Pennsylvania Was Supposed To Give Hillary A Much Needed Push

Posted 2008/04/07 21:28:23
Read all 106 opinions

In the most recent poll, Sen. Hillary Clinton holds a 7-percentage point lead over Sen. Barack Obama -- 49 percent to 42 percent; 9 percent remain unsure.
A decisive win in Pennsylvania's April 22 primary vote is necessary for Clinton to convince the party's undecided superdelegates to give her the nomination.
University of Pennsylvania professor Donald Kettl says some of the "air [is] starting to slip out of Hillary Clinton's tires."
Obama, who does better when the voters see him more, has spent $3 million dollars trying to get his name and message out, while Hillary Clinton has only spent $1 million dollars.

+10

Mannix 2008/04/12 16:03:27

+5
The fact that Obama is outspending Hillary 3 to 1 shows me he wants to win at ANY cost. It shows me that he has to rely on his charisma and charm to get the votes because he doesn't have a record to run on. I hope people can see through the smoke and mirrors because we really don't know who this man is or what he can or can't do. Just that he's a good talker!
>> See Replies

The Con... to Red 2008/04/18 17:39:52

Exactly, Red, why can't he 'put her away' as you say? Still, Hillary keeps coming back. Food for thought.

Editor
The Conservative Independent
(www.conserveind.com)

reply
gonzo 2008/04/07 21:29:53
vedac to gonzo 2008/04/07 23:47:31 (edited)

I think that enabling Republicans to crossover to vote for the candidate that J. McCain can defeat is not fair game for the candidates. I wish that we could abolish all the delegates, all the super delegates and all the caucuses. By eliminating the negative we can accentuate the positive.... the will of the people. Plus make one date for all primaries or divide the country in quarters and each quarter has a date for the primary.
It disheartens me to think that Hillary won't be able to pull this through. Fox and MSNBC have been getting tough again on her and lightening up on Obama.

reply
BloodDAnna to vedac 2008/04/08 02:35:07

Why not have every state hold their primary at exactly the same time like the general election? Now that would be interesting.

reply
GaryLee to vedac 2008/04/08 06:25:50

You can't run on old politics. We send the same people over and over again to Washington expecting a different result. For example: Bush-Clinton-Clinton-Bush-Bush. America can see what happens. Look around you..... It hasn't been good for most Americans.

reply
Chartre... to vedac 2008/04/08 14:26:57

I like the idea of rotating regional primaries, beginning in March, one a month. Maybe start with the Northeast one time, the Southwest another election. I think a single national primary would eliminate all but the best known and best financed candidates, but doing it by region of the country would make it a little easier for lesser known candidates to present themselves.

reply