Are you the hidden dragon to liam's grouching PUMA? ;)

So now you pull a 90% figure out of your arse, and make me responsible for what they said. Damn; why the hell did they not let me know that I was their leader.

Desidero:

I'm beginning to get over the fact that over-the-toppers like liam will not take any responsibility for some of the unfortunate and ongoing bitterness between Obama's and Clinton's primary supporters.

I don't like liam the poster (I don't know liam the person). I think he or she dragged up stuff right out of the GOP 90s playbook with reckless abandon, but I have still come to respect him or her as one hack comes to respect another. Unlike many folks who are twisting and squirming to justify Obama's blatant flip flop on FISA, etc., liam essentially says shut the f**k up and appears unapologetically focused on one thing and one thing only, and that is electing Senator Obama. I like that; it's no bullshit and it's real.

Life is not linear, my favorite and original quote. I can detest liam for his Monica Lewinsky-type attacks on Hillary, but I'll be right there with him or her in November, and I guess there is a bit of a kinship there between this pragmatic former Clinton supporter, and liam's pragmatic, albeit viscious approach to electing Obama.

That said, I liked your post because I confess to still getting pleasure calling bullshit on the formerly pure folks who somehow thought that the Clintons would somehow be drummed out of the Party because of the campaign. Baloney; Hillary Clinton has never been more respected and Bill Clinton's legacy is secure as heck. And nothing anyone around here has said about either of them --Josh Marshall included--will do squat to threaten the revered status of either Bill or Hillary Clinton. This place is just a sandbox; we play here.

On that note, I wholeheartedly reject the notion that our intra-family bickering at the Cafe is going to hurt Senator Obama in November. Such a position is nothing more than delusions of grandeur in the aggregate. In fact, I am totally convinced that Senator Obama wants to show distance from his most loyal followers on the left, because it makes good "old-style" political sense for him to do that. And liam is leading the old-fashioned political charge at the Cafe to stay focused and elect Obama; ain't nuthin new and different about that. That's what we call politics.

So keep poking Desidero. Nobody should be immune from being forced to look inward. Folks like us took a lot of shit during the campaign around here but we remained a part of this community, and now I think it's kinda fun to give some harmless pokes back at the right-or-wrongers who disrespected us so vehemently over the past several months. I don't wanna get even, but I don't mind being mad once in awhile! :)

Bruce

First, Obama was never doomed with women, Hillary just managed a significant lead in that demographic at various times, somewhat dependent on geography as well as of course age.

Second, I think the two of them are working together to deal some with the white worker gradient. I'm afraid I can't tell you to what extent he's doomed there, because polling is rather unreliable especially at this early date when vicious ads and internet rumor mongering haven't really kicked in. But Obama is certainly clever and knows how to target specific demographics and build cross-demographic coalitions, so I certainly wouldn't dismiss his ability to woo over a significant chunk of this one.

Personally, I'm not disparaging Clinton or Obama. I think they're both impressive leaders, devoted to a good cause. Nor am I dissing all Clinton supporters -- I'm married to one. Or all Obama supporters -- I am one.

I'm calling attention to dangerous human weaknesses that we ought to be wary of. They're called confirmation bias and mass hysteria.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

Darragh Murphy. She donated to McCain in 2000. She donated to Senator Clinton in this years primary contest, and claims that she voted for Al. Gore in 2000. Who knows where the truth begins and ends with someone like that, and her PUMA cohorts.

That's the silver lining, post facto. But the way Desidero made the comment, it was a justification for Hillary's behavior. (Recall her saying during the campaign her attacks were good for Obama because it's toughening him up for the GOP.)

Or to make an analogy: it would be like Jews being pleased that the Holocaust occurred because it provided the world with enough guilt to form the state of Israel.

It is terribly big, eh.

She has to get it from people who haven't already contributed to her.

And like another poster said, she hasn't raised the money just yet. So let's keep first things first.

Either way, I'm glad she is raising money, her debts are her problems.

I just disagree. It's nothing new for candidates to have debts after their campaigns are over. Richardson had a debt of over $300K. Dodd and Giuliani are still trying to retire their debts. I'd say they were all long shots. So since you could feasibly say, "What were they thinking?" about them as well.

And if the qualifier is when "most people" thought she should drop out, well, if I recall correctly, during the primaries, it was never a majority of people who thought she should.

Hilary: The "selfish" meme comes from her going beyond the point where most people would have given up

Or to make an analogy: it would be like Je