For Democrats, increased fears of a long fight

[maseman]

Source: NY Times

WASHINGTON - Lacking a clear route to the selection of a Democratic presidential nominee, the party’s uncommitted superdelegates say they are growing increasingly concerned about the risks of a prolonged fight between Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama, and are perplexed about how to resolve the conflict.

Interviews with dozens of undecided superdelegates — the elected officials and party leaders who could hold the balance of power for the nomination — found them uncertain about who, if anyone, would step in to fill a leadership vacuum and help guide the contest to a conclusion that would not weaken the Democratic ticket in the general election.


Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23638095

---

Every day that goes by we are losing a little more to John McCain.

[Oleladylib]

1. I don't think we would be facing this difficulty if our two candidates

would mount an active, together campaign against McCain.

[cornermouse]

2. Short of telling people that their "votes don't count, but hey

we hope you show up in November to vote for the candidate that we chose for you", there isn't much you can do this time around. If you want to change the primary process for the next election, that's a possibility.

By the way, have you ever noticed how many of these "fear of infighting so end the process by declaring a candidate now" posts have Obama icons? Color me skeptical.

[Clear Blue Sky]

3. That's what the other side wants.

That's why Rush and others were pushing Hillary during the Texas and Ohio primaries.

United we stand or divided we fall...

[bemildred]

4. Go back to sleep, pay no attention to politics. nt

[robcon]

5. McCain is taking advantage of the divisions...

MyDD suggests that McCain is leading in the polls.

Looks great for McCain in March
by Jerome Armstrong, Sat Mar 15, 2008 at 09:10:12 PM EST

On the heels of a Rasmussen poll showing McCain leading Obama or Clinton by a 46-40 margin in Iowa, Zogby includes Nader in a national poll.

Now, Zogby loves to make news, so I wouldn't put it past him to have polled for a sample showing Nader doing well, and he did, showing McCain, Clinton, Nader at 45, 39, 6 and McCain, Obama, Nader at 44, 39, 6.

Zogby has McCain's lead due to Independents, and while Dems and Reps wind up polarizing in the McCain-Clinton match-up, they wind up crossing over in the McCain-Obama match-up, with Nader flanking to Obama's left:
http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/3/15/211012/376
------------------------------------------------

I think Armstrong is right - Zogby is a total phony, and finding 6% of any sample favoring Nader must have challenged even Zogby's fraud squad. But McCain is not only taking a cue from the Clinton and Obama camps on how to wage his campaign, he's making some headway.

It's early - remember Dukakis had a 10 point lead on Bush in AUGUST, 1988, so these polls are only directional.

[Jackpine Radical]

8. If you look at the data over time, Zogby is really one of the better polls.

Rasmussen is highly questionable, but Zog is working very hard to advance the technology to keep up with the times, exploring internet methods, etc.

[robcon]

18. Not true, Jackpine.

Alone among all the pollsters, Zogby missed New Hampshire by 23 points!!!!!!

Alone among all the pollsters Zogby missed California by 25 points!!!!!

He called both contests the same way (Obama huge plurality over Clinton, and instead they came in at near-landslides for Clinton.) He's corrupt - no other explanation is available why he's always wrong, and always in the same direction.

Finding 6 percent of the electorate favoring Nader takes Herculean mismanagement, or more likely spectacular corruption in the sample.

Zogby has no credibility at all. Armstrong wrote: "Now, Zogby loves to make news, so I wouldn't put it past him to have polled for a sample showing Nader doing well."

I think Armstrong nailed it on the head.

[Zhade]

20. Gee, no evidence from the conservative. Wonder why.

I guess liars are allergic to evidence.

[robcon]

22. I think missing those two primaries by so much is evidence, and

being the only pollster to miss the results by so much is further evidence. I think Jerome Armstrong's argument, that Zogby will try to make news for his organization rather than create accurate polls supports my perspective on Zogby.

I guess scum like you ignore anything you wish weren't true. Stick your head back in the sand.

[ohio2007]

6. The "thrilla in Manilla" will shrink in comparison to the "debacle in Denver"

the fight will continue well past the convention arguements of ignoring the Fla. and Mi. voter disenfranchisement.

[zanne]

7. I disagree about that, ohio2007.

I think there will be a clear cut winner and that we'll have enough time to stand behind him/her before the general election. Right now, Democrats like to fight against their Primary opponents, but after the fact, nothing will please us more than fighting against the Republicans.

[ohio2007]

11. You might be of a disenfranchised state of mind if you think the "do overs" in two states

are NOT a sign of things to come.

[zanne]

12. Oh, I think it'll get messy...

But after we stop the infighting, we'll support our candidate. Not enough of us will stay angry enough at other Dems to ruin the general election. The frustration we're feeling now will cease.

[humbled_opinion]

15. There already is a Clear Cut Winner..

The only thing stopping him is that Hillary is trying her damndest to steal it somehow and if that happens... I will not go happily to the Hillary camp... no I will support Obama as a third party or even Nader for that matter but there is no way that witch will get my vote... She is cold and calculating and it shows. Give the people what they want... I would have much more respect for her if she would just gracefully bail out now.

[galileo3000]

9. I am not afraid of a long fight.

A long fight is good training. May the best candidate win. Like steel, fire only strenghtens our resolve.

[Bandit]

10. What Democrats call fighting is only T-ball for Republicans

I mean really, how much damage is being done to either candidate? What are they saying that is so terrible? I have not heard anything that would prevent me from voting for either one. McCain is skating at the moment but it won't last. He really has nothing good to brag about so I am sure he will use the Republican style of attacking his opponent and what can he come up with that won't be old news by then. At least Democrats are in the news daily although the MSM is only focused on confrontation occasionaly a bit of the issues get out. IMO this is a benefit for our side..

[AndyTiedye]

14. That's Because Repiglickins Have Teflon® While Democrats Have Flypaper

All the mud that is being thrown around in the primaries will stick. The MSM will see to that.

We have an uphill battle ahead of us.

[2Design]

13. It is great - they are in the news all the time - makes Mclame look like

he isn't even in the race - he is nobody - they are getting a lot of free publicity - and the pundits are showing their stupidity in the things they say - it is really all good as DEAN said - let it rolll

[humbled_opinion]

16. Oh yeah great Publicity...

Jeramiah Wright has been in the news more than Obama or Hillary for that matter....

[mmonk]

17. Sometimes instead of waiting for someone to fill the vacuum, it might be best

to step up and fill it.

[Zhade]

19. Perplexed? Go with the winning candidate.

Show Clinton it's time she accept her loss.

[ryanmuegge]

21. It would have been a long fight no matter when we chose our nominee.

We have to compete against overwhelmingly biased coverage in favor of John McCain. That's something we can't control. Of course, the Democratic Party is finding ways to fuck it up and make it even more difficult.