Hillary's so-called 35 years experience, which included 15 years at The Rose law firm, she not only represented Tyson Foods, but Wal-Mart Stores Inc., Stephens Inc.(investment bank), Worthen Banking Corporation; Arkansas-Oklahoma Gas Corp.(oil and gas interests); ALCOA; The Equitable Life Assurance Society; General Electric; John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Co.; International Paper Co.; Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Co.; New York Life Insurance Co.; Prudential Insurance Co.; USX Corp; and the Union National Bank of Arkansas.

Her campaign’s chaos and incompetence has shown her to be anything but

That's a point I've been hammering on with my fence sitting friends for a while now. A huge problem with the present administration is no one knows exactly who's talking. Is it the president? Is it Cheney? Is it someone else? The restoration of Clinton will bring about similar issues. Will it be Hillary talking? Bill? Someone else? Hillary says it will be all her, but watching her campaign, one gets a decidedly different message.

Remember back in the Fall when everyone was begging Obama to go negative and start whacking at Hillary? That he would need to start being substantive? Both he and his people refused to do either, choosing to stay on their current course. That's the anti-Hillary. No drama. Just competence. That's what I want on Day One. The more I watch him, the more I'm convinced that's what we'll get.

I think Obama's answer to the charge that he "lacks the experience to solve our nation's problems" is quite powerful. He says that the reason we can't solve our problems isn't lack of good ideas, it's the lack of political will. And what we need in a president isn't a policy wonk with the next great idea, it's someone who inspires people to solve the problems -- even if they don't get everything they want.

Obama's got the nomination wrapped up, barring some scandal. McCain has a certain cross-over appeal with independents that might make this thing close, but I just don't think voters are going to elect a grouchy 72 year-old to the presidency.

$11,000 on pizza; $1,200 on donuts; $25,000 at the Belagio Hotel...and millions of $$$ on failed consultants.
Hillary is really just another "old white man" in Washington DC.

Another good campaign tip for Obama-don't trust the secret service. http://www.star-telegram.com/dallas_news/story/486413.html

don't trust the secret service

W picking up a few pointers from Pervez?

Hilary ain't Bill, and the voters are saying so. She can at least go down gracefully, which would be something novel for Team Clinton.

Obama's got the nomination wrapped up, barring some scandal.

I hope so. But I have this sneaking feeling that Howard Dean & the upper crust of the DNC are going to make sure its Clinton "no matter what". She just strikes me as the type that will do *anything* to become president. I wouldnt even be surprised if there were "voter shenanigans" within their party.

She lost me when said she'd stay in Iraq and attack Iran. ...And when she went sucking up to Rupert Murdoch. ...And wrote her hawkish article for Foreign Affairs and the CFR crowd.

Not that Obama or McCain are any better. She's just another war mongering elitist.

Well, I like Obama, too. But Hillary is a good candidate, and if it comes down to Hillary or McCain, it's Hillary. It's not even close. Do we really want to be in Iraq for 100 years? Do we really want a Republican appointing more conservative federal judges to the bench for another 4 years? People, get real. I'm enthusiastic about Obama, too, but let's not demonize this woman in order to feel self-statisfied in our enthusiasm for Obama.

But I have this sneaking feeling that Howard Dean & the upper crust of the DNC are going to make sure its Clinton "no matter what".

Dean is still on the outs with the Democratic elite, who never liked him or his 50-state strategy. One reason the party is so concerned if this goes to the convention is that Dean's just not powerful enough to broker anything. It would be chaos.

I think Bill slipped the other day when he told Texas voters that they had to come out for Hillary because if she loses Texas she loses the nomination. It sounds like internally they're resigned to that fact.

Hillary is a good candidate

ICK...I plan on voting Obama...but if she is the one, I will vote McCain.

Resisting the urge to call her on her demonic and hypocritical attacks on Obama is getting harder and harder as she sinks lower and lower in her approach. She and her team are running a terrible campaign, and resorting to "the politics of personal destruction" when they lose on the merits. Multiple good posts on HuffPo today detailing the virtues demonstrated by Obama's campaign, vs Hillary's. Urge all to surf on over there and see for yourself.

That he would need to start being substantive? Both he and his people refused to do either, choosing to stay on their current course. That's the anti-Hillary. No drama. Just competence.

So Chris - in your eyes, not providing substantive information = competence?

if it comes down to Hillary or McCain, it's Hillary.

In the Electoral College? I'm not so sure.

not providing substantive information = competence

Again: abstractions are preferable to lies. Like Gore eight years ago, Clinton is trying on various identities and approaches to see if one or more will stick. Sort of an ideal campaign in reverse. Instead of showing the voters who you are so that they can make up their minds for or against you, it's a process of divining who the voters might like you to be, and trying to be that. In contrast to this, Obama seems to be promoting himself for what he is.

“I'm enthusiastic about Obama, too, but let's not demonize this woman in order to feel self-statisfied in our enthusiasm for Obama.”

You have to admit that it’s getting harder and harder to say anything positive about her when she continues to go negative against Obama on a personal level. I understand why she is frustrated by Obama’s success, but she only makes herself look like an angry and reactive whiner with the personal attacks, etc.

The fact that there are lots of people who like Obama but would vote for McCain over Clinton is the reason we ended up with George Bush.

So there is now talk about Nader running (again - not sure why), if that would happen then no matter who the nominee from the democratic party is they would be hurt. As for Hillary versus Obama - I vote for none of the above. Which means I'll hold my nose (as I've done in almost every election that I can remember) and vote for the 'lesser of two evils' - which in this case will be McCain.