I say that because they are the only ones with balls. Solid steel balls. For those newbies Hillary was tested during Bill's impeachment and she is really a very strong person.

 I think they are the only ones who are really capable of carrying the electorate. I say that because they are the only ones capable of beating the shit out of McCain.

What is wrong with you people you want Biden, Bayh or Sebelius?
LOL

If you have seen how Hillary campaigned in states like PA, KY and WV when she knew even her best effort would still lose her the nomination, how could you recommend Obama nominate Biden, Bayh, kain or Sebelius.

I think Hillary and Webb or the two real fighters in the Democratic Party. For the VP spot we really need a fighter. Do you guys remember the way Webb confronted Bush. I know of nobody who did that.

I am a Hillary supporter but I would be happy with Hillary or Webb.

I am shocked to see the swing state map published by Politico:

They are putting CO,FL,MO,NV,MO,OH and VA in McCain column. The have IA,MI,NH,PA,WV in our(obama's) column. That gives a total of 85 to 59 advantage to McCain that translates to a 274 to 259 McCain advantage.

RCP has:

RCP Electoral Count 228 163 147
No Toss Up States 275 263 -
Battleground States Obama McCain Spread
Colorado 45.3 45.8 McCain +0.5
Virginia 45.7 46.3 McCain +0.6
Missouri 45.0 47.3 McCain +2.3
Michigan 46.0 42.8 Obama +3.2
Ohio 45.3 46.8 McCain +1.5
Florida 45.4 47.2 McCain +1.8

To my knowledge Politico is not known to be biased against
Sen. Obama.

Is this election really this close?

Actions always speak lot louder than talk and I believe that the VP selection would tell us exactly how both the campaigns really view this election.

   I say:

           Very Confident    Confident    Desperate     SOS

Obama         Sebelius         Kain         Bayh          Hillary

McCain        whitman          Pawlenty     Romney       Ridge

What do you think?
                                                                   

From real Clear politics:

Colorado 45.3 45.8 McCain +0.5
Virginia 45.7 46.3 McCain +0.6
Missouri 45.0 47.3 McCain +2.3
Michigan 46.0 42.8 Obama +3.2
Ohio 46.0 45.5 Obama +0.5
Florida 45.4 47.2 McCain +1.8

Gallup Poll:

Gallup Daily: Obama 45%, McCain 44%August 16, 2008
Nationwide voter preferences for president remain closely divided between Barack Obama and John McCain, with Obama favored by 45% to McCain's 44%.

RCP electoral:

Electoral College Obama McCain Toss Ups
RCP Electoral Count 228 163 147
No Toss Up States 295 243

I feel good about the electoral map but the polls give me the willies. Why is Sen. Obama not leading by a bigger margin? I feel our nominee needs some real help.

Shedding all your biases could you give some advice to Sen. Obama?
We all would like him to  bring back Gold in November, Don't we?

Sen. Obama has clearly demonstrated that he would follow a measured approach towards foreign policy. I offer congrats to him and his foreign policy team. Susan Rice is correct McCain seems to have no hesitation to jump into a new war but I honestly believe he thinks we are still at war with Russia. I think in his mind it is still USSR.

It is about time our campaign exposes the war mongering attitude of Sen. McCain. I think he believes in "talking harshly" and carry "no stick". Honestly his reaction is really frightening. He actually reminds me of Barry Goldwater.

Here is a nugget that exposes McCain's clear lack of understanding:

At the height of the Cold War, the Soviet Union had some 45,000 nuclear warheads. At the moment, Iran has none. But when Barack Obama said the obvious--that Iran does not pose the sort of threat the Soviet Union did--John McCain reacted as though his rival had offered to trade Fort Knox for a sack of magic beans.

"Such a statement betrays the depth of Sen. Obama's inexperience and reckless judgment," exclaimed McCain. "These are very serious deficiencies for an American president to possess."

But if Iran is the Soviet Union, I'm Shaquille O'Neal. There is nothing reckless in soberly distinguishing large threats from small ones, and there is something foolhardy in grossly exaggerating the strength of your enemies.

here is the link:

http://www.reason.com/news/show/126609.h tml

May be we should make it 50-1 (Louisiana). According to the AP news story Sen. Mary Landrieu wants to keep her distance from our Presidential nominee.

Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu, who faces a tough re-election, has had her name removed from a fundraiser announcement for presidential candidate Barack Obama.

Landrieu will attend the "Lipstick, Laughter and Libations" fundraiser for Barack Obama at a Washington restaurant next week, but she won't help host it.

Landrieu's campaign said her name only was added to the online announcement of the fundraiser on Obama's Web site as a mistake. Her Republican opponent's campaign said she is trying to keep her distance from her party's presidential candidate and removed her name after they pointed it out.

"She was never scheduled to host," said Landrieu campaign spokesman Scott Schneider. "She is attending, and there was some sort of clerical error in which somebody said she was hosting, but she is not."

I understand that the so called fifty state strategy is just campaign gimmick to fool the newbies. Should we expect more candidates for the Senate and congress distancing them selves from our nominee?

Here are the links:

http://www.thetowntalk.com/apps/pbcs.dll article?AID=/20080802/NEWS01/80802021

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/08/12/ facing-tough-re-election-landrieu-remove s-name-from-obama-fundraiser-invitation

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/L/L A_LANDRIEU_OBAMA_LAOL-?SITE=LABAT&SE CTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

I believe Wolfson is correct when he says:

I believe we would have won Iowa, and Clinton today would therefore have been the nominee," former Clinton Communications Director Howard Wolfson told ABCNews.com.

I totally agree with him when he says:

"Our voters and Edwards' voters were the same people," Wolfson said the Clinton polls showed. "They were older, pro-union. Not all, but maybe two-thirds of them would have been for us and we would have barely beaten Obama."

Wolfson is some what correct when he says:

But he says he is mystified about the failure of the national media to pursue the story as it has allegations of other candidates' affairs.

"I can't say I understand the rules of the media and I'm not sure they do either," he said.

I think the real reason the MSM did not follow up with the Edwards story was because they knew it would hurt Sen. obama's Chances.

Who better to introduce Gen. Clark than Bill Clinton? Gen. Clark may not sound like a very exciting choice but I think he will be a great asset to the ticket. Here are some great arguments in his favor.

1) He brings solid military experience combined with lot of Foreign policy experience.

2) He is a decorated war hero during Vietnam war.

3) He has no voting record and very little paper trail. He is not a politician and that is a change.

4) He was a Clinton supporter during the primary and could bridge the gap.

5) He is a pit-bull and can be a real attack dog.

6) He has appeared on TV many times and comes across very well on TV. He can make some of the toughest comments with a very smiling face.

7) Best of all he is not the other woman. LOL.

You do not hear this often from me but Kudos to Axelrod, Gibbs and Sen. Obama for the way they handled the media the past few days in answering questions about the Clintons.