Good post, and quite frankly you give lots of reasons to vote for Hillary.

Good perception that campaign slogans go stale.

You might take notice that the campaign guys go away after the election, so we're not talking about 4/8 years of Wolfson & Penn.

And in general, campaigns are very tangentially related to how someone might govern, though you do get some useful ideas on ability to organize and re-organize, respond to difficulties, strength under stress, etc.

Campaigns are not straight lines - there are ups and downs. Both provide their challenges.

We're going to see (or just guess about) a lot of back-room wheeling-dealing, pleading, threatening and so forth to shift delegates and super-delegates. Some might not like it, but it's good practice for getting legislation through Congress and getting party members to act like a party. The Republicans have been good at getting members to toe the line, even the "moderates" some people seem to love. Let's see if the Democrats can follow a chow line, and which candidate can better form one.

While I actually think that Obama might come out on top in a brokered convention and have been saying it since New Hampshire, I've been saying for more than a year that among the things that he'll need to do is learn how to fight. Of course, it usually gets me some kind of nonsense response about Chicago politics, but Hillary's actually from the area and she has been in politics for a long time, so whoopie-freaking-deal.

I disagree with those who say that he needs to overtly attack the Clintons and the previous Clinton administration, but this whole above-the-fray approach didn't get him anything this week and it shows some of the same arrogance and naivete that a lot of people get from his claims that if he's elected, everybody will suddenly start holding hands and all will become right with the world.

"Why hasn't anyone picked up that damn phone? Answer it already. Make the Obama administration the administration that picks up the phone by the second ring. Let's neutralize the fear campaign with a little humor."

LOL, thats hilarious, and I totally agree that having Barack pick up the phone would have been the perfect response to the played-out "Daisy-esque" 3AM phone call commercial. Its what Reagan would've done -- heck its what Big Dawg would've done.

Obama has that "rat-pack" attribute in him. He is a quick and responsive counter-puncher and is witty enough on the fly to answer all the attacks coming his away WITHOUT stooping to below the belt tactics. I think Obama needs to tread that line more without crossing it.

In many ways, this past Tuesday probably freed his hands a bit to scrap it out with Hillary. Its shocking and dismaying when we see someone lashing out at another person, but we tend to root for someone who fights back after taking repeated blows. I think people won't be so shocked to see Obama start taking calculate jabs at Clinton more and more, and i hope he does.

Bravo. Thank you!

In the last few days before Tuesday, it became clear to all voters that Obama's ads about NAFTA were cynical posturing, lacking integrity, intentionally designed to fool the more ignorant, less engaged types of voters into perceiving Obama's trade policies as having more protectionist sympathies than Clinton's.

That's why his poll numbers went into reverse during the last few days. It was not an accomplishment by Clinton, but a self-inflicted wound by Obama. For the past year Clinton has been laboring under the disadvantage of the perception that "she'll say anything to get elected". Obama's NAFTA advertising escapade inflicted on himself the same disadvantage. But not with the same severity. If he'll now be wise enough to avoid similar sly, bogus, misleading ads, he'll probably be forgiven and may be able to break even in PA.

I haven't been feeling the inspiration from Barack quite as strongly in the last few weeks. I definitely want him to win, and am impressed by what I have read about the people he is surrounding himself with. I will not vote for Hillary Clinton in the GE if it comes to that. Yet I have noticed that when I watch him on television he appears a bit too careful, a bit repetitive, almost cautious about what he is saying, thinking too much, like he is "protecting a lead", maybe being "handled" too much now; the front-runner status hasn't helped him thus far, IMO. His ability to connect on a visceral level and inspire an audience is his great strength. The importance of plans are way over-emphasized by the Democrats historically. How many times must the lesson of Reagan be relearned? Get the people behind you first, then roll out your plans. The Democratic Party hasn't had a communicator like this since Kennedy.

Yet, since leading in the delegate counts he seems to have gotten away from his strength. I would say that his campaign didn't handle this well over the past few weeks, and let the Clintons back into the game, at least in terms of manipulation of the media and hence of voter's perceptions. (Of course, the media lust for a "horserace" and the bonanza of ratings and advertising dollars this would entail may be driving the coverage, and largely beyond his control). Still, somehow it seems the strategy or tactics have been a bit "off" in the last few weeks. I think he strategy has not been what it needed to be his momentum has faltered a bit, for the first time.

Every contest from here on out will count, especially Pennsylvania. I am not sure whether he needs to "go negative", or come to the realization that he might actually lose, and find the deep motivation within himself to dig deeper and fight the good fight, not to let this moment slip by. Whatever, it seems to me he must know who he is and not believe the descriptions of others: handlers, or the media portrayal of who he has become. His success comes from the way in which he conveys a deep, authentic sense of conviction about the need for change in this country, right now. You can feel it, which is inspiring to see in a public figure. He doesn't need to be another kind of leader.

While the Canadian debacle and press shots were unwarranted, it's good for Obama to have the experience of a tough press conference now and then. It keeps him sharp.

Obama has been trying to maintain his lead and avoid going negative. This has sometimes resulted in blandness. After the "she's likeable enough" debate comment got him (unwarranted) criticism, he suddenly was pulling out Hill's chair for her in debates. Being respectful is fine, but that shouldn't have stopped him from taking a shot or two at some of her vulnerable spots.

He also needs to mix up his standard stump speech a bit.

And I'd like to throw this out to all candidates- including Obama- can everyone stop with the "it's in the eyes of the waitress I spoke to in Spokane, in the tears of the crossing guard that came up to me in Timbuktu", etc., etc. That's such a tired campaign laundry list device and it gets old when anyone does it, no matter how pleasent their baritone is to the ears.