

"While we would love to have them seated, but it has to be done to the rules everybody agreed to … what you should not do is change the rules in the middle of the test," Dean said today.

"We're clear what they can do. One, they can resubmit a set of rules to pick delegates that are within the rules that they agreed to. And, two, if they don't want to do that they can appeal to the credentials committee and hope for the best in July."

Dean argued that Florida and Michigan "chose to ignore the rules. … All they have to do is come before us, with rules that fit in to what they agreed to a year and a half ago and they'll be seated."

But even adding those delegates would likely not mean a winner before the convention — the race is that tight.

I'm writing this before the results from Ohio and Texas are known. And in an election year where events have been brutally unkind to predictions, it seems folly to pronounce Hillary Clinton a dead woman walking, but I'm going to do it anyway.

Whatever the results of Gotterdammerung Tuesday are, it seems clear that Clinton won't be the Democratic nominee. Indeed, the only way for her to win is for Barack Obama to lose by his own hand. Like some invulnerable demigod who can only be destroyed by his own hubris, Obama is now mathematically and politically immune to Clinton's attacks. She is now the true candidate of hope.

That's ironic, given that Clinton's whole campaign has been based on the premise that she is the careful, strategy-obsessed candidate. From health-care policy to hairdo, Hillary is a planner. As I've said before, her idea of spontaneity is to leap from her prepared text to her prepared index cards.

Hence the glorious failure that she and her strategists neglected to imagine they'd even need a strategy after Super Tuesday.

And there were other more obvious mistakes. In the mother-of-all-change elections, the Clinton team opted to make her campaign about "experience" and about veering "back to the future," in Bill Clinton's words. Or were those Hillary's words? Is there a difference?

And by dragooning Bill into the race - or, more accurately, by failing to prevent him from leaping into it - the Clinton team reinforced the perception that Hillary is the closest thing to an incumbent the Democrats have.

This is not the year for incumbents. This is not the year for a candidacy whose central argument amounts to "it's my turn."

For the first few debates, Hillary insisted there were little to no substantive differences among the Democratic contenders. Over time, voters took her word for it and decided that in a year when Democrats are likely to win and in a race where the policy differences are trivial, they'd rather vote for the candidate who inspires them about the future than the candidate who wearies them with memories of the past.

There's one last problem with Clinton's positioning as the experienced candidate in the race. She is not all that experienced.

Last week, the Clinton campaign belched out an argument that felt hackneyed when used by Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale. A Clinton TV ad asks voters which candidate they'd want in the White House at 3 a.m. when a crisis erupts. The tested-and-ready Clinton is supposed to be the obvious answer. But obvious to whom? How has she been tested? Such is the Clinton campaign's overweening sense of entitlement that when a reporter asked what crises Hillary has actually handled, the Clintonites had no answer at the ready.

Again, miracles happen, and Hillary may win. But come the fall, no matter who the Democratic nominee is, Democrats won't be pleased that Hillary raised the who-should-take-the-call question with John McCain in the race.

By JONAH GOLDBERG, Tribune Media Services, March 5, 2008

One of the telling themes out of Tuesday's primaries is that Hillary Clinton appeared to rebuild her core coalition -- working-class voters, whites and Hispanics, and, perhaps above all, women.

EMILY's List, a political action committee that helps female candidates and is supporting Clinton, just put out an analysis today that suggests that women increased their share of the Democratic electorate in all four states that voted Tuesday.

In the key state of Ohio, women made up 59 percent of primary voters, up 7 percentage points from 2004. In the other big prize, Texas, women comprised 57 percent of primary voters, an increase of 4 percentage points from four years ago, according to the analysis of exit polling data. She defeated Barack Obama among women, with bigger margins among white women, according to the exit polls conducted for the television networks and the Associated Press.

"Once again women made up the backbone of Hillary Clinton's support in her critical victories in Texas, Ohio, and Rhode Island," Ellen R. Malcolm, president of EMILY's List, said in a statement. "Women have been Sen. Clinton's most consistent and committed backers from the beginning and they will see her through to the end and victory."

By Foon Rhee, The Boston Globe, March 5, 2008

DALLAS - Now that Senator John McCain is headed to the nomination, he can begin thinking seriously about perhaps the most important decision he will have to make as the Republican presidential nominee: the selection of a running mate.

Mr. McCain and several senior campaign advisers insist that there is no short list of names, and no process to help him make his choice - merely a process to find a process. He directed his campaign to study past methods.

"If I win tonight, we will sit down tomorrow or the next day, whatever it is, and say, O.K., what's the process that you are recommending that we start into, and that will be the first step," Mr. McCain said on his bus Tuesday as it rolled through Dallas.

Mr. McCain said he was particularly interested in learning "what other processes were used in previous selections of the vice president, and, frankly, the ones that seemed to come out with a good product and those that maybe did not."

The choice of a running mate is always important, but it may be particularly so in Mr. McCain's case, given that, at 71, he is seeking to become the oldest candidate ever elected to a first term as president.

Several governors have been mentioned as potential running mates; their executive experience and ability to cast themselves as Washington outsiders are perceived as strengths. They include Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota, an early supporter; Charlie Crist of Florida, whose last-minute endorsement helped Mr. McCain win that crucial swing state's primary; Jon Huntsman Jr. of Utah, an early supporter despite Mitt Romney's popularity in his state; and Mark Sanford of South Carolina, whose conservative reputation could help Mr. McCain with the base but who did not endorse him.

Former governors have been mentioned as well, including Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania, whose support of abortion rights could cause Mr. McCain trouble with conservatives who are already wary of him. Two of his primary opponents - Mr. Romney and Mike Huckabee - also fall into the ex-governor category.

Mr. Huckabee, a former governor of Arkansas, has a reputation as a good campaigner but is distrusted by some economic conservatives for raising taxes. Mr. Romney, a former Massachusetts governor with a business background, often sparred brutally with Mr. McCain, but endorsed him swiftly and would bring a financial background to the ticket.

Rob Portman, a former Ohio congressman and director of the Office of Management and Budget, is also mentioned as someone who could bring a financial background to the ticket.

Michael Nelson, a professor of political science at Rhodes College who has written about the vice presidency, said there were three ways Mr. McCain could go: try to consolidate the party base by tapping a conservative, try to reinforce his appeal to independent voters by picking someone with crossover appeal, or try to win a swing state or region by taking geography into account.

The strategies could be equal, Professor Nelson said, as the selection seems presidential.

"I think that ever since the development of ICBMs," he said in a recent interview, "there's been a concern among voters that the vice president be someone who could step into the presidency literally at a moment's notice."

By Michael Cooper, The New York Times, March 5, 2008

PRINCETON, N.J., March 5 (UPI) -- Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton has wide support among whites and Hispanics, while more blacks back rival Barack Obama, a poll indicates.

A Gallup poll of 2,901 Democratic voters found Clinton and Obama have clear voting blocs behind them.

The poll found Clinton had a 50 percent to 41 percent lead among whites. Obama, meanwhile, led among black Democratic voters, 76 percent to 17 percent.

The poll, taken between Feb. 25 and March 2, found that overall, Obama led Clinton 48 percent to 43 percent nationally.

"It may not be surprising to find that Obama -- the first black to be his party's front-runner at this point in the campaign -- dominates the vote preferences of black Democratic voters," Gallup said in its analysis.

"The current analysis suggests that Obama's powerful strength among this group has propelled him -- during the week of Feb. 25-March 2 at any rate -- to his overall modest lead in support among Democrats nationwide."

The poll's margin of error was plus or minus two percentage points. The margin of error is larger for subgroups used in this analysis, Gallup said.




United Press International, March 5, 2008

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) revved up her stalled presidential campaign in Ohio and Texas last night by recapturing white working-class voters who had swayed toward Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) in the Wisconsin primary two weeks ago.

Clinton's focus on experience may have helped to solidify her hold on many of these voters. About as many whites without college degrees ranked "experience" as their top candidate attribute as those who said "change" was their top priority -- a first in exit polls, and by a 2 to 1 ratio in Texas and 3 to 1 in Ohio, these voters felt that Clinton was more qualified to be commander in chief.

After reaching such financial straits that she made a $5 million loan to her campaign last month, Sen. Hillary Clinton has had a resurgence with the support of hundreds of thousands of small online donors.

The change in emphasis to small donors mirrors the tactics of her deep-pocketed rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, Sen. Barack Obama, and shows the necessity for candidates to use the Internet to compete.

The Clinton campaign has reported raising about a million dollars a day through the Internet since Sen. Clinton disclosed the loan right after the Feb. 5 Super Tuesday primaries. By contrast, about half of the more than $100 million she picked up in 2007 came from donors giving the maximum $2,300 allowed by law.

Sen. Clinton wrote an email appeal to supporters on Friday asking for 30,000 contributions in two days. "There's one thing you need to know: I am relying on you to win," she wrote. "You are my best supporters, and over the past weeks you have made this campaign your own."

Sen. Clinton sent out another letter on Saturday saying she had raised the goal to 50,000 after the first target was met in one day. Breaking the goal so quickly may have been by design -- it happened a month ago as well. The Clinton campaign didn't respond to a request for comment.

In February, the campaign pulled in a total of $35 million, nearly matching Sen. Barack Obama's haul in January. Some of Sen. Obama's fund-raisers have reported that his success also increased in February, with a total of $50 million taken in.

In a post last week to the Clinton blog announcing the total, Internet chief Peter Daou said more than $30 million came from "grass-roots supporters." Almost 600 comments followed the post with supporters congratulating and encouraging each other. Neither Mr. Daou nor the campaign's press office responded to a request for comment.

Sen. Clinton's February total is almost as much as she raised in the entire first quarter of 2007, which was itself a record quarter for any candidate last year. It is also more than most candidates have reported raising for their entire campaigns through January, including Republican Internet-phenomenon Rep. Ron Paul, who raised $32.5 million through Jan. 31, according to his latest filings with the Federal Election Commission.

The Clinton campaign has increasingly used the Internet to create online activity and community discourse, not just for donations, said Andrew Rasiej, founder of the Web site Tech President, which tracks online political trends. That activity has in turn fueled more donations.

"Money is actually a byproduct of robust online communities," Mr. Rasiej said, "and up until now, the candidates have been thinking that the Internet was a good way to raise money. They haven't recognized that in order for money to flow, they have to nurture the community."

According to the latest reports with the election commission, the Clinton campaign started to rely on small donors, which frequently come over the Internet, in January.

Money given in checks of less than $500 accounted for a majority of funds that month, up from 17% in 2007. That number is expected to grow much higher once the campaign files a report for February.

Sen. Clinton announced she brought on 200,000 new donors last month, bringing the total to an estimated 400,000 people -- more than any other campaign save for Sen. Obama's, which reports it has more than one million donors.

Both candidates have online phone banks where supporters are given lists of phone numbers for likely Democratic voters in states with coming contests. The Obama campaign said in an email yesterday to supporters that it used the system to make 1.5 million calls to the four states voting yesterday.

By T.W. FARNAM, The Wall Street Journal, March 5, 2008

Sen. Hillary Clinton dedicated her victory speech here tonight to "anyone in Ohio and across the nation who has ever been counted out but refused to be knocked out."

Speaking at the Columbus Athenaeum shortly after CNN called the contest at roughly 11 p.m., Clinton gave a brief speech to thank supporters in Ohio and Rhode Island who tonight delivered two much needed wins.

But the victory rally still held the heady anticipation of a pre-party, with Ohioans and Clinton staffers glued to the televisions to monitor Texas results as they came in. The results were a virtual tie when Clinton took the stage and were not expected to be final until the early this morning.

"The nation is coming back and so is this campaign," Clinton said as multicolored confetti spilled from the balconies. Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland and former astronaut and Sen. John Glenn stood with her on stage.

The Clinton campaign has said that no matter what the outcome in Texas, it now has the momentum to labor on. The Obama campaign out spent the Clinton camp by 2 to 1, not including spending by independent groups.

Rural counties make up 12% of Ohio and Clinton won 70% of rural voters compared to 30% for Obama. Exit polls also showed that undecided voters tended to break to Clinton at the last moment.

Clinton has been honing her message recently to focus more on "solutions" while painting rival Barack Obama as heavy on rhetoric. Tonight, two giant "Solutions for America" signs hung on both sides of her. Cherry Miracle, a social worker in Columbus, jumped up and down when Clinton took the podium. "She has the background and the heart to make it happen for our state," she said.

Clinton congratulated Obama and said she looks forward to continuing to campaign with him in Pennsylvania and the other 16 states or territories that still need to hold contests. But she also used the stage to critique her opponent. "When the phone rings at 3 a.m. at the White House, there's no time for speeches," she said.

In his primary night speech, Obama exuded confidence. "We know this - no matter what happens tonight, we have nearly the same delegate lead as we did this morning, and we are on our way to winning this nomination," he said.

As Clinton, daughter Chelsea and senior campaign aides boarded a plane to Washington DC after the Columbus rally, reporters on board alerted them that Texas had been called as a victory for Clinton. Chelsea let out a shout and hugged her mother.

"I am thrilled by this vote of confidence from the people of the great state of Texas, a state I know and love. Tonight, we won 3 out of 4 contests and began a new chapter in this historic campaign," Clinton said.

The Clinton campaign had been on its last leg having lost 11-straight contests to Obama and still lags in the overall delegate count. Some Democratic Party elders had urged Clinton to step down if she lost both contests tonight so that the Democrats could unify to challenge Republican nominee Sen. John McCain.

"Some were ready to call this campaign over but the voters said otherwise," said Clinton campaign spokesman Doug Hattaway. Clinton called McCain earlier tonight to congratulate him on his victory.

By Amy Chozick, The Wall Street Journal, March 5, 2008

Democratic presidential contender Hillary Clinton won a key primary contest in Ohio, Tuesday, against rival Barack Obama, ensuring the battle for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination will continue. Clinton and Obama were also locked in a tight primary race in Texas. In the Republican race, Senator John McCain won all four primary contests on Tuesday and clinched his party's nomination. VOA National correspondent Jim Malone reports from Washington.

Hillary Clinton was banking on a victory in Ohio to keep her presidential hopes alive. Democrats there gave her the response she was looking for.

"For everyone here in Ohio and across America who has ever been counted out, but refused to be knocked out, and for everyone who has stumbled but stood right back up, and for everyone who works hard and never gives up, this one is for you," said Hillary Clinton.

Clinton also defeated Barack Obama in Rhode Island, while Obama won the Democratic primary in Vermont.

Obama still holds a lead in delegates after Tuesday's vote, despite Clinton's strong showing in Ohio and Rhode Island.

Obama told supporters in Texas he still expects to be the Democratic nominee when the party holds it national nominating convention in late August in Minnesota.

"We know this," said Barack Obama. "No matter what happens tonight, we have nearly the same delegate lead as we did this morning and we are on our way to winning this nomination."

Democrats allocate their delegates on a proportional basis, meaning even the candidate that loses a given primary or caucus vote still wins some delegates. That makes it difficult for the candidate trailing to win enough delegates to catch or surpass the leading contender.

Voter exit surveys conducted by news organizations showed that Clinton solidified her support among women and working class voters. Obama did well with African-American voters and college-educated Democrats and independents.

The exit polls also suggested the economy was the major issue in the campaign, topping health care and the war in Iraq.

In the Republican race, John McCain made it a clean sweep, winning all four primaries in Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island and Vermont.

American news organizations estimate McCain now has more than the 1,191 delegates he needs to clinch the Republican Party nomination.

McCain spoke to supporters in Texas, shortly after his remaining major challenger, former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, conceded defeat and vowed to support McCain in the November election.

"Now we begin the most important part of our campaign, to make a respectful, determined and convincing case to the American people that our campaign and my election as president - given the alternatives presented by our friends in the other party - are in the best interests of the country we love," said John McCain.

In their remarks, Democrats Obama and Clinton both said they looked forward to a general election campaign against McCain, even though it remains to be seen which one will wind up the nominee.

Democrats are expected to emphasize change and the weakening U.S. economy in the general election. McCain has said he will emphasize his experience in foreign policy and national security and will present himself as the candidate best able to keep America safe from terrorist attack.

By Jim Malone, Voice of America, March 5, 2008

Hillary Clinton broke her 11-state losing streak with a barrage of attacks against Barack Obama and took Texas, Ohio and Rhode Island in her "must-win" Democratic nominating contests Tuesday.

Out of the four state primaries held that day, Obama only won Vermont.

Before the ballots were counted in Texas, Clinton made it clear she would be continuing her campaign, although she had been encouraged to concede the nomination to Obama.

She said her win proved to "everyone in Ohio and across America who has ever been counted out, but refused to be knocked out, for everyone who has stumbled but stood right back up and for everyone who works hard and never gives up, this one is for you!"

"The people of Ohio have said in loudly and clearly," she cried. "We're going on, we're going strong and we're going all the way!"

Shortly after Clinton declared victory in Ohio, but hours before it was announce she had also won Texas, Obama told his supporters in a televised address from Texas, "No matter what happens we have nearly the same delegate lead as this morning and we are on our way to the nomination."

In the final days before the March 4 primaries the Clinton campaign highlighted Obama's inexperience in foreign policy and alleged Obama officials had privately assured the Canadian government he would not support protectionist trade policies had has hyped on the campaign trail. They also raised questions about Obama's relationship with Tony Rezko, the Chicago landlord and "political fixer" who was recently charges with eight counts of corruption, money laundering and aiding bribery.

On the advertising front, Clinton released a controversial "red phone" advertisement that some Democrats said came close to "fear-mongering." It pointedly asked voters which President they would like answering a "3 am call" "while your children are safe and asleep" before cutting to images of Clinton answering the phone.

Clinton also scheduled appearances on Saturday Night Live and "The Daily Show" with Jon Stewart where she complained about the negative attention the media has wrought on her, but not Obama and drew attention to what she calls his "empty rhetoric."

Obama described the coordination of these efforts as a "kitchen sink strategy" and expressed shock media had given attention to the attacks. "I was a little surprised that all the complaining about the refs actually worked as well as it did for them, this whole spin on how the press has been so tough on them and not tough on us" he told reporters traveling with him on Tuesday.

"I didn't expect that you guys would bite on that," he said. Days before the nominating contests, Clinton campaign senior officials said they were certain she would "blunt" Obama's momentum Tuesday with these attacks and on the issues of security and the economy. "Obama can't seem to be Commander in Chief against Senator Clinton," chief strategist Mark Penn told reporters I a conference call March 2. "How can he possibly expect to be seen as someone who could win the Commander-in-Chief argument against John McCain?" "We have also put the central question of who is the right person to be the manager and steward of this economy during a tough and difficult period where the next president is likely to inherit a recession, a credit crunch and other extremely tough economic problems," Penn said.

By Amanda Carpenter, Town Hall, March 5, 2008

I'm writing this before the results from Ohio and Texas are known. And in an election year where events have been brutally unkind to predictions, it seems folly to pronounce Hillary Clinton a dead woman walking, but I'm going to do it anyway. After all, the great difference between pundits and coroners is that pundits don't need to wait for actual death to commence the autopsy.

Whatever the results of Gotterdammerung Tuesday are, it seems clear that Clinton won't be the Democratic nominee. Indeed, the only way for her to win is for Barack Obama to lose by his own hand. Like some invulnerable demigod who can only be destroyed by his own hubris, Obama is now mathematically and politically immune to Clinton's attacks. She is now the true candidate of hope.

That's ironic, given that Clinton's whole campaign has been based on the premise that she is the careful, strategy-obsessed candidate. From health-care policy to hairdo, Hillary is a planner. As I've said before, her idea of spontaneity is to leap from her prepared text to her prepared index cards.

Hence the glorious failure that she and her strategists neglected to imagine they'd even need a strategy after Super Tuesday.

And there were other more obvious mistakes. In the mother-of-all-change elections, the Clinton team opted to make her campaign about "experience" and about veering "back to the future," in Bill Clinton's words. Or were those Hillary's words? Is there a difference? Confusion on this point is understandable given that the ex-president not only speaks as if a vote for Hillary is a vote for him, but also seems to think that voters are actually voting for him.

The decision to use Bill as a surrogate - the ultimate Hillary in a pantsuit - has been hotly debated for months. The arguments in favor (he's popular with the base, he gets enormous media attention, he's an indefatigable campaigner) and the arguments against (he's controversial, he puts the campaign "off message," his narcissism is all-consuming, etc.) all seem to have missed the larger point. By dragooning Bill into the race - or, more accurately, by failing to prevent him from leaping into it - the Clinton team reinforced the perception that Hillary is the closest thing to an incumbent the Democrats have.

This is not the year for incumbents. This is not the year for a candidacy whose central argument amounts to "it's my turn."

For the first few debates, Hillary insisted there were little to no substantive differences among the Democratic contenders. Over time, voters took her word for it and decided that in a year when Democrats are likely to win and in a race where the policy differences are trivial, they'd rather vote for the candidate who inspires them about the future than the candidate who wearies them with memories of the past.

This points to why Clinton must have a special hatred for Obama. Perhaps not for the man but certainly for the phenomenon. Obama would have been an impressive candidate in any field. But only in a contest where Clinton sucked up most of the oxygen could Obama thrive in such rare air, accomplished as he is in deflating his lungs with outbursts of rhetoric suitable for Olympian heights. Clinton may be a fighter, and she may have claimed to be named after legendary mountain climber Sir Edmund Hillary. But she was raised to fight in the trenches and unsurprisingly gets altitude sickness at the oratorical heights where Obama thrives.

There's one last problem with Clinton's positioning as the experienced candidate in the race. She is not all that experienced. Last week, the Clinton campaign belched out an argument that felt hackneyed when used by Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale. A Clinton TV ad asks voters which candidate they'd want in the White House at 3 a.m. when a crisis erupts. The tested-and-ready Clinton is supposed to be the obvious answer. But obvious to whom? How has she been tested? Such is the Clinton campaign's overweening sense of entitlement that when a reporter asked what crises Hillary has actually handled, the Clintonites had no answer at the ready. Again, miracles happen, and Hillary may win. But come the fall, no matter who the Democratic nominee is, Democrats won't be pleased that Hillary raised the who-should-take-the-call question with John McCain in the race.

By Jonah Goldberg, Town Hall, March 5, 2008

In a stark, unfinished office space in a gritty corner of Philadelphia along the Delaware River, Hillary Clinton supporters gathered last Sunday to plan a campaign that wasn't supposed to happen. "We cannot take anything, any area, any voter for granted," the city's newly elected mayor, Michael Nutter, told the crowd of perhaps 150. The race, he said, will be like this year's Super Bowl, in which the previously undefeated New England Patriots unexpectedly fell to the underdog New York Giants. And he means for the Pennsylvania's Clinton campaign to be the Giants. "We have our work cut out for us," he said. "But we have a real candidate who is a real person, and she really does care."

Campaign organizer Abe Dyk assured the crowd that the six-week run-up to the primary will be a full-bore, no-excuses campaign. "We will be Iowa on steroids ... everything we do in a traditional campaign after Labor Day we're going to start doing after March 4," the date of primaries in Ohio and Texas, he told the cheering crowd of activists.

In fact, the state's April 22 primary is shaping up to be another so-called decisive battle in the Democratic campaign. It is the single biggest prize in the next six weeks, with 103 delegates up for a vote. With her comeback victories in Texas and Ohio, Clinton needs a solid victory here to justify a potential triumph at the convention with a superdelegate strategy. Obama needs to counter that strategy by piling up the pledged delegates, to blunt any Clinton hold on the superdelegates that is based on momentum and growing popular support. "Neither Clinton nor Obama can afford to bypass [Pennsylvania]," said pollster and political analyst G. Terry Madonna of Franklin & Marshall College. "They can't afford to let it alone even though it won't give anyone enough pledged delegates for a victory at the convention." Madonna's latest poll, taken in mid-February, shows Clinton holding a good lead in Pennsylvania, 44 to 32 percent, but Obama has closed the gap since January, when he was 20 points down. Democratic consultant Larry Ceisler believes that by winning Texas and Ohio, Clinton proves she can win Pennsylvania.

Indeed, Pennsylvania and Ohio share very similar demographics. It appears that the campaign in this state will look much like the one just concluded in its neighbor, with a strong emphasis on economics and some sparring over national security. Clinton organizers in Pennsylvania were instructing volunteers early in the week to call Ohio and tell undecided voters that she will "deliver real solutions to the lagging economy and soaring home foreclosures," both issues that have affected Pennsylvania, particularly in the formerly industrial sections in the West and Northeast. Obama's statewide chairman, Congressman Patrick Murphy, predicted that the candidates will also continue the Ohio debate over the legacy of NAFTA, which blue-collar workers in Pennsylvania blame for the loss of textile jobs.

Money has been a problem for Clinton, with Obama far outraising her, but the results on Tuesday may change her fortunes as donors become more certain she can win. And Pennsylvania is generally thought to be a rich state for Democratic candidates looking for funds. Obama is "a money-making machine," Madonna said. "She would probably have a more significant problem, but she does have [Governor] Ed Rendell and his money-making boys" to help fund the fight.

Madonna said Obama is likely to do very well in Philadelphia, with a large African-American electorate, and may win in the city's suburbs, which have the same kinds of upscale, well-educated professionals that have gone for Obama in recent contests. Western and Central Pennsylvania are much more conservative, blue-collar and Catholic, and the voters tend to be a bit older, all of which seem to favor Clinton. The key battleground is likely to be in the Lehigh Valley and the Northeast, toward Scranton and Wilkes-Barre, where traditional blue-collar industry is giving way to high-tech.

Despite Clinton's continued lead in the state polls, Obama is riding on a wave of grassroots enthusiasm, the likes of which political veterans say they have never seen before. Until late February, neither candidate had much of an organization in the state - a handful of junior staffers but no more. But without prompting from the national campaign, dozens of self-generated Obama organizations have sprung up around the state in recent months, drawing in thousands of supporters. "The brilliance of the Obama campaign is that it is very organic," said Dan Wofford, an Obama supporter and son of former Sen. Harris Wofford. "It's not without structure, but it is bottom-up." As campaign staff begins to arrive in the state, he said, "they are very mindful; they don't want to snuff out the grass roots with a layer of hierarchy on top of it, but they do bring in structure that helps nourish the grassroots movement."

Kathleen Hood of Highland Township, for example, began holding house parties for Obama last year and took it upon herself to set up "United for Obama in Chester County" in early February this year. Since her first meeting, the group has grown from seven to 50, all without any contact from the official campaign until the final few days of the month, when some staff began coming into the state. She was able to do it largely by using the campaign website, which has a calendar for local activists to post events and reams of material for organizers to use without having to have any direct support from the central campaign. "They've provided tools that can be used to begin to generate that enthusiasm ... there are very specific tools you can use, very specific things you can do," said Hood, a teacher and school administrator. "It helps you act on your strong beliefs. That's what so exciting about it."

Sue Gregson, a freelance writer from nearby Downingtown, started holding events for Obama in March of last year. She even tried calling the national campaign for help, but couldn't get much out of them. "They could hardly staff the phones at that point; everyone was calling in. I didn't even get material from the campaign," she said. "They had little packets eventually that they sent to people who were having house parties, but mine was too early." So she bought an "Obama for President" sweatshirt and went to work on her own. "We would basically just meet in peoples' houses and talk about what we can do on a shoestring budget, because people were talking money out of their own pockets," she said. "That hoodie was probably the best $35 I ever spent. It's my trademark."

So great was the grassroots enthusiasm that some of Obama's more experienced Pennsylvania supporters had to step in to bring order to the campaign, holding organizational meetings in January in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh to begin the process of naming delegates to an Obama slate in advance of the primary. "You could either allow that [enthusiasm] to dissipate, or allow it to go off in all these different directions where it would create counter purposes," said Pittsburgh attorney Cliff Levine, who chaired the western organizational meeting. But "by marshaling everybody together and trying to map out the wildfire of enthusiasm, that little bit of structure allowed this to grow very quickly and in an organized way."

The Clinton campaign, meanwhile, has taken a different approach, focusing on securing high-level support from most of the state's Democratic establishment, including Nutter, Rendell and state party chairman T.J. Rooney. "While the Obama campaign has a lot of enthusiastic people on their list of delegates, our delegates are mostly county commissioners, party chairmen and others," said Lazar Palnick, an organizer for Clinton in Western Pennsylvania and a longtime friend of the Clintons dating from his youth in his native Arkansas. "Each of those have extensive networks that we intend to take full advantage of and make good use of to operate the mechanics of a serious get-out-the-vote operation."

Nutter, meanwhile, admits that Obama's base seems more strongly enthusiastic than Clinton's, but he said the experience and political muscle of the New York Senator's base may prove stronger. Obama's organization "certainly has to be respected," he told TIME, but the key is "how you translate that into on-the-ground troops that know how to run elections and get people to come out to the polls. It's one thing to have events and rallies and be moved by stirring oratory; it's another that people know you and are motivated to come out to the polls and actually push your button."

Obama supporters and some media commentators, however, have suggested that Clinton's campaign in Pennsylvania is top-heavy and poorly organized, pointing to the fact that she failed to fill all 103 slots on her delegate slate - a routine and basic exercise in political organizing - despite a two-day deadline extension from the governor. "It indicates to me they weren't sufficiently prepared for this and they fell asleep at the switch," Madonna said. The campaign, however, dismisses this as "a story about nothing," saying a few would-be delegates failed to file their paperwork for personal reasons, such as illness. Even so, they say, the delegate slate is a minor technical matter and Clinton will get credit for every delegate she wins, whether or not she actually named a full slate of delegates. "It's just a matter of waiting for the media to get bored with the subject," spokesman Mark Nevins said. "Nobody else is talking about it."

And even if the Clinton campaign did get off to a later start in Pennsylvania than Obama's, it was clear in the days leading up to the Ohio and Texas primaries that the organization was getting geared up. It opened offices in both Pittsburgh and Philadelphia and began holding meetings across the state to fire up volunteers. "We are not going to concede any votes to Barack Obama," Dyk told the Philadelphia meeting.

The Clinton volunteers themselves seem aware that the weight of emotion, and perhaps grassroots momentum, seems to lie with Obama, but they say they can deliver Pennsylvania for her. "I feel like this is when she really needs our support the most," said Elsa Louis-Charles, 34, a legal assistant from suburban Glenside. "I try not to watch the numbers so much." Hannah Miller, 31, of Philadelphia, signed up to volunteer hoping that Clinton would be the one to stand up against the war in Iraq and the increasingly militarized nature of American society. She said Pennsylvania will be the key to Clinton's comeback victory. "I think the whole race is going to change," she said. "I think it's going to change in Pennsylvania ... I think something magical is going to happen in her campaign here."

By Sean Scully, Time, March 5, 2008

Hillary Clinton bounds back

"SHE was humiliated in front of the whole country and she rose from the ashes, and look at her now." That was how Shirley Deininger of Austin, Texas, explained why she supported Hillary Clinton's campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination. Ms Deininger was alluding to events of the 1990s. But Mrs Clinton is making a habit of bouncing back. On Tuesday March 4th, after weeks of struggle, doubts and losses, Mrs Clinton won do-or-die contests in Ohio and Texas. She also won Rhode Island. Barack Obama carried Vermont, but that will be small consolation. This is once again a race.

Mrs Clinton needed these victories. She and Barack Obama came out of the Super Tuesday contests on February 5th in a virtual tie. But during the next four weeks he won every contest - 11 in a row. He built a modest but significant lead in the popular vote and the number of pledged delegates. Superdelegates, who support the candidate of their choosing, began to drift his way. Money flowed in. Momentum built. There were suggestions that Mrs Clinton should drop out and let the general election begin.

Even her supporters conceded that time was running out. Bill Clinton said that his wife needed to win both Texas and Ohio to carry on. On February 29th Mrs Clinton's campaign sent out a rather pathetic memo that seemed to criticise Mr Obama for campaigning vigorously, holding rallies, "and - of course - making speeches." Mark Penn, her chief strategist, sent out an e-mail announcing that he had "no direct authority" in the campaign.

The situation looked bleak. But two things happened in the days before the primaries: Mr Obama stumbled, and Mrs Clinton stepped up. The Obama campaign faced a pair of minor scandals. The first concerned an unruly economist. Last month Austan Goolsbee, Mr Obama's economic adviser, met a Canadian diplomat. According to a leaked memo, Mr Goolsbee said that Canada should not worry about the campaign's professed hostility to NAFTA. Such comments were, according to the memo, "more reflective of political manoeuvring than policy." Then, on March 3rd in Chicago, an old friend and former fundraiser, Tony Rezko, was put on trial on corruption charges.

Neither episode is particularly damning. But the Clinton campaign was able to suggest that Mr Obama is not the pure hero of popular folklore. And Mr Obama made things worse by getting huffy. At a press conference on March 3rd in San Antonio, he seemed irritated that he had to answer questions about either issue. In his telling, the good-hearted Mr Goolsbee had been invited to the Canadian consulate and had gone as an innocent courtesy, expecting a "casual conversation." Mr Obama sounded especially peeved to be asked several questions about Mr Rezko.

In the meantime, Mrs Clinton was building her support. According to exit polls, she led by roughly 20 points in both Ohio and Texas among voters who had made up their minds in the last few days. Her "3am" advert, which asked voters to think about who they would want answering the phone in the White House in a moment of crisis, probably helped. The NAFTA flap was useful in economically depressed Ohio, where Mrs Clinton appeared to lead by ten points with most precincts reporting.

NAFTA is a less potent issue in Texas, which has generally benefited from trade with Mexico. And a large edge in early voting helped Mr Obama to keep Mrs Clinton to a narrow margin. But Mrs Clinton won roughly two-thirds of the Latinos, who turned out in record numbers. Polls had suggested that Mr Obama would make greater inroads with Latinos in Texas than he did.

What next? The nomination will go to the person who can amass 2,025 delegates. Before Tuesday Mr Obama led in the delegate count, but neither candidate would have been able to reach the magic number without superdelegates. That has not changed. So the campaigns now have to work out how to woo the superdelegates. Mrs Clinton can point to a victory in a state like Ohio and say that she can swing it to the Democratic column in November, but Mr Obama can point to his big success in Virginia and make a similar argument. Right now it seems that Mr Obama will be able to claim a lead in raw popular votes, but Mrs Clinton can point to her successes in primaries to Mr Obama's successes in caucuses. The race between Mrs Clinton and Mr Obama will continue, and some Democrats will regret that. But Mrs Clinton has undoubtedly earned the right to be there.

The Economist, March 5, 2008

UNIONTOWN, Pa. -- They waited for three hours in a chilly gymnasium, more than 2,000 people standing shoulder to shoulder on the hardwood floor, their patience waning through a cheerleading routine, a pep rally and four noisy speeches from local politicians.

Finally, at 8:15 p.m., a brown SUV pulled into the snowy parking lot of the Penn State Fayette campus. Secret Service officers dispersed through the crowd, and the gym fell quiet. Pennsylvania Gov. Edward G. Rendell walked onstage and waved. Next on the platform was Hillary Rodham Clinton, the first presidential candidate to visit this town in 35 years. And then, at long last, the celebrated special guest:

"Ladies and gentlemen," the announcer yelled, "please welcome . . . your congressman! John Murtha!"

Clinton turned to greet the towering Democrat, grabbing his arm and lifting it above the crowd like a referee announcing the winner of a prizefight. It was an odd role reversal for a presidential contender accustomed to being the main act, but everyone opens for Murtha, 75, in southwestern Pennsylvania. For the moment, at least, Clinton appeared content to stand in his shadow.

After all, she owes him. When Murtha announced last week that he would endorse the senator from New York, he gave her a uniquely valuable gift. No politician is better positioned to deliver votes when Pennsylvania holds its presidential primary on April 22 than Murtha, who has lived in the same Johnstown neighborhood since winning a House seat in 1974.

Many constituents and local politicians revere Murtha for his loyalty in bringing new business to a region abandoned by steel, coal and Coca-Cola. Others fear his reputation as an old-school politician given to shouting matches and backroom dealings. But almost everyone in this corner of Pennsylvania agrees: Usually, it's wise to follow Murtha's lead.

"When the congressman speaks, we listen, and we pretty much do as he says," said Rich Kasunic, a state senator. "He is the type of politician that comes around once every 50 years in Washington. He has an incredible presence, and his word means more than anyone's to us."

Last week, a few hours before he took the stage in Uniontown, Murtha postponed a business trip to the West Coast and instead met Clinton's plane at a regional airport east of Pittsburgh. He climbed into the back seat of her SUV, and the two headed off through hilly backcountry. Past Latrobe, which lost its identity and major employer when Rolling Rock brewery left two years ago. Past Connellsville, whose population has been in decline ever since the coal industry faltered in the early 1960s. Past the outskirts of Uniontown, where later this year some residents in the surrounding hills will have running water installed for the first time.

The tour of "hard luck," as Murtha sometimes calls the region, bore little resemblance to the once-proud intersection of Pennsylvania and West Virginia in which the congressman grew up. His relatives worked in the mines, excavating the coal and forging the steel that helped win two world wars. But by the time Murtha won two Purple Hearts as a Marine and returned from the Vietnam War to run a carwash in Johnstown, his home town had new distinctions: abandoned factories, low median incomes and an unemployment rate that eclipsed 20 percent.

Murtha has consistently been returned to Congress with about 70 percent of the vote, in large part because he has become an economic development committee of one, adept at steering money and employment to his home district. He chairs the House Appropriations subcommittee on defense -- his military expertise has been tapped by seven presidents -- and he delivers for his town. Johnstown is now the headquarters for a Marine helicopter squadron and a National Drug Intelligence Center, and is a primary manufacturer of military technology.

In a town that census data once highlighted as the least likely place in the United States to attract newcomers, Murtha has created an annual defense-oriented trade show so popular that it runs a waiting list of 25 companies. Only about 5 percent of adults there remain unemployed.

"Why do people here listen to what [Murtha] says?" asked Tom Trigona, mayor of Johnstown. "I guess because he got us our jobs."

As Murtha and Clinton pulled up to the Penn State satellite campus in nearby Uniontown on Monday, the congressman could look out on one of his old projects across the street -- a once-abandoned manufacturing plant where 150 people now repair Bradley Fighting Vehicles. He followed Clinton into the gymnasium and walked gingerly up the stairs to the stage; taking the steps is so demanding on his legs that he recently moved into a single-story house. The crowd chuckled when Rendell introduced Murtha as a man so accomplished that "the historic commission should put up one of those markers in front of his house."

HAMMOND, Ind. - To answer questions that have been swirling around her candidacy all day, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton arrived here in northwest Indiana - just a few miles from her Democratic rival's home on Chicago's South Side - to unequivocally say she has no intention of leaving the presidential race.

"There are millions of reasons to continue this race: people in Pennsylvania and Indiana and North Carolina and all of the contests yet to come," Mrs. Clinton said. "This is a very close race and clearly I believe strongly that everyone should have their voices heard and their votes counted and that includes Michigan and Florida."

Then, she added: "There is a lot still to be done and I'm looking forward to campaigning hard over the next several months."

The late-afternoon press conference came hours after Senator Patrick Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, said Mrs. Clinton "has every right, but not a very good reason, to remain a candidate for as long as she wants to." Other party leaders on Friday fretted aloud that the nominating fight between Senator Barack Obama and Mrs. Clinton would damage the party.

Mrs. Clinton brushed aside those concerns, saying she disagrees.

"I think I believe that a spirited contest is good for the Democratic Party and will strengthen our eventual nominee," she said. "We will have a united party behind whomever that nominee is. I certainly will do everything I can to make sure that we win in November."

Asked whether she believed party leaders should stay out of the race, she demurred.

"We are a party of many differing opinions and strong-minded individuals," she said. "People are free to say whatever they want and their views are all over the map."

It is worth remembering, Mrs. Clinton said, that neither she nor Mr. Obama will win enough pledged delegates to become the nominee. "I think that's a very important fact," she said.

"Superdelegates should exercise their right and their responsibility to determine who they think would be the best president and who would be the best nominee to defeat John McCain in the fall," Mrs. Clinton said. "That's the way our process is set up. That's the way it will operate."

As she prepared to depart for two more campaign events in Indiana today, Mrs. Clinton was asked to comment on a remark Mr. Obama made while campaigning in Pennsylvania. He said the presidential race was akin to a good movie, which had lasted too long.

With a smile, she said simply: "I like long movies."

By Jeff Zeleny, The New York Times, March 28, 2008

Several years ago, it became trendy for American twenty-somethings to discuss and dissect the arrival of their very own "quarter-life crisis"--a brick wall of angst and stress brought on by the realities of the post-college world.

Now recognized by sympathetic scholars, psychologists, and sociologists across the country, the quarter-life crisis often besets high-achieving, Type-A young people who expect a dream job, a dream salary, and a non-leaky, non-rodent-infested New York apartment right out of school. Unfortunately for many, reality often translates into a low-paying, highly competitive job that fails to cover rent for a Manhattan shoebox with an in-house animal kingdom to rival the Bronx Zoo--and, sadly, here I speak from past experience.

Here's the good news: Quarter-life crises are usually short, and they're usually not even crises. People grow out of them, perspective is gained, and salaries go up as dues are paid. But identity crises in general, it turns out, may be as American as apple pie. In fact, we seem to be in the thick of one now -- just in time for the 2008 election.

Exhibit A in the national obsession with identity is Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Barack Obama's pastor of disaster. A few weeks ago, Wright's linguistic fireballs introduced portions of America to an identity-based subculture many never knew existed (or, if they did, were in deep denial about).

Rev. Wright, however, is merely a drop in America's teeming, frothy bucket of identity conflicts. Gender identity also plagues us, or so we're told. This month, for instance, Conde Nast's Portfolio magazine broadcast the allegedly daunting problem of sexism in corporate America. The article's exquisitely ironic subtitle ("Weren't we supposed to be beyond this by now?") echoes what many Americans are likely thinking at this point. So thick is the air of identity, however, that the much-publicized study somehow misses the point of its own concluding paragraphs, in which two female business school professors suggest that, rather than facing discrimination, many women just might not be cutthroat enough--they're "equality builders," one says--to rise to the top. (Apparently, Hillary Clinton missed that particular memo.)

So, weren't we supposed to be beyond this by now? Perhaps. But a quick glance at the nations' college classrooms shows that we're busy training the next generation of leaders for a life full of identity-based grievances and sensitivities. In Harvard's sociology department alone, fifteen classes deal with divisions among race, gender, class, or ethnicity. Twelve classes focus on various levels of "inequality," with special attention of course on the American variety.

Some of these identity-based divisions are real, but some, just as clearly, are in our heads. Americans, it turns out, are no slouches when it comes to inventing problematic personal labels. As Northwestern University professor Christopher Lane recently pointed out, "America has reached a point where almost half its population is described as being in some way mentally ill." Among the more popular maladies is "social anxiety disorder," one of seven new anxiety disorders created in 1980. The symptoms include "fear of eating alone in restaurants" and "avoidance of public toilets." (So far, most people I know are scoring two for two).

"By the time a revised task force added dislike of public speaking in 1987," Lane adds, "the disorder seemed sufficiently elastic to include virtually everyone on the planet." Count me in!

Another popular American identity, particularly during election season, is that of the downtrodden, abused, and hopeless middle class. This identity, widely revered by politicians of a certain stripe, is also largely a construct. As columnist Robert Samuelson recently noted, economic realities in America are much sunnier than politicians or the chattering classes would have us believe. Populist rhetoric may be on the rise, and class warfare is ever popular on the Democratic stump, but, it turns out, the real middle class (as opposed to the invented one) isn't always buying it.

A significant number of people, however, appear to be buying it, and the implications for future policy and politics could be immense. "The election this fall will pose the starkest ideological choice since 1980," according to a recent issue of the American Prospect. If only that were so. While the ideological rift between left and right is certainly real, the referendum this fall will more likely center on identity, not ideology: The identity of the candidates (black, white, man, woman), the identity of voters (both real and imagined), and, on a superficial level, the identity of America.

Beyond the increasing honks and sighs about race, gender, class, and the fear of public toilets, there's a deeper, more daunting identity crisis bouncing around, touching on themes like the true meaning of equality, the value of freedom, and the role of the individual in America. At times we get close to discussing these themes, and then, just as quickly, they float away. Let's hope that these issues will break through the noise over the next few months. If not, get ready: The road to November will be a long one.

By Heather Wilhelm, Real Clear Politics, March 29, 2008

HAMMOND, Ind.--Asked about Sen. Barack Obama's remark today that the Democratic primary contest was like a good movie that had gone on too long, Sen. Hillary Clinton quipped, "I like long movies."

In the midst of a day where she traveled to four Indiana towns to talk about the economy, she held a news conference that quickly turned into repeated questions of her viability in the race, after one of her Senate colleagues, Vermont's Patrick Leahy, had said it was time for Clinton to quit running and back Obama.

She defended her staying in the race on a number of grounds: Millions of voters in places like Indiana had not had a chance to cast ballots, the primary process was drawing many new voters into the process in places such as Pennsylvania, and a poll showed the majority of the Democratic voters wanted the contest go on.

"I believe that a spirited contest is good for the Democratic Party and will strengthen our eventual nominee and that we will have a united party behind whoever that nominee is," Clinton said. "... I just think that this spirited, exciting contest is actually a real plus for us, and I just don't have the worries that some people either are talking about or feeling."

Clinton answered several questions that referenced both Leahy and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who has suggested whichever candidate leads among pledged delegates after the primaries should be declared the winner. Clinton did not criticize them, saying people could say whatever they wanted about the process, but she stood firm by her reasons for staying in.

"Neither one of us will have the delegates needed to be nominated," Clinton said. "I think that's a very important fact. Neither one of us can be nominated without superdelegates."




By Perry Bacon Jr., The Washington Post, March 28, 2008

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, kicking off a weekend convention of California Democratic Party heavyweights, stuck to the middle ground Friday despite the increasingly personal battle between would-be presidential nominees Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton.

"Both of them are great," she said at the gathering of hundreds of top state Democrats at the San Jose Convention Center. "Either one of them would make a great president of the United States, and I know one of them will be."

Despite the San Francisco representative's public comments, supporters of Sens. Clinton and Obama attending the meeting are expected to work privately over the weekend to woo uncommitted superdelegates, the elected Democratic officials and party activists who get an automatic pass to the party's national convention in August.

Former President Bill Clinton will speak to the state convention Sunday and later will meet privately with unpledged delegates in an effort to win their support for his wife. Neither Obama nor his wife, Michelle, was able to attend the state convention.

With neither candidate likely to collect the number of pledged delegates needed to win the nomination, it's likely that the nearly 800 party insiders listed as superdelegates nationwide will decide who gets the nod.

While California voters made their presidential choice in the Feb. 5 primary, about 21 of California's 66 superdelegates have yet to go public with their choice for president. Speaking on CBS' "Early Show" Friday, Howard Dean, chair of the Democratic National Committee, said the time has come for all the superdelegates to make a decision.

"I think that there's 800 of them, and 450 of them have already said who they're for," Dean said. "I'd like the other 350 to say who they're (for) at some point between now and the first of July so we don't have to take this into the convention."

But not everyone is ready, willing or able to choose between the two senators just yet.

State party chair Art Torres, for example, can't announce his choice. State party rules say the chair has to stay neutral until the convention.

"I'm one of the loneliest superdelegates in the country," the former state senator said. "The candidates read the bylaws ... and I haven't gotten bottles of wine, I haven't gotten cookies, I haven't gotten phone calls."

Other delegates want to see how the remaining Democratic primaries play out before making a choice.

San Francisco state Sen. Carole Migden, a superdelegate because she is a member of the Democratic National Committee, is getting plenty of phone calls but isn't ready to announce her choice.

"I've indicated firmly and politely to both campaigns that there won't be a decision coming in the near future," she said. "Let the rest of the country vote. Let's not truncate this period of democracy."

Pelosi, a San Francisco Democrat, said the campaign battle between Obama and Clinton should be allowed to play itself out.

"This is what happens in campaigns," she told reporters at the convention Friday. "It's the normal give and take. ... What's important is what they're saying about jobs and the economy, what they're saying about health care and education, what they're saying about stopping the war in Iraq and really protecting the American people."

By national party rules, all superdelegates are officially unpledged even if they've announced a choice. That means any or all of them can switch candidates right up to the roll call of the states at the Democratic National Convention in Denver.

Torres is confident that party leaders will meet Dean's deadline and will have the presidential nomination sorted out by July. In the meantime, the knockdown, drag-out presidential contest will bring plenty of interest to the weekend convention, along with some wheeling and dealing and intraparty politicking.

The excitement that brings is a good thing for California Democrats, at least for now, Torres said.

"It's not unusual to have such a competitive race, but what is unusual is that it's not over by now," he said. "I'm not worried today, but if we don't get something resolved before the convention, then I get more concerned."

The state convention also will give party activists an early look at many of the Democrats who could be running for governor in two years.

Attorney General Jerry Brown, who served two terms as governor before a term-limits law was passed, will speak to the convention Saturday along with state Treasurer Bill Lockyer, an early dropout in the 2006 governor's contest, and Lt. Gov. John Garamendi, who has made two unsuccessful tries for the office.

Also speaking Saturday are San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom and state Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell, who also have been mentioned as possible candidates for governor.

By John Wildermuth and Jonathan Curiel, San Francisco Chronicle, March 29, 2008

MUNCIE - Hillary Clinton brought a standing-room-only crowd to its feet - and kept it there - during her Friday evening appearance in Muncie.

With numerous references to the community and a special emphasis on recovering lost jobs, the Democratic presidential candidate held the attention of the crowd in Central High School’s gymnasium.

Clinton's speech built slowly to an urgent plea to consider the presidential election a job search.

"Who would you hire for the most important job in the world?" Clinton asked. Her promises to make an impact on health care and college costs, the trade imbalance and other issues were lost to the roar of the crowd.

Although the speech hammered the issue of job losses and offered the remedy of investment in job creation - a relevant point in a community that has lost hundreds of manufacturing jobs and thousands of residents in the past decade - Clinton's biggest ovation came when she promised to "end the unfunded mandate known as No Child Left Behind."

The crowd shouted its approval, and Clinton said, "I guess some of you agree with me on that."

Clinton made no direct references to Barack Obama, leading her in the delegate count for the Democratic Party nomination, or John McCain, the presumptive Republican Party nominee. She made several references to President Bush and Vice President Cheney.

Her 40-minute-plus speech was similar to the one she delivered in Anderson a week earlier. After a few early references to Muncie's reputation as Middletown, the typical small American city, as well as the state high school basketball championships of Central's Bearcat team, she focused on the economy and jobs.

One tried-and-true phrase from many of her campaign speeches made reference to the 1990s, when her husband was president. She noted that some had criticized that period.

"I wonder, 'Which part of the '90s did you not like - the peace or the prosperity?' " she asked.

Clinton made numerous references to Muncie and lost jobs, but also promised to end the war in Iraq and stop unfair advantages given to oil companies and the rich.

"Do you think oil companies need your tax dollars to make profits?" she asked.

When the crowd shouted, "No!" she replied, "That is exactly the right answer."

The speech, which had been scheduled to begin at 8:45 p.m., began about 45 minutes late. Clinton made a string of Indiana appearances Friday, including a late afternoon stop in Fort Wayne. She was introduced locally by state Sen. Sue Errington and former Indiana Secretary of State Joe Hogsett.

The Central High School gym, which seats 2,900, was filled to near capacity. Several minutes into the speech, more than 100 people who had been waiting in the lobby were admitted. Clinton stopped and said, "I'm not sure who just came in, but we have some seats over here."

The crowd was warm in its reception despite having waited outside Central High School in a brisk wind for hours. Spectators were let into the auditorium about two hours before the speech was to begin.

Members of the crowd waved Clinton campaign signs, although at least two people with signs for other candidates - Obama and Republican Ron Paul - lost their signs to Clinton campaign workers well before the candidate arrived.

Bleachers on each side of the gym were filled and folding chairs in the floor were mostly taken up by local Democratic Party activists.

By Keith Roysdon, The Indianapolis Star, March 28, 2008

Clinton insiders speculate about Obama's offer to him.

What did Barack Obama offer Bill Richardson for his endorsement? Nothing, say both the Obama and Richardson camps, but this is the question angry and jilted Clinton supporters are asking in the wake of Richardson's announcement a week ago that he would support Obama rather than their woman.

Despite Clinton strategist Mark Penn's effort to downplay the endorsement, Richardson's move was very helpful to Obama. When Richardson said he'd decided to back Obama in part because of Obama's speech reacting to the uproar over his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, his move became a symbolic end point to the controversy. Richardson also went beyond mere praise, calling for Democrats to rally around Obama and bring the contest to a close.

It is a standard tactic to accuse a turncoat of having been bought off. Some would say this is the Corleone reflex in the Clinton world, which punishes those who stray. What better way to malign Richardson than to claim low motives, which undermines Richardson's professed reason - that he was inspired by Obama's grand speech on race.

But Clinton supporters say Richardson was poised to join the family - in fact, he was already a charter member - and the speed of his reversal makes them think self-interest must have played a role in his jump. Many of those who are angriest have known Richardson a long time and have raised money for his various campaigns. They talked to him while he was sitting on the fence, and in those conversations, they say, he signaled his eventual support for Hillary. Why renege on old friends? A grand offer must have been in the offing, the detractors surmise.

On Thursday, I talked to one of those in the Clinton circle who had talked to Richardson, and that source said the damning reason the former energy secretary gave for his then-apparent plan to support Clinton was Obama's lack of experience - the central nail Clinton has been hammering. Not to mention that experience was the basis for Richardson's own presidential campaign.

On Larry King Live on Thursday night, James Carville, who branded Richardson "Judas" for what Carville said was a particularly high level of betrayal, named a handful of Clinton fundraisers who say they had similar cheery conversations with Richardson. Richardson also gave former President Bill Clinton the impression that he would ultimately back Hillary Clinton as well as Bill Clinton's top aides. When Bill Clinton called Richardson on hearing the news of his endorsement switch, Richardson refused to return his phone calls. "I wouldn't treat President Bush the way he treated President Clinton," says Carville. Richardson's communication director, Gilbert Gallegos, says no such representations were made to anyone connected to Clinton and that when Bill Clinton flew to New Mexico to watch the Super Bowl with Richardson, the governor was clear about his intentions. "Gov. Richardson told President Clinton not to come to New Mexico for the Super Bowl if he expected an endorsement," says Gallegos.

This has been a bad week for Clinton's financial backers. In addition to the Richardson betrayal, they also feel that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has turned on them. Despite their years of supporting the party, they have been unable to use their leverage to move Pelosi away from what they see as her public support for Obama. Though Pelosi says she is neutral, she has said that the superdelegates should follow the will of the pledged delegates. Since Obama holds an insurmountable lead among the pledged delegates, this is just a long way for her to say, "Elect Barack." Clinton fundraisers wrote to Pelosi asking that she retract her remarks and support the party rules that allow superdelegates to vote their conscience. Furious at the letter, she refused to.

What's significant about the Pelosi and Richardson duet is that both seem to have made a calculation that in the long-brewing tension between party elites and the new grass roots, they're siding with the latter. These veteran Democrats may be making their moves based on their assessments of Obama as a candidate, but they also may be informed by his success in raising money online and from a huge number of small-dollar donors, which may mean a dilution in the power of traditional rainmakers. As a sign of the new landscape, Moveon.org sent out a fundraising letter asking Pelosi to stand her ground.

Richardson, through a spokesman, denies that he told anyone he would support Clinton. Those who know him say that as a politician who has negotiated with some of the world's trickiest foreign leaders, he knows how to let people "believe what they want to believe," as one put it. Both Obama's and Richardson's spokesmen offer ironclad denials that Obama offered Richardson anything specifically or implicitly in the way of a quid pro quo, and there is no actual evidence of any kind of deal.

What Bill Richardson did or didn't extract from Barack Obama in return for his timely support may not be known until Obama wins the nomination and picks his running mate or wins the election and names his Cabinet. But there is one other little piece of evidence that suggests Richardson must have wrested some promise in return for his support. It's contained in the "Richardson Rules," his pointers for how to negotiate: "Don't concede absolutely everything the other side is requesting. Get something in return, even if it's minor."

By John Dickerson, Slate Magazine, March 28, 2008

Last Friday the New York Times asked me to comment on New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson's endorsement of Sen. Barack Obama for president. For 15 years, Richardson served with no small measure of distinction as the representative of New Mexico's 3rd Congressional District. But he gained national stature -- and his career took off -- when President Bill Clinton appointed him U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and later made him energy secretary.

So, when asked on Good Friday about Richardson's rejection of the Clintons, the metaphor was too good to pass by. I compared Richardson to Judas Iscariot. (And Matthew Dowd is right: Had it been the Fourth of July, I probably would have called him Benedict Arnold.)

I believed that Richardson's appointments in Bill Clinton's administration and his longtime personal relationship with both Clintons, combined with his numerous assurances to the Clintons and their supporters that he would never endorse any of Sen. Hillary Clinton's opponents, merited a strong response.

I was fully aware of what kind of response calling someone a Judas would evoke.

Certainly, it didn't take long for the resign-renounce-denounce complex to kick into high gear.

In a bit of bloviation that brought joy to my heart, Bill O'Reilly pronounced himself "appalled."

Keith Olbermann, about two degrees shy of the temperature necessary for self-combustion, quipped, "So if he's Judas in this analogy, who's Jesus?"

Even Diane Sawyer took the analogy to the extreme, questioning, "Are you saying that he made a deal of some kind when you talk about 30 shekels?"

Others opined that my remark was "tactless" and "ugly."

Heck, I give myself some credit for managing to get the Clinton and Obama campaigns to agree on something -- that neither wanted to be associated with my remarks.

I know enough to know that comparing a former Cabinet secretary and sitting governor to Judas is inflammatory and provocative. I expected the coverage that it evoked.

All political campaigns have schedules, meticulously designed about two weeks out and refined day by day. These printed booklets are each workday's bible. They are helpful and valid until the first event of the morning. When everything starts running behind.

No candidate seeking votes, obviously, can pass up 20 more eager hands in the rope line waiting to be shaken. And autographs to be signed. And photos to be taken so someone can prove someday they were once, however briefly, in the presence of fame.

AUSTIN - Texas Democrats, still reeling from the chaos of precinct caucuses in early March, are ready to do it again Saturday with 280 county and senate district conventions to keep sorting out whether Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton will win more delegates from the state.

Saturday's conventions are the third step in a four-step process for selecting delegates to the Democratic National Convention, where the presidential nominee will finally be decided.

First was the March 4 primary vote, which Clinton won with 51 percent to Obama's 47 percent. Immediately after the polls closed that night were more than 8,000 precinct caucuses that selected about 88,000 delegates. Obama appears to be winning that step with about 56 percent to 44 percent for Clinton, according to the state party's unofficial incomplete count.

On Saturday, those 88,000 delegates will be winnowed down to 7,294 delegates to the state party convention in June, when the final 67 caucus delegates will be selected to go on to the national convention.

Texas's caucus system has been a political footnote even within the state because it hasn't had a significant role in picking the Democratic nominee in 20 years.

As if that wasn't confusing enough, the campaigns are continuing to tangle over delegates and bicker over who might be stretching the rules.

Both the Obama and Clinton campaigns kept organizers working in Texas after March 4 to mobilize supporters.

"This system forces the campaigns to make sure their supporters continue to stay involved and turn out," said Texas Democratic Party spokesman Hector Nieto.

Obama's campaign challenged the math used to apportion delegates in some precinct caucuses in Hidalgo County, a Clinton stronghold.

Clinton's campaign didn't challenge the caucus itself, but is helping delegates who have complaints.

"We obviously support anybody who wants to roll up their sleeves and participate in the process that the Texas Democratic Party rules allow for," said Clinton spokeswoman Adrienne Elrod.

Irving resident Michael Batiste, a 37-year-old Obama delegate, said he got a call from a Clinton campaign worker this week who suggested he might want to switch his support to Clinton. But Batiste, a first-time Democratic delegate, said he has no plans to abandon Obama.

"They said, 'Are you sure that you want to stay with Barack?' " Batiste said. "I took offense to it just because I'd already decided that I was going to be for Barack."

Elrod said Clinton campaign callers have not been instructed to try to persuade Obama delegates to switch their support—but she alleged that Obama's campaign workers are doing that to Clinton delegates.

Obama spokesman Josh Earnest said Obama supporters are "fired up and ready to go" and that the campaign is not attempting to lure Clinton supporters.

Meanwhile, the Clinton campaign said some of its delegates in Caldwell County received calls telling them their local convention this weekend was moved or canceled, which Elrod characterized as an attempt to confuse people.

Earnest denied that the Obama campaign is behind those calls.

Texas Democratic Party Chairman Boyd Richie said Friday delegates have complained of e-mails and phone calls saying that conventions have been canceled.

"The Texas Democratic Party has not been informed that any county or district convention has been cancelled or postponed," Richie said in a written statement.

Both campaigns' Web sites offer instructions to their delegates.

After the March 4 record voter turnout, some of Saturday's conventions in large population areas are expected to include thousands of participants and last all day and into the evening.

A few small counties aren't holding a convention. Armstrong, Hansford and Roberts counties, for example, didn't hold Democratic primaries or precinct caucuses, so there were no delegates selected to attend a county convention. Concho County held a caucus on election night, but no one showed up.

By law, county and senate district conventions are supposed to be held Saturday. But Collin County is holding its convention Sunday because it said it couldn't find adequate meeting space for Saturday.

By KELLEY SHANNON, Associated Press, March 28, 2008

With losses in three out of four primaries yesterday, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and his campaign face a scenario that a barrage of advertising, phone calls and door-knocking could not avert -- a protracted, two-front war against Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and the presumptive Republican nominee, Sen. John McCain.

Even before the polls opened, campaign officials were dreading an outcome that would keep Clinton (D-N.Y.) in the race at least through the Pennsylvania primary on April 22. Those seven weeks will cost Obama at least $10 million, and possibly much more, campaign aides say, as he battles a rejuvenated Clinton who will have every incentive to try to force him into a major mistake.

Obama aides also expect to take concentrated fire from McCain (Ariz.) and his Republican allies, who have already begun raising questions about the 46-year-old Democratic senator's credibility, authenticity and even his patriotism.

For months before his victory in Iowa, doubters questioned whether Obama had the stomach to deliver the blows necessary to wear down Clinton's advantages. Now, the question is whether he can take a punch -- "and you know they will be coming," said former Iowa governor Tom Vilsack (D), a Clinton supporter.

Some Obama supporters are increasing pressure on him to shift tactics, frame more sharply his criticism of his opponents and begin inoculating himself from the GOP attacks, but Obama remains reluctant to change the approaches that he still thinks will secure him the nomination. "I have said consistently that we do things differently," Obama said. "It's worked for us so far. And I'm not going to do things that I'm not comfortable in doing."

To be sure, Obama campaign aides think the defeats yesterday in Ohio, Rhode Island and Texas will not alter his path to the Democratic nomination. Under the Democratic Party's system of distributing delegates proportionately, Obama will maintain a lead in pledged delegates, and any diminishment of that delegate lead is likely to be recouped in Saturday's Wyoming caucuses and next Tuesday's Mississippi primary.

"No matter what happens tonight, we have nearly the same delegate lead we had this morning," Obama said last night in San Antonio, "and we are on our way to winning this nomination."

Obama aides stressed that the campaign will not be drawn into a fight for Pennsylvania on Clinton's terms: an expensive, all-out battle focused on her. Instead, the campaign's main target will be McCain -- a point underscored by Obama when he declared himself "ready to start a great debate about the future of the country with a man who loves his country and served it bravely."

But Democratic leaders outside the campaign are worried that a candidate who cruised through his only Senate campaign, in 2004, does not know what is about to hit him. Republicans are already planting the seeds for a negative campaign designed to make one overarching point, said Rep. Artur Davis (D-Ala.), an Obama supporter and informal adviser: This man is not who you think he is.

"You have to question whether he is equipped to deal with the complex and serious issues that are facing the nation," said Danny Diaz, the Republican National Committee's communications director.

Republicans such as Rep. Jack Kingston (Ga.) have used Obama's decision not to wear an American flag on his lapel to question his patriotism. Virtually every day, the Republican Jewish Coalition sends e-mails to Jewish voters questioning Obama's commitment to Israel. And darker e-mail and Internet campaigns continue to falsely suggest that Obama is everything from a Muslim to a terrorist sympathizer.

McCain has already made clear how he will try to brand Obama if they are opponents in November, drawing on the Illinois Democrat's Senate votes on abortion, taxes and guns as evidence that he is out of the mainstream.

But more broadly, Republicans are poised to offer what they consider a stark contrast between McCain's lifetime of experience -- in war, in the Senate, in politics -- and a caricature of a young, inexperienced neophyte with little but fancy rhetoric to offer.

That is a line of attack Clinton has tried for weeks. But McCain's advisers say they think their candidate will be more effective in convincing the public that Obama is not ready to lead the nation, especially during an economic downturn and while waging two wars overseas.

As part of the wide-ranging case they have begun constructing, they plan to follow some of the threads that Clinton has already exposed: Obama's ties to Chicago businessman Antoin "Tony" Rezko; the senator's failure to hold hearings on Afghanistan in his Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee; his decision to repeatedly vote "present" in the Illinois legislature.

A senior Obama strategist, David Axelrod, acknowledged that he is receiving varied advice from Democrats, including changing Obama's stump speech to emphasize his American roots and pushing for a second round of changes in the nation's welfare laws, this time aimed at stray fathers.

If Obama finds himself forced to defend his patriotism before a skeptical electorate, he will be in deep trouble, Vilsack warned. But, he added, "what's the alternative, ignore it? We paid a price in 2004 for thinking the charge wouldn't stick."

Davis said Obama needs to immediately preempt attacks on his patriotism by reprising the theme of his 2004 speech to the Democratic National Convention -- that only in the United States of America could the son of a Kenyan immigrant and a woman from a small-town in Kansas aspire to the heights of power. Obama took up that theme last night, but only deep inside his San Antonio address.

Other Democrats worry that Republicans might find some nugget from Obama's days as a community organizer in Chicago to paint him as a radical who will be unwilling to challenge liberal orthodoxy on social and poverty issues.

But Obama has resisted such entreaties. "There's no reason why we would want to change our approach," Obama said yesterday.

Obama is accustomed to doubts about his ability to withstand an opponent's attacks. During his 2004 Senate race, he kept above his desk an image of Muhammad Ali defeating Sonny Liston. But that campaign turned into a cakewalk when, first, his main opponent for the Democratic nomination, Blair Hull, and then his expected Republican opponent, Jack Ryan, self-destructed.

Obama campaign manager David Plouffe scoffs at the notion that Obama will not be prepared for the coming attacks. "The Clintons are the gold standard of negative tactical campaigning," he said. But that attitude worries many Democrats.

"What Barack has shown is the ability to raise a prodigious amount of money. The one thing I don't know that Barack has proven is, can he take a sustained attack?" asked one unaffiliated strategist.

Yesterday's results might suggest that Clinton's punches are landing with more force than at any other time in the 13 months since Obama entered the campaign -- and as the Obama campaign is beset by missteps.

Clinton's TV ad last week questioning Obama's readiness in a national security crisis threw him on the defensive, and Obama economic adviser Austan Goolsbee's meeting with a Canadian consulate official -- a meeting the campaign initially denied had happened -- raised questions about his candor. Couple those issues with the opening days of former Obama supporter Rezko's corruption trial, and Obama entered yesterday's primary elections in the midst of a serious rough patch.

"There's no doubt that if you're being attacked every day, it creates a sense of turbulence," Obama acknowledged.

The campaign's casual response to the Goolsbee episode seemed to assume a presumption of innocence that does not exist for politicians. A story that could have been dealt with the day it broke on Canadian television was instead handled carelessly. Obama said he was told that the story was untrue, but later it became clear that a meeting had taken place, and Clinton seized on the contradiction to portray her opponent as a liar.

"That was the information I had at the time," Obama pleaded on Monday.

Clinton unveiled her "red phone" ad in Texas suggesting that Obama is a foreign policy naif, just as advisers were urging Obama to challenge Clinton's contention that she holds a vast foreign policy advantage. But Obama held back until Sunday afternoon, in Westerville, Ohio.

"We're still waiting to hear Senator Clinton tell us what precise foreign policy experience that she is claiming, that makes her prepared to answer that phone call at three in the morning," Obama said to deafening cheers.

Then he dropped the issue. When reporters were pummeling him at the Monday news conference, Obama described his rival in the most banal of terms. "She is a hardworking candidate," he said.

Even before yesterday, senior Obama campaign officials had been preparing to shift the campaign's "optics," if not the message. Obama's most compelling attribute was supposed to be likability. But as the Obama phenomenon grew, the campaign sent him to ever-larger arenas, transforming him from a regular guy into a virtual demigod before throngs of screaming admirers. Campaign aides then tried to combine intimate, policy-focused roundtables with rallies, but local news broadcasts ran only images of the rallies.

Now, the campaign hopes to keep the rallies separate from the roundtables in each media market. "We all are uncomfortable with a campaign whose signature is a rally," Axelrod said. "If you overdo this, you can lend credence to a caricature that is untrue and unhelpful."

Making adjustments is something all campaigns do. But this is not the situation that Obama's aides hoped they would be in. Axelrod acknowledged that fatigue is setting in. "There's a weariness," he said. "We're in the 27th inning of a nine-inning game."

PITTSBURGH, Pennsylvania (AFP) - US Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama on Saturday stepped up efforts to wrest away his rival Hillary Clinton's blue-collar base amid heightening fears about the country's sagging economy.

Obama was at the beginning of a six-day foray into Pennsylvania, a Clinton stronghold, as Democratic Party angst mounted over fallout from their fierce White House race.

As Obama set course for the northeastern state's nominating contest on April 22, Democratic chief Howard Dean warned both sides that whoever loses their battle must fall in line behind the winner to unite the party.

But a top Obama backer, Senator Patrick Leahy, said there was no way Clinton could win, and she should fold her effort and allow Obama to take on presumptive Republican nominee John McCain.

Obama started a meandering bus tour here by snapping up the endorsement of Pennsylvania Senator Bob Casey, who hails from a prominent political dynasty and is popular among blue-collar voters with whom Obama has sometimes struggled to connect.

"His battle and his life's work to help people is our battle here in Pennsylvania," Casey said, as he appeared with the Illinois senator here.

Obama trails Clinton by double digits in most polls in Pennsylvania, despite leading her in pledged delegates, nominating contest victories and the popular vote nationally.

His aides however believe Obama manages to reduce Clinton leads when he has time to spend in a state, and believe even a narrow loss which confounds expectations of a Clinton landslide could be spun as a victory.

"We win if we lose by only five points," said an Obama staffer on condition of anonymity.

Clinton, campaigning in Indiana on Friday, needs a big win in Pennsylvania to boost her argument that only she can win big states that Democrats must secure to recapture the White House in November.

Dean, the Democratic National Committee chairman, warned that Obama and Clinton must not rip the party apart, and tried to head off a divisive convention fight.

"Somebody's going to lose this race with 49.8 percent of the vote, and that person has got to pull their supporters in behind the nominee," Dean told CBS.

"That's our obligation. Because in the end this is not about Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, it's about our country."

Dean also said he favored a solution which would see party graybeards, or superdelegates, effectively crown the nominee long before the Democratic convention in August in Denver.

"I think there's 800 of them and 450 of them have already said who they're for. I'd like the other 350 to say who they're on between now and the first of July so we don't have to take this into the convention."

Obama echoed the view during a rally in Pennsylvania, pointing out that the primary race is like "a good movie that lasted about a half an hour too long."

He also argued that the war in Iraq had damaged US's reputation around the world and promised a return to a more traditional course.

"The truth is that my foreign policy is actually a return to the traditional, bipartisan, realistic foreign policy of George Bush's father, John F. Kennedy, of in some ways Ronald Reagan," Obama said in Greensburg, Pennsylvania.

Neither Clinton nor Obama can reach the magic number of 2,025 delegates necessary to wrap up the nomination, so the choice of superdelegates will be decisive.

Leahy said on Vermont Public Radio that "there is no way that Senator Clinton is going to win enough delegates to get the nomination."

"She ought to withdraw and she ought to be backing Senator Obama. Now, obviously that's a decision that only she can make," Leahy said.

Clinton campaign spokesman Phil Singer accused Obama's team of trying to shut down the nominating battle before all Democrats had a chance to vote.

"The Obama campaign clearly thinks Senator Clinton can win and is trying to end this race before more people vote," Singer said.

As the Democrats squabbled, McCain cranked up the pace of his general election effort, debuting a campaign ad stressing his military heroism and incarceration during the Vietnam war.

"The American president Americans have been waiting for," says the narrator in the ad, which includes film of navy pilot McCain being asked for his military identification number "624787" as he lies wounded after being shot down in 1967.

The advertisement was the latest sign that the 71-year-old Arizona senator, who strongly backs the Iraq war, wants to make November's general election about who can best keep Americans safe.

AFP, March 29, 2008

Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama told Democrats to take a deep breath yesterday and stop worry. The two rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination told their supporters that "they may bicker daily over issues, character and innuendo" but they both believe that "Democratic voters will coalesce around a nominee and carry him or her to victory in November over Republican John McCain."

The Associated Press reports that both candidates addressed the issue after a series of polls showed that the intensity of their struggle was affecting their supporters. Many told pollsters that they would rather vote for McCain than for the other Democrat.

"Please think through this decision. It is not a wise decision," Clinton said to applause from a crowd in Fayetteville, North Carolina. "Every time we have a vigorous contest like we're having this primary election, people get intense. Senator Obama has intense support. I have intense support. It's exciting because people want to be involved. But, the differences ... pale in comparison to the differences between us and Senator McCain."

Clinton pledged to be a "team player," regardless of who won the nomination, saying she would help to make sure the party was united

Meanwhile, Obama was making a similar point during an interview on ABC's "World News."

"There are going to be some bruised feelings, whoever the nominee is. We are going to have to come together and remind ourselves that there is a heck of a lot bigger difference between either Senator Clinton or myself, and John McCain," Obama said. "I think short term, there is going to be work to do for the nominee to bring the party back together again. People feel pretty passionate about their respective candidates. I appreciate that, and I understand it."

In an interview with the AP, former vice president Al Gore also said there was no urgency to resolve the contest now. "What have we got, five months left?" he said, when asked about whether he would make an endorsement soon.

NPR, March 28, 2008

A look at the upcoming contests in the race between Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination:

___

WYOMING:

Caucuses on March 8 with 12 delegates

Wyoming Democrats are outnumbered by Republicans by more than 2-to-1. No public polling has been done in the state. Gov. Dave Freudenthal, a Democrat, has declined to endorse either candidate, while state party Chair John Millin is backing Obama.

Former President Clinton is scheduled to campaign for his wife in the state on Thursday; Obama, who has generally performed better in caucuses, arrives on Friday.

___

MISSISSIPPI:

Primary is March 11 with 33 delegates

Mississippi's population is 60 percent white and about 38 percent black, according to the U.S. Census. The state does not register voters by party. Historical voting patterns show high black turnout in Democratic primaries. This might translate into strong showing for Obama. Clinton was first lady of neighboring Arkansas for the 12 years while her husband was governor.

Three of the state's superdelegates have endorsed Obama, three others are uncommitted and one superdelegate will be named during the state convention June 7.

___

PENNSYLVANIA:

Primary is April 22 with 158 delegates

Pennsylvania is the biggest prize left to be won in the nomination battle, and the political terrain favors Clinton. The primary is open only to registered Democrats, leaving out the independents and crossover Republicans who have boosted Obama's candidacy. Pennsylvanians who want to participate have until March 24 to register as a Democrat.

Pennsylvania is also an industrial state that has suffered from a changing economy similar to neighboring Ohio, where Clinton soundly defeated Obama. And 15 percent of Pennsylvanians are senior citizens, a larger percentage than all but two other states. and this group has been among Clinton's most reliable supporters. Clinton has consistently led Obama in polls of likely voters in the state, but her lead had narrowed to just 5 percent in a poll taken in February.

The state also has 29 superdelegates, including Gov. Ed Rendell, who has campaigned for Clinton.

___

GUAM:

Caucuses on May 3 with 4 delegates

It's a safe bet neither candidate will visit the far-off Pacific Ocean island.

___

NORTH CAROLINA:

Primary is May 6 with 115 delegates

North Carolina is the home state of former Democratic candidate John Edwards. The former senator has met with both Obama and Clinton, but has yet to endorse a candidate, as have many of the superdelegates from the state who initially backed Edwards' second bid for the White House.

Obama won neighboring South Carolina and Georgia partly on his strength among black voters, and blacks make up 22 percent of North Carolina's population. But Clinton could fare well in a primary where she'll share the ballot with Lt. Gov. Beverly Perdue, a Democrat making a bid to become the state's first female governor.

___

INDIANA:

Primary is May 6 with 72 delegates

Indiana's pledged delegates are awarded proportionally: 47 of them based on primary results in the state's nine congressional districts and 25 from the statewide results. Like neighboring Ohio, a large share of the state's work force - 13.7 percent - is in manufacturing, and the black population is relatively small at 9 percent. The state doesn't have registration by party, and the primary will be open to independents and crossover Republicans.

Popular Sen. Evan Bayh and four other of the state's 11 superdelegates have endorsed Clinton, while one is backing Obama. The state's four Democratic congressmen remain uncommitted. Obama, the senator from neighboring Illinois, could benefit from Chicago media coverage in northwest Indiana communities such as Gary and East Chicago. Neither candidate has been to the state since last July.

___

WEST VIRGINIA:

Primary is May 13 with 28 delegates

The primary is open to independent voters. Bill Clinton carried the state in both of his wins. It also has the fourth-lowest percentage of nonwhite residents in the country, U.S. Census figures show. The economy, especially the future of the state's coal industry, is a key issue.

Hillary Clinton visited the Mountain State in July for a fundraiser and a town hall-style meeting. Obama has not campaigned in the state. Obama outraised Clinton in the state in January, but overall Clinton has raised three times more money in West Virginia than Obama and Republican nominee-in-waiting John McCain combined. Of the state's ten superdelegates, three have endorsed Clinton, one is backing Obama, and the rest are undecided.

___

OREGON:

Primary is May 20 with 52 delegates

Oregon is the only state in the nation where elections are done entirely by mail. Voting begins about three weeks before "election day" and is open only to registered Democrats. Polling suggests Obama has an edge over Clinton, and that Oregon Democrats believe he would match up better against McCain in the general election. Obama could do particularly well in the liberal strongholds of Portland and Eugene, but the more moderate Portland suburbs could prove fertile territory for Clinton.

Turnout should be high for Democrats, who will also be choosing a candidate to run against Sen. Gordon Smith in the fall, a Republican incumbent who is considered vulnerable. Gov. Ted Kulongoski and Rep. Darlene Hooley have endorsed Clinton, while Rep. Earl Blumenauer has endorsed Obama. The rest of the state's 12 superdelegates are uncommitted.

___

KENTUCKY:

Primary is May 20 with 51 delegates

Kentucky is predominantly white with a strong blue-collar presence in a conservative state that Bill Clinton carried twice in the 1990s. Republicans and independent voters can't cast ballots in the Democratic race.

The state has large pockets of poverty, especially in its Appalachian region. The state's household median income of $39,372 is more than $9,000 below the national average, according to 2006 figures. Manufacturing and construction make up 22 percent of employment. Obama has been endorsed by first-term Rep. John Yarmuth, who represents the Louisville area, a key Democratic stronghold.

___

PUERTO RICO:

Caucuses on June 1 with 55 delegates

Seven superdelegates will round out the island's 62 convention votes. Three of the superdelegates are committed to Clinton, two to Obama, and two are uncommitted. Residents of the island get no vote in the general election.

Puerto Rican politics largely revolve around the long-standing debate over what should be the island's future relationship to the U.S. mainland. Clinton may benefit from the island's close links to New York, home to many people from Puerto Rico.

Democrats here are pushing to change their contest to a primary this year, but still need national party approval.

___

MONTANA:

Primary is June 3 with 16 delegates

The most recent poll, taken in December, showed that Clinton was preferred over Obama among Montana Democrats, although a majority of voters in the state have an unfavorable impression of her. There is no party registration in Montana; the primary is open to all voters.

The state's most prominent Democrats - Sen. Max Baucus and Gov. Brian Schweitzer - have said they will not make an endorsement until after the primary. The state's economy has so far remained strong. Prices for farm commodities and natural resources like oil are still solid, and unemployment is low.

___

SOUTH DAKOTA:

Primary is June 3 with 15 delegates

No independent public opinion polls have been published on the candidates' popularity in the state, and neither Obama nor Clinton has campaigned in South Dakota. However, Obama has solid backing from South Dakota's superdelegates - six of seven have publicly endorsed him, including former Sen. Tom Daschle. Several former Daschle aides hold key positions in Obama's campaign.

The Associated Press, March 5, 2008

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Election officials in Texas have resumed counting votes from Tuesday's caucuses after overwhelming turnout pushed the caucuses later than expected.

State Democratic Party officials say that final results from Tuesday's caucuses won't be certified until county-level conventions convene on March 29, but that they expect to release their last batch of unofficial results Thursday evening.

Officials stopped counting caucus results early and resumed later in the day Wednesday before calling it a night.

They restarted the count Thursday morning.

Sen. Barack Obama led with about 56 percent of state delegates in the caucuses, compared to about 44 percent for Sen. Hillary Clinton, with about 41 percent of the state reporting by Thursday morning.

Clinton won the state's primary 51 percent to Obama's 48 percent. The state party awards the delegates proportionally statewide -- Clinton earned 65 delegates to Obama's 61.

The caucuses determine how the remaining third of Texas' delegates are allocated.

Clinton also won Tuesday in Ohio and Rhode Island, while Obama won Vermont.

The Texas Democratic Party estimates 1.1 million Texans attended the precinct conventions, doubling the 508,000 who voted in 2006.

As polling places closed Tuesday evening, Texans lined up in bigger-than-expected numbers for the caucuses -- in some places lining up in parking lots and overflowing buildings where caucuses were held.

And that large number created problems at caucus sites throughout the state.

A CNN I-Reporter in Houston, Texas, reported hundreds of people at his polling place -- saying he had to wait for more than an hour just to sign in.

Mark Houston, a registered voter, told CNN affiliate KTRK that "we went on to wait and wait ... it seemed all we were doing was waiting."

At a location in Austin, Texas, about 800 people showed up -- far outstripping expectations.

CNN I-Reporter Bill Seitzler added that "most of the people in the room had no idea what was going to happen ... people were jumping up on tables ... and saying this is how it's going to go."

"It's been extremely confusing. No one seems to be in charge," Patricio Espinoza, another CNN I-Reporter, said.

But the scene was much calmer at a Plano, Texas, caucus site.

Russ Sikes, a registered voter in the Dallas, Texas, suburb, said his caucus site, which had around 70 people, "wasn't bad at all" and was "fairly organized."

"It went smoothly ... no big deal and kind of fun ... it wasn't disorganized or slow," he said. "It was amazing how big the turnout was."

A complicated formula in Texas weighs delegates more heavily in highly populated areas.

"It literally makes no sense," said CNN chief political analyst Bill Schneider.

"The voters don't understand it and to some extent they're in control of the caucus process. So I think you're going to get complaints about irregularities."

In what pundits have dubbed the "Texas two-step," the state's Democratic Party hosts both a primary election, in which 126 delegates are awarded, and a post-election caucus in which another 67 are awarded.

It's possible for the loser of the primary to win more delegates with a strong showing in the caucuses. And Texas' method of awarding delegates in the primary -- with more delegates coming from large population centers like Houston, Dallas and Austin -- further complicates the matter.

"Those [districts] that have supported the Democratic ticket [in the presidential election] well in the past tend to get up to as many as eight delegates, those who have not get as few as two," said Texas Monthly's Paul Burka.

"Sen. Clinton tended to carry the rural areas where the Republicans are very strong in the suburbs, so her districts are worth fewer delegates and Obama has won districts that are in urban areas that have been very strong for Democrats, so he gets more delegates."

Clinton supporters were saying a strong performance of any sort would keep her campaign alive. Weeks ago, former President Clinton had predicted his wife would need wins in Texas and Ohio to stay in the race.

Clinton's campaign, meanwhile, says it may challenge the state's caucus results, citing what they call "hundreds of complaints" of mischief caused by the Obama campaign at caucus, The Associated Press reported.

Clinton officials cite evidence that Obama supporters illegally obtained caucus packets in several precincts throughout the state.

Under caucus rules, whomever has the packet is placed in charge of the caucus. They also say Obama supporters locked Clinton voters out of several caucuses, the AP reported.

By Suzanne Malveaux, Ed Hornick and Bill Schneider, CNN, March 6, 2008

"Gender," Gloria Steinem wrote in the New York Times, "is probably the most restricting force in American life, whether the question is who must be in the kitchen or who could be in the White House."

Later that day, Hillary Clinton's victory in New Hampshire made her the first woman to win a presidential primary.

Is Clinton hampered by her gender as she fights for the Democratic nomination? I think the reality is neither as dire as Steinem suggests nor as benign as those of us who would like to see a woman elected president would wish.

Clinton herself has recently sounded like Steinem by way of Tammy Wynette: 1992's invocation of "Stand by Your Man" has morphed into "Sometimes It's Hard to Be a Woman."

As the candidate said last week, "It's hard being a woman out there. It is obviously challenging with some of [the] things that are said, that are not even personal to me so much as they are about women."

The burden of two X chromosomes, Clinton suggested, has made hers a tougher climb: "Now every so often I just wish that it were a little more of an even playing field, but, you know, I play on whatever field is out there."

This complaint is a little hard to take from someone who entered the race as the Official Candidate of the Democratic Establishment. Clinton might not have been born on third base, to paraphrase the late Texas governor Ann Richards on George W. Bush, but she began the campaign with the equivalent of a triple.

The candidate of inevitability and the victim of the uneven playing field aren't compatible concepts.

If anything, the playing field has been demographically tilted in Clinton's favor. Women account for nearly six in 10 Democratic primary voters. In October, when it seemed almost a given that Clinton would win the nomination, Clinton strategist Mark Penn bragged about her edge with women and predicted that 24 percent of Republican women could defect in the general election. I don't recall any complaints about field conditions then.

Clinton's loss, if it comes to that, will have more to do with squandered and mismanaged resources; a shapeless, shifting message; a loose-lipped spouse; and arrogant strategists who dismissed the threat from Barack Obama and assumed the past would predict the future.

Yet I'm not arguing that gender has been irrelevant in this campaign. How could it be with the first serious female candidate for the White House?

The gender gap in Clinton's support is persistent -- and striking. In every Post-ABC News poll since December, Clinton's support among women has significantly exceeded her backing among men, with differences ranging from the mid- to high teens. In the latest poll, Clinton trailed Obama among men 35 to 57 percent, even as she clung to a narrow lead, 50 to 45 percent, among women.

Still, as Democratic pollster Geoff Garin notes, women have tended to stick with Clinton even as men have been swept away by Obama, suggesting that the difference may lie more in women's affinity for Clinton and interest in a female candidate. "It does not appear to be the case that Democratic men are particularly hostile to her," Garin said.

Clinton can legitimately complain about a double standard when it comes to sexism on the campaign trail. The exquisite sensitivity to perceived racial slights -- Joe Biden on the "clean" and "articulate" Obama -- has been missing on gender. "How do we beat the bitch?" one voter -- an elegantly dressed older woman, no less -- asked John McCain in South Carolina. He laughed, and there were no repercussions. Contrast that with McCain's immediate repudiation of a conservative talk show host who used Obama's middle name in introducing McCain.

But the most problema