Still too soon to count Hillary out

For Obama's own sake he better hope that he takes this nomination. Hillary won't soon forget and will remember that revenge is a dish best served cold. And those who jumped ship from Clinton to Obama best hang on tight to their panties. That is, of course, if Hillary manages to win. Or not.

What dishonest garbage.
Print the ENTIRE Obama-Israel quote.
He was clearly referring to the Middle East conflict, not Israel.
You're deliberately deceiving your readers.

Oh, please. Stop it. Please?

Thank you for your objectivity. Please take note of today's Gallup Poll. I don't understand how someone whose polling numbers show barely winning if not losing to McCain can have the nomination. It's like this is a gift owed to Obama. No one ever points the recklessness of his holding himself up as experienced enough to take on the job of Commander and Chief. His ambition is larger than his resume.

I agree totally with this article - even though I am a Republican - I do NOT understand why the media is so biased against everything that Senator Clinton says or does - she has no chance with the msm constantly down her throat - I can hardly wait until the general election to see who they will flock to next - ARE THEY THE ONES THAT WILL DECIDED OUR PRESIDENT FOR US - I will never do what the media suggests - in the old days - I am a senior citizen - the media was unbiased and just gave the facts - now they push everything down your throats - this is DEMOCRACY - I think not - the talk shows on Sunday used to be my favorite time of the week - can't stomach them anymore -

The funny thing is just because they do the damage they try to do - I would go opposite of them - if Hillary CLinton were to be the nominee I would vote for her just as a slap to the pundits and media.

She is the only qualified candidate with the fight, vision, plans, and ability to lead the country forward.

Take it to the convention - I know there will be millions behind her that will absolutely guarantee the Republicans a victory this year.

Let's not forget that May 31 will be a very important day for Hillary. DNC decision on seating the delegates of Florida and Michigan wil take Hillary on the lead of the popular vote. And if she wins with a 20% margin in Puerto Rico as predicted, her lead in the popular vote will be even bigger. Then everything may change. Obama is winning, but HE CAN NOT CLOSE THE NOMINATION.

You people are a joke. Do any of you remember the tag you in the MSM and right wing tried to and continue to lay at Obama feet. His cling comment in San Francisco, you all ran with it. Why is it that when the shoe is on the other foot, all the Clintonistas and her right wing denfenders are offended that her words are biting her in the butt. When Obama said the clinging remark, every Clintonista said look he is an Elitist. He does not understand the everyday hard working American, white American ( a guy who mothers was on food stamps and had no father is an elitist, give me a break). Me personally, I took the elitist tag as saying "look poor white people of America, this uppity black man thinks he is better than you".

Now for the second time in this primary, Hillary talks about an assassination as the reason she has not drop out of the race. Well just call me a freaking idiot, but I would be very concern with an opponent whose talking this way if I was running. Maybe she was just thinking about Obama when she was telling us the story about sniper fire in Bosnia

There are two glaring logical problems here.

First, regarding the "sore" gaffe:

You note-with punctilious attention to grammatical detail-that "the antecedent in the question was Israel." Presumably, we can prove that because he uses the word "this" (e.g. "this constant wound, this constant sore"). However, in the next sentence he refers to "the lack of a resolution to *this* problem." Using your grammar-parsing logic, one might ask: is the word "resolution" more apt to refer to a state or a political conflict. You might describe Iran's chutzpah (to maintain cultural correctness) as a "sore" or a "wound" or anything you like, but you wouldn't say "we must resolve Iran."

My point is that you point to the antecedent indicated by his use of the word "this" to prove that his statement qualifies as a "gaffe." But obviously, in one of the two sentences he is using "this" to refer to the conflict. Doubtless, since you are blinkered by your adamant dislike for Obama, you will take this as further proof that "his partisans take deep personal offense" at anything even remotely critical of him, but the point is that you are engaging in a semantic discussion that doesn't even lend credence to your argument.

2. When you write, "Once again, Obama and his partisans take deep personal offense..." you are ignoring the fact that Obama clearly and unequivocally during a Puerto Rico radio appearance, "Senator Clinton says she did not intend any offense by it, and I will take her at her word on that."

That's a far cry from responses of the sort that Hillary Clinton issues on the subject of, say, Sen. Obama being a Muslim--do we need to revisit her claim that there's "no evidence for that... as far as I know?"

If you have an issue with the Obama/Messiah complex, it would be more effective to enumerate instances in which, for example, credit is given to him where it isn't due--and explain what you think is a more accurate picture. But if you think that Obama "partisans" (why can't someone just be a 'supporter'?) over-react, maybe it's because the criticism over-reaches.

I am constantly amazed that the press gives Obama a free ride. As someone who cares about public policy and "wonkishness", I am often dismayed that Obama seems to lack substance, and that he OFTEN makes policy gaffes.

Guess these pundits don't care that their presumptive candidate is more like a G.W.Bush running for office (substance light) than an RFK or a Clinton.

seriously, you should be ashamed to attach your name to this piece of tripe! objectivity? there is truly no such thing. referencing a gallop poll from right about now is as worthless as the time it took you to cite it. polls schmolls. they mean nothing. i cannot say who will be the next president, but it with either be Obama or McCain; and if Hillary pushes the issue to convention, she will forever be known as the egoist pariah of the democratic party that tossed away the best chance at running the table since Watergate. Peace Out.

seriously, you should be ashamed to attach your name to this piece of tripe! objectivity? there is truly no such thing. referencing a gallop poll from right about now is as worthless as the time it took you to cite it. polls schmolls. they mean nothing. i cannot say who will be the next president, but it with either be Obama or McCain; and if Hillary pushes the issue to convention, she will forever be known as the egoist pariah of the democratic party that tossed away the best chance at running the table since Watergate. Peace Out.

HA! A Clinton supporter using "ambition" as a slur against Obama! What a joke!

Hillary Clinton has a PSYCHOPATHIC hunger for power. She has lied through her teeth and resorted to Rove-style tactics in this campaign.

Anyone still supporting her should be ashamed of him/herself.

It's unfortunate that many think she should exit the race. She is free to do exactly as she pleases. In response to Allen's post however, it is to be noted that nobody thought the gift was owed to Obama. In fact it was just last year that he only had 15% of the black vote, had little money, and was down in the polls. The truth is, the gentleman has lead one of the most impressive campaigns in American history. The bottom line is that he out raised, out organized and out planned the Clinton campaign. Remember Obama's nomination has always been an unlikely story. He didn't start the campaign season with deep pockets, familiar terrirtory and the strongest brand in Democratic politics. It's a tough pill to swallow but the truth is that the Clinton campaign up until recently has been lethargic and old fashioned. Relying on fundraising and campaigning strategies that have proven themselves to be outdated and ineffective.

Silly. In that statement it was OBVIOUS that Obama's reference was to the Israel-Palestine issue not being rsolved. The non-resolution...and not Israel is the sore. Furthermore, the statement was responded to with a "No". If you couldn't correctly interpret that statement we might need to send you back for some college-level English courses.

For god's sake stop manufacturing excuses for Hillary

The lady is demonstrably flawed characterwise

She cannot distinguish truth from lies

She deliberately conspired to deceive the American public about her husbands sexual problems, before and during his presidency

She is indefensible

Pack in this apologising for Hillary now

Good article.

The MSM press is clearly "in the tank" for Obama,and all but the hardcore Obamabots know it.Hillary supporters will not forget.He must lose, so she can run in 2012.

Silly. In that statement it was OBVIOUS that Obama's reference was to the Israel-Palestine issue not being rsolved. The non-resolution...and not Israel is the sore. Furthermore, the statement was responded to with a "No". If you couldn't correctly interpret that statement we might need to send you back for some college-level English courses.

Obama has responded to this Hillary gaffe with reasonableness and calm. How exactly is his reaction that they are tired and that he takes her at her word about what she meant "taking great offense?

Billary will be doing everything they can,under the table,to help McCain win.
Just as they will be helping the GOP in 2010 unseat Obama
from the Senate to complete their revenge.

The anti-Hillary faction in the Democratic Party may be laughing now. By fielding a black candidate to oppose her they succeeded to deprive her of the black Clinton base in the primary. But this may backfire in the general election. Such strategy, should they succeed to deprive her of the nomination, could turn anticipated sure victory for the Democratic Party into DEFEAT!

1) Obama and his campaign did not take that much offense, in fact Obama gave her a pass on this one. Some of his supporters are taking offense, but mostly of the fact that her campaign is trying to spin it that Obama seems the guilty one.

2) Hillary as veep? Increasingly unlikely, there are more good candidates that are not laden with her amount of bagage.

3) Yes she will fight on as she promised but to no avail.

4) Unlikely. More likely is that Bill will come forward to campaign for Obama on behalf of both of them. This will enable Bill to save some of his legacy and he is just as able (if not more so) to appeal to her supporters.

5) This comment has little to do with journalism, more with personal opinion and is just as true for McCain or Hillary.

6) As said earlier the race will go on but the result is inevitable.

On the topic of Israel: it is amazing how much the american elections are, or seem to be, linked to the well being of Israel. It is conceivable that it is better for the security of the USA to have some distance and perspective towards Israel, at least the ruling politicians there. Israel is not totally without fault in their conflict, nor are they totally wrong. The mess in the Middle East is one that will remain a difficult knot to untangle, and I believe there will be many fanatics that will not accept any solution that is acceptable to both sides. Those fanatics exist on both sides as well, the murder of Rabin proved that.

To try to reduce the complexity of that situation to a few soundbites is irresponsable and does not do justice to the legitimate grievances and fears on either side of the conflict.

Do you get paid to do this? I hope not.

obama is intelligent enough to be the commander and chief, better than Hillary w/her truthful Bosnia exp.

go obama.

Israel is our ally? In what way? Remove the religious connection and tell me, what has she done for us as an ally. She attacked our ship in the 7 days war, killing American sailors. She constantly spies on us both in this country and abroad. True allies don't spy on each other. American soldier-citizens are dying in the Mideast for our "good ally"? We send over 15 billion dollars to our "good ally". What are we getting back from this relationship? I am not anti-Semite, I am anti-Israel. Someone please help me out here.

It's scary that any educated person would want Hillary as our president.

Which of her redeeming qualities do you think an American president should have? The disonesty ora trying to change the rules when you don't win attitude? Could it be the making up stories to look good and pander? IT must be the trying to get what you want by all unethical means necessary tactics...hmm...

Is this the picture you want for your next president?

You may not count her out yet, but the American people have. Thank God there are more people with an education and common sense.

Obama-campaign spreads vile garbage as it suits them. When Obama revealed the bad habit of "sweetie" and appologized right away, Hillary Clinton said nothing and we forgot in two days. The negativity must stop, and what Clinton said wasn't even a gaffe. Obama deserves no more favors.

This is a pretty dishonest article. As someone pointed out, Obama's full quote clearly isn't referring to Israel, but rather the U.S.' unbalanced policies towards the Middle East.

Also, your argument about Hillary as VP is tremendously flawed; at this point, if Obama chooses Hillary as VP, it will be perceived as a sign of weakness, as him choosing his running mate purely out of necessity. There is nothing that Hillary can provide for him politically that other VP candidates cannot provide, and provide more of, at that. Ed Rendell, Ted Strickland, Chuck Hagel, Dick Lugar, Sam Nunn? All infinitely better options than Hillary.

Ultimately, though, the biggest flaw in your argument is your assumption that whether or not Hillary goes to the convention is somehow up to her. It isn't. It's up to the superdelegates, her supporters, and ESPECIALLY her donors. People in all three categories are dropping like flies. Bottom line: Hillary is toast. The only thing that needs to happen is for someone to get that across to her.

Well, why print "the entire quote" even if there's more? None of the media outlets would even use a byte of RFK, Jr.'s statement (which he made on Friday night) and it was a very classy way for him to say "Hey, if I'M not offended, what are you all screaming about?" Here's the complete statement:
May 23: Robert Kennedy Jr. issued the following statement this evening:
"It is clear from the context that Hillary was invoking a familiar political circumstance in order to support her decision to stay in the race through June. I have heard her make this reference before, also citing her husband"s 1992 race, both of which were hard fought through June. I understand how highly charged the atmosphere is, but I think it is a mistake for people to take offense."
### (end of RFK, Jr. statement). The uproar over the gaffe looks like a manufactured storm by the media to take one big shot at knocking her out of the race. Nice try. Shameful conduct. Where is Ed Murrow when you need him to expose a media at the complete service of a particular candidate? Shame.

Regarding Obama's unwarranted "personal offense": The campaign's statement didn't even refer to himself. It said that the remarks had no place in the campaign, i.e. why would anyone use an example about assassination? She has made a plethora of horrible comparisons lately like the situation in Florida and Michigan being similar to slavery, women's suffrage, and civil rights... and now this comparison. It was just a bad comparison and it truly has no place in the campaign. Why in the world would someone compare themselves to a situation that involved assassination?

Second, after the Clinton's LBJ "it took a president" to get the civil rights laws passed, her sniper-fire, etc. comments, Obama has taken the complete high road compared to Wright "he wouldn't be my pastor" to "he's an elitist" and "I love guns." She took the Wright situation and the "bitter guns and religion" gaffe far and wide, and she's still running with her populist message, which implies that Obama is an elitist. So tell me again, Obama overreacted?

Israel itself, or the conflict makes little difference; it's not as if Israel keeps picking the sore. Obama shifts blame even if he just means 'the conflict'.
=========

Well I don't understand how someone like Hillary who is losing badly to Obama in the polls believes she should get the nomination. She is a nobody without Bill Clinton and has hurt the women's movement.

You are thinker? Check the video posted by the NY Times, it's not even a gaffe. It's like saying, campaigning into june, remember my husband in 1992 and Bob Kennedy also until he was assassinated. It's a statement about a historical fact, with no other implication. Stop confusing the reader.

Who's is ass for another lying pathetic sorry hillarist??? Get a life already....

The real question is, when will the MSM start vetting John McCain. Obama and Clinton has had every word scrutinized while Mac has gotten a free ride for the most part.

On Fox News today, a guest commentator "joked" about killing Obama.

Where is the outrage?

Barack has excused Hillary for her comment, blaming it on the strain of a 15 month campaign and all the media scrutiny.

How refreshing to have a candidate that respects his opponent and makes allowances for her.

That is the true Obama and that new styleof politics is what endears legions of voters to him.

It is about time we elected a person who wants to end the scorched earth style of politics that has divided our nation.

Barack Obama is the right person at the right time in our Country's history.

This recent incident and his rising above it merely confirm my case.

Should Hillary lose the Democratic nomination what are the odds she'll divorce dear William?

Many pro-Hillary blogs have argued that Hillary is an "Obama gaffe" away from the nomination. That was before Hillary gained a two and a half gaffe lead in the race. The day-before-yesterday she was a gaffe ahead. She increased her lead to two gaffes when she opened her mouth in South Dakota and referenced RFK's assassination as an argument for staying in the democrat party race. Later she opened up another half-gaffe lead with a less than sincere apology. The book makers are now giving 5-to-1 that Hillary will win the gaffe race. Her jockey, Bubba, could be seen going to the whip, but not in the usual sense. He was putting it in her mouth and using it as a gag. Folks, I don't think we're going to have a photo finish.

The media kept asking Hillary Clinton over and over why was she so polarizing. And yet this polarazing figure by the end of the Democratic primary process will have more votes than the supposed super-popular Obama.
She would also be ahead in pledges if some of the states had not held caucuses- which are totally undemocratic because by their nature they exclude mothers with children, elderly voters and many people with real jobs. Caucuses usually are good for fanatic activists, therefore cannot produce a good national candidate.
It is not a surprise then that Clinton wins major battleground states over McCain in the last polls and Obama is shown to lose those same states in a national election.
Obama's campaign also blocked a revote of Florida and Michigan, because they knew that big losses there would have killed his campaign.
His supporters have proven to be the biggest hypocrites when it comes to the issue of revote because it was the more liberal wing of the Democratic Party (the people who are now for Obama) that were frothing at the mouth about Bush stealing two elections in Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2004. This theft according to them occured by disenfranchising the black vote.
And yet Obama the black cndidate is disenfranchising voters in two states so he can be President.
How ironic and vile!
Obama is an inexperienced radical candidate who got the nomination with the support of the Clinton hating media.
The sweet revenge will come in the fall when everyone will hear the voice of average Americans who will not let the media pick their President, and they will elect an American war hero over an empty suit.

Well, Mr Lifson. I wonder how long you will keep your comment function?

The Left Wing nuts quickly have the word, and obviously intend to swamp the board, nitpicking every thing published.

It was fun while it lasted.

I agree, Hillary is still climbing the hill. What we have seen Hillary Clinton endure,I would not want to be a female candidate in your country, If anyone thinks Obama will win without her they are deeply mistaken there are now too many divides.

Obama is a fake. He is Muslim in disguise. If this man is our next President we are doomed. Vote for Hillary it is time for the American women.

Mr Lifson;

Your wrong to imply/suggest that Hillary's staying on with the fight is justified by her not being a so-called quitter. It's one thing to stay in a fight that you have some chance to win and not quit...It's quite another thing to stay in a fight well beyond your time when it is quite apparent that you are quite literally a LOSER.

Your right to predict that Hillary will go all the way to the convention, however. She will do this for many reasons. Some of which will be an insistence that many of her (and Bill's) people get certain posts in an Obama Administration. Perhaps other negotiations such as just what a health-care bill should/should not include. Her potential wish-list could be endless.

What I'm tired of hearing is that Hillary has every right to continue in the campaign and shouldn't be forced out. How stupid, ofcourse she has every right to remain in the campaign....but at what cost to the party, to the candidate, to her supporters, to the country. She has a responsibility to all these people and should place them BEFORE her RIGHT to continue running. I do feel we should stop all the devisiveness and negative comments about either of the candidates and work toward unifying the party. But we do NEED Hillary and understand what the cost is the longer she stays in. The party is NOT made stronger any longer. If her reasons for staying in are personal and she continues in the vein of playing the "victim" by saying sexism has tainted her campaign......she is hurting herself and her supporters. The Supers need to do their job and stop enjoying all the self-serving attention. It's ridiculous for anyone to have NOT made up their mind by now. They need to weigh in on this election within the next week or so, or else we're headed toward a real mess and a lost election for sure.

I agree that the demonization of Ms. Clinton by the press may boomerang on Mr. Obama when the general election comes. It makes him weak while keeping untested his political skin. The implication is, as Mr. Osorio´s posting´s suggests, that the race has been greatly influenced --I would not say decided-- by an Obama-struck press and by a party far more powerful than it ever was, due to the role superdelegates play this year. "The pundits and the politicians", as Ms. Clinton would put it. A new of kind of Democratic political party has emerged this year, one that ressembles the European ones in its capacity to tip the scale when choosing a candidate (for instance by token of its disregard of the popular vote, the memories of Florida 2000 notwithstanding). We should not forget this is a very close race, nearly a statistical tie, and the pressure put on Ms. Clinton, like the excruciating examination in the public sphere of her every small gaffe has taken a toll, like puttig off donors and undecided voters.
I would disgree, however, with the claim that we should not count her out yet. I believe while the race may not be over, the nomination process is. Barring the unlikely scenario of political disaster or scandal, the candidate will be Mr. Obama. Whether she is aware of it or not, Ms. Clinton is now largely running for history and THIS gesture will speak far louder than any unfortunate words she may have uttered.

Hilary will win the nomination. MSNBC especially is the least democratic station I have ever witnessed.They may have crowned the Royal Prince. There are millions of women who may differ with that thought. I would rather anything then to vote for a candidate as arrogant and seems to think he is owed the nomination because of his race. How dare anyone say anything whether true or not...that makes you a racist. If, by some miracle Obama gets the nomination. Watch out. He's made this white vs. black. It hasn't been the whites that started it. He's made it so women all over the country have seen how he patronizes Hilary. All his charming rhetoric will never soothe the anger that now exists in this party. The lines have been drawn and Obama's camp have drawn them slyly but not slyly enough that many of us see the real Obama

The reason the media is so biased against Clinton is because she has tried to lie, pander, cheat, exaggerate, and scare people into voting for her. She deserves the negative press. Everyone knows that the RFK comment was not meant to be about Obama, but the insinuation was there. Why use that year. Back then only 13 states had primaries. It was noting like today. And, in 1992, Bill Clinton's primary was won in March. Yes, it went to june, but wihtout active opponents. I would rather they report on the big fibs she keeps telling.

Hillary Clinton won't quit. Although she has better polling results against McCain than Obama, I believe Obama will get the nomination. He is not qualified. I believe he will lose to McCain in the general. The democratic party is caught between two candidates whom their constituencies believe are 'owed' a chance to be president. Noone is owed such a thing. They will do better when they nominate an electable candidate with experience.

"who is prone to them when not relying on a teleprompter and vaporous generalizations"

Proof this is a hack. Mr. Obama is intelligent enough to speak without a teleprompter although there are times he uses them.

I would put Obama against Lifson in a "speaking contest" any day of the week.

The Israel to "Constant wound" is extremely weak and nothing like Clinton's "gaffe". It is obviously to any intelligent person who has kept up with the Israel "situation" that he was talking about the lack of peace in that region. It is my belief that people like Lifson know this but use it to win an argument with the bottom of the brain chain.

Clinton could have only been using the assassination of RFK in her statement as that race had only been going on for 3 months at that point. The California Primary hadn't happened yet. She was talking about the assassination in context of the removal of a candidate.

Then again, THAT'S her only chance :)

This is the THIRD writer for this site that I am aware of who has tried to spin Obama's use of the word 'sore' as referring to Israel. Everyone needs to read the entire (it isn't very long) so-called interview Obama gave to Goldberg to see what the correlative of 'sore' really is.

Hillary is history!!!! There is no way she can turn this primary around. Hopefully, she does not put up a stink about forcing herself into the VP slot. I would hope, Obama has more smarts than to consider her & Bill. He would loose alot of support from the Republicans & the Independants. Can't waite for this to be OVER!!

The Obama supporters who are criticizing this author are beyond amazing. Obama was asked a direct question. If he meant the entire Middle East problem and not just Israel then why didn't he just say so, in that one sentence? He said "what I think is that this constant wound, that this constant sore, does infect all of our foreign policy."
This was in response to a direct question: is Israel a drag on our foreign policy?
When were any of you so willing to listen to Trent Lott? You heard one sentence from a speech he made at a birthday party and the man was practically run out of town.
Can any Obama supporters tell me if I'm a racist simply because I have no desire to vote for Barack Obama? (I don't believe him and I don't trust him.)
Am I also a sexist (or is that genderist?) because I have no desire to vote for Hillary Clinton? (I don't believe her and I don't trust her.)
Am I also an ageist because I have no desire to vote for John McCain? (See Barack Obama)

My first thought on hearing Hillary's assassination comment: "My goodness, maybe she did have something do to with Vince Foster's death," At least it's not completely unthinkable.

Heaven help Obama if he chooses her as his vp!

"I don't understand how someone whose polling numbers show barely winning if not losing to McCain can have the nomination."

It may have something to do with those pesky little things called DELEGATES.

And this piece is garbage. There's no reason offered as to WHY we can't count her out. It's too soon to count her out because she won't quit? Well, that hardly matters. She's done.

This is poorly disguised, whiny hit job on Barack Obama, and that's all it is.

Enjoy President Obama; I know I will.

This is such a joke to quote the "sore" reference as a gaffe. In the whole interview Obama was gushing over Israel and he was mentioning what most people realize. That until the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is resolved there will be no peace in the middle east. This is beyond a hack job.

Actually, the 'popular vote' issue is moot. A number of states held caucuses in lieu of primaries so they're lacking an actual 'vote' to roll into the grand totals. Florida and Michigan cannot be included with a straight face, no one campaigned in either state and no one but Hillary was on the ballot in Michigan. They're bogus totals.

Hillary, I believe, will get out of the race following the final round of primaries, when superdelegates begin to climb off the fence and ultimately put Obama over the top.

The Clintons are a Shakespearean tragedy. They have everything going for them, and yet they stumble. They stumble because of hubris. Their pride in ignoring their own frailties is the tragedy. Hillary Clinton's pride would not allow her to exit the race after Kentucky (or any earlier race). If she had left then, she would have been the frontrunner once again in 2012, she could have been VP, she could even have been a Supreme Court Justice. But like a guest who overstays his welcome, by staying in the race because her pride would not accept defeat, she has allowed herself to become not just vilified by both the left and the right, but, worse, irrelevant. She is a has been. She has alienated and divided the Democratic Party, and if Obama manages to screw up and lose the election, it will be Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton who will be blamed. And all of this could have been avoided if she had just "suspended" her race for the nomination when it became obvious that she was grasping at straws. She and Bill Clinton, like Lear, have surrounded themselves with supporters who flatter the couple instead of telling them the truth. And, like Lear, the two of them are blind to political reality. The real tragedy is that a very smart and politically astute woman -- who could have been the first woman President of the U.S. -- has destroyed her campaign through her own actions and statements. All because she was too proud to see the truth. Shakespearean tragedy, indeed.

This is a shame, to have people assume that because a woman is running for president, that she is some Psychotic nut, is truly disgusting, get your facts straight. When you say this stuff against Hillary, your committing discrimination, in which case if it was said about Obama, it would be saying that we hate black people. The world is soo scared anymore to stand up for themselves, because if they something remotely close to discrimination, they could get sued, well here I am unafraid 100% american, and not ashamed, saying, the world is stooping to an all time low, to vote for Obama, would be another vote to have a George Bush back in office, lets go ahead and have Bush stay another 4 years, because if Obama gets elected we're going to be in the same screw up we were in while Bush was in office.

This is demented beyond belief. But then, anyone who believes Obama committed a "gaffe" about Israel live sin an alternate universe.

So your defence of Hillary's current "misstatement" is "HEY LOOK! OBAMA DID IT TOO! SEE!" American thinker indeed.

Did someone just cut and paste this article from the comments section of Youtube? No, wait, the comment of a random Clinton supporter would have made more sense than this.

This article is too negative when today the polls show Hillary Clinton has a 99.9% chance of winning the general election-much better than Obama's chances.
http://hominidviews.com/?p=1551
Looking at the polls in the last few days HRC is holding steady. People judge HRC as a whole person including her entire history and obviously many people like her at the core and believe she would be a good American president.

Thomas.......you are an idiot.

Interesting that despite the supposed money advantage that Obama has and the media coverage of Clinton that veers between ignoring her and ridiculing her, she's doing better against McCain in both the latest Newsweek and Gallup polls. It seems that neither money nor media will decide this election.

Obama is nothing more than the Affirmative Action Candidate of the Left Wing Democrats. That distinction will not get him very far in November.

This has been an exciting weekend. Obama's incompetence has never shone more brightly. I really believe that the only way Hillary will not be the nominee is if the DNC hates her more than they'd love to win the White House -- which, I admit, may be the case.

Regardless of the outcome, I feel privileged to be able to participate in this primary season, and vote for a candidate with such surpassing qualifications.

Go Hillary!

Say what? Clinton has had ZERO chance since she lost TX and won Ohio by nowhere near enough to ever have a chance at winning the most elected delegates. There has been zero chance that the super delegates would overrule the grass roots Dems and pick her and she is surely smart enough to know that. She has her reasons for wanting to spend a few months trashing the Dem 2008 nominee, but if they relate to ever being the Dem nominee now or ever in the future, then she was just spinning her wheels. Think Supreme Court for her; she would be good at that job.

I very much agree with this article and with Mary Lou King's comment. I've voted in every presidential election since 1972 and with the exception of voting for McBride(Libertarian) in '76 and Anderson(Independent) in '80, I've always voted for the Democrat. 2008 will likly be my first experience in voting Republican. This is not about race - it's about the pushy arrogance of Obama's supporters and their badmouthing about anyone doesn't worship their "messiah."

Most of the anti-Hillary bloggers who would want her to quit the race now are missing the main reason why Hillary is plodding on, which is this: Majority of Obama's pledged delegates were won before FOX NEWS exposed his connections with Rev. Wright, the Ayers, and Michelle's disgust of America. Thereafter, it was mostly losses for Obama. It is reasonable to believe that should there be a re-vote in those states where Obama won before the exposes, the results could favor Hillary. In November, should Obama become the nominee, this changes in these voters perception of Obama could translate into a McCain victory.

Hell hath no fury ...
McCain, 2008

American Thinker?? This should be published under "American Clinker"

when hillary ends up giving up and backing obama, there will still be writers writing this stuff. the end is never the end. this was over 2 months ago and writers like this have kept her hopes going. obama will beat mccain overwhelmingly and it will be 1964 all over again for another arizona senator.

Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton loved RFK and this comment was taken way out of proportion. Take it from someone who worked for RFK and thinks Hillary is going to win. RFK would have loved her

Great article. Though, if she is completely pushed aside Clintons should focus on helping increase Senate and Congress lead and leave presidential campaign to Obama. Now, I think she is more passionate about issues, particularly universal health care, then about formal job title. And if Barack lets Michelle decide on top appointments he does not deserve to be a president. She haven't been as much as school principal or village mayor. Those things will be up to Ted Kennedy and his buddies to decide (I guess). BTW I am curious to see what will superdelagates do if Hillary wins popular vote. I mean, after whole brouhaha of 2000... have fun. And finally, I am left leaning European and does not have dog in this fight. I just have common sense and had seen my share of noisy populists.

as an observer of your elections from here in england how is it possible for HRC to win the nomination when she has fewer delegates than Obama? it does not sound democratic to me.

If BO's boat sink in November as it is likely,all Democrats will find themselves in Dark Ages.

This is such a good article. What you say is factual, honest, thoughtful. Why does the media loathe Hillary? If Obama gets the Dem. nomination I will vote for McCain. Not that I dislike Obama, but I can't stand the terrible destruction of Hillary by the media.

That's the problem with blogs. Any idiot can write a blog. If you can't do simple English Comnprehension you have no business writing anything for anyone but yourself to read.

You say, "I can't count the times I have heard the expression "the race is over" and "Hillary should concede." The people writing that have been wrong. They still are. Probably."--do you realize how stupid you sound, given the fact that he's got this thing wrapped up, as he has for the last two months. Her 10% odds are down to the .o5's. She's toast, as anyone who could do 3rd grade math could have told you in February.

Don't you understand that Republicans just want Hillary Clinton to be on the ticket? Or the nomination? They want to see the Clintons crash and burn after being attacked by the 527s'. That's why every major GOP pundit or news organization believes that Clinton should stay in as long as she can, like the assertion of this individual.

AS a former Obama supporter who "saw the light" once he started showing his true inner self (aka Rev. Wright style), I am now an ardent Hillary supporter. One piece of advice to those of you Obama supporters who think "once this is done, Dems will support Obama"...NO WAY. We will work feverishly to ensure that this unqualfied person who clearly holds disdain for both Americans and White people does not take office. McCain has issues but more Hillary supporters will go w/him or stay home in the fall. Mark my words.

Clearly, proper grammar aside, Obama was referring to the *conflict*, not the *country*.

I cannot bring myself to understand how the Israel conflict *couldn't* be viewed as a sore--and far worse--in light of both the Israelis and Palestinians killed (all other foreign policy consequences aside).

Obama is a member of the Foreign Affairs committee. He should be aware of the problems in the Middle East and should be able to express himself in exact and unambigious terms, especially since he is often lauded for his command of words and eloquence, at least as long as a script or a teleprompter is nearby...

He meant what he said and that is a problem.

Diana, not only does she better in the latest Newsweek and Gallup polls. She does better in Rasmussen, Quinnipiac and SurveyUSA as well. Electoral-vote.com has her at 319-202 against McCain, Obama vs. McCain is at 266-248 with Virginia and Indidana tied.

I was around for the RFK moment - in fact I was watching TV when it happened. If you had asked me what month it happened, I would not have been able to guess. It was interesting to learn it was June. I had not an inkling when she said it that she meant anything other than ... June. In June, candidates are still running. They started early this year.

I saw Hillary's gaffe, and honestly, compared to some of Obama's gaffes, it's just not that big a deal. Of course Hillary is not saying she expects Obama to die - she's just saying that historically there was fluidity up to the last moment.

When Obama first came to the fore, I really liked him, but since things like the Rev. Wright statements have come out, I feel I can no longer support him. I am a minority, not a white person, but I think bigotry hurts all of us regardless of our race. Rev. Wright called Italians "garlic noses" in his magazine and in his Audacity of Hope speech he referred to "white greed". I read the transcript. Obama went to this guy's church for 19 years and brought up his daughters in that church. So obviously the racism did not bother him.

Anti-black bigotry bothers me and so does anti-white bigotry. I have friends of both races, and don't want to hear this type of nasty stuff. I can't believe Obama tolerated it for so long.

I am voting McCain if Obama is the Dem candidate.

Is Hillary about to unleash a coup de Jarnac?

Just like what the Obama camp did with Hillary's statement after NH win about MLK, they have done it again with RFK. This makes me sick to my stomach. The Obama camp have delibrately taken HRC's comments out of context and that is unforgiveable in my book.
This is precisely the reason I will not vote for the democrats this fall if Barack is the nominee.

Mr. Lifson, you stated "I take pride in having predicted that she would take it all the way to the convention, and I still think she will".

I assume you´re a card-holding Republican because any Democrat who takes pride in a candidate who, by way of an ego trip, threatens our chances of beating the GOP this Fall must be a Conservative. Not to mention, of course, a fool.

Senator Obama's self-delusion reminds me of James Dean's character in the Sherwood Anderson play, "I'm a Fool." Obama won't realize what a fool he is until it's way, way too late to change anything. In the meantime, he will continue to be divisive (pronounced "dee-viss-ive") at every opportunity, fancying himself to be the all-time great uniter.

Finally an article not bashing Hillary. Obama obviously didn't make himself clear in his statement. Hillary's RFK ststement was clearly spoken (she clearly emphasized the word June) but was not so clear in print. But what a difference in the backlash against her!! The dems need to realize that millions of voters support her (flaws & all) because Obama can't win against McCain. We are also highly offended by all of the disrespect and negativity directed at her by Obama-dems. Many of us will happily vote pro McCain and anti Obama-dem. McCain is moderate, tested, and highly electable with our help.

Some of these HRC supporters are clearly dellusional.

Mary Lou King wrote:

I don't understand how someone whose polling numbers show barely winning if not losing to McCain can have the nomination. It's like this is a gift owed to Obama.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mary Lou, please understand that this is an election. For an election to have any sort of validity, there must be rules in place at the beginning of the process that don't change at the end of the process, in order to benefit candidates who couldn't win by the original rules. The media didn't go to the polls to give Obama majorities in the popular vote, elected delegates and states tallied; Democratic voters in 50 some-odd states and territories did. And in estimating the popular vote tally, no fair-minded person is going to assume that he would have received 0 votes in a fairly run election in Michigan.

Going back to March, Hillary's only realistic possibility for "winning" the election has depended on her ability to convince the so-called super delegates that even though Obama beat her fairly and squarely on nearly every count, he is such a flawed general election candidate that they must use their infinite wisdom to overturn the verdict of the voters. This unfortunately required her to manipulate unsuspecting people such as yourself into believing the same trash.

The bottom line to this is IT AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN. Why won't it happen? Because the minute it does, the Democratic party will cease to exist as we know it today. It's possible that it may survive as a niche party capable of winning in some locales, but it will PERMANENTLY lose the loyalty of millions of voters across the country. For the super delegates, this is a much worse result than potentially losing the 2008 presidential election (been there, done that).

I'm just hacked off at the media for giving Obama a free ride because he's goodlooking and has a voice like John Barrymore. If he were gonna play in the next Indiana Jones movie, I'd say go for it. But to run for president with his razor thin resume -- and to hide his positions on the big issues of the day and call people to ask about him "divisive"?-- No! We've been manipulated by people like Chris Matthews because he gets a chill down his leg listening to "the voice". You'd think this was a tryout for varsity cheerleader squad, rather than a presidential contest during a war.

How can you say that Clinton is the only democratic candidate who has not had their gaffe "vanish into the memory hole" when you yourself, in a childish and irrelevant manner, bring up Jeremiah Wright, a subject that has (forcefully, by the part of the McHIillary bandwagon) scarlet lettered Obama for the good part of two months now

Friends:

I understand that we have a participatory Democracy, but the destructive missives (IED's) being shot into our discussions by the always angry left get very tiresome to me ...and I suspect, the Editors as well.

Que Sera and soldier on. :-)

Sincerely

There are important points missing from Lifson's analysis. To begin with perhaps the most important:

Hillary's most consistent supporters have been folks over 50, especially women over 50. With her statement about RFK's assassination, and her bizarre "apologetic" explanation (namely, I was thinking about Teddy and so I mentioned Bobby's assassination), she has lost a substantial number of these supporters. I will not say all. I will not say those closest to her. But I will say, a very significant number. Most importantly, in terms of the race, many superdelegates in this age cohort, who may have been leaning her way, will be looking around for the nearest Exit sign. Ditto for those who were in favor of placing her in the VP slot.

This is from my blog. The rest is too long for a comment, but can be found at

http://msa4.wordpress.com/

I have a question for anyone who can answer...

If HRC does not win the democratic nomination can she run for president as an independent?