*Barack Obama holds a 52%-35% lead over Hillary Clinton in Montana. As Kos points out, "it's shocking to me how difficult it has been for the political media to distinguish from Obama's Appalachian problem and his non-existent problems with white voters at large." Kos also suggests a bit of "ju jitsu," as in "Why is Clinton suddenly having a hard time with working class whites?" Heh.
*Former President Carter says that while Hillary Clinton "has the perfect right" to stay in the race, "I think at that point it will be time for her to give it up." Thank you, President Carter!
*Clinton has an op-ed today which can only be described as delusional. Thus, she's still running because she still believes she can win and that "staying in this race will help unite the Democratic Party." Well, alrighty then. She also takes back her non-apology apology from her RFK assassination comments the other day, throwing it back at everyone who somehow mistakenly "construed in a way that flies in the face of everything I stand for." Got that?
*Puerto Rico's primary is coming up on June 1. For some interesting analysis, see here (predicts 30% turnout and a 4-5 point Clinton victory) and here.
*The Libertarian Party convention is voting on its presidential nominee. As of late afternoon Sunday, Bob Barr leads Mary Ruwart (who?), Wayne Allyn Root (???) and Mike Gravel (I thought he was in the Grandpa Simpson party!) 188-162-138-73 after 2 ballots. To win the nomination, it takes 327 votes, so this could be a long night in Denver!
*Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, the DSCC and DCCC are raising wads of money. The DNC? Not so much, with just $4.4 million at the end of April compared to $40.6 million for the RNC. Is this the key? "Hassan Nemazee, a finance co-chairman for the Clinton campaign and longtime DNC fundraiser, said until the party has a nominee the national committee's fundraising ability is hampered." (but wait, Hillary says she's HELPING the party by staying in the race...I'm so confused!)
"People are not going to give until that candidate puts in place an apparatus that allows for people to feel as though there is an institutional memory in place, so they know someone will remember they gave the money," he said.
That's what giving to campaigns was all about in the old model that the Clinton campaign so typifies -- "getting credit" with elected officials so they'll remember to invite you to the kaffeeklatsch, let you sleep in the Lincon Bedroom, preserve your favorite tax break or subsidy, etc etc
The fact that Obama has got the small donor model firing on all cylinders is going to be a big game changer in American politics -- the $100 donor doesn't expect anything other than a good president...
[And yes, I know that neither campaign is exclusively focused on the old or new model, but the percentage of under-$200 donors for Obama in the FEC data bears this out in general terms]
I personally think that this is a wise investment with phenomenal returns. I know that the folks funded through this effort in Virginia, like Joe Montano and Susan Mariner, are absolutely terrific. And it's hard to argue with the success of 3 straight House special election victories in strong Republican districts.
It's not like Howard Dean is using these funds to buy monogrammed boxer shorts or something -- this is money very well spent.
Mississippi, for goodness sakes! If we hadn't put money into that, would it have gone Democratic. And just a year ago, who could have predicted it?
I'm so proud of Howard Dean for sticking to his guns on this.
An upset, after all, is by definition, winning the race you weren't expected to.
http://www.jedreport.com/2008/...
And check out the link in the first comment for Spike Lee comparing Clinton to a basketball coach calling timeouts and telling her players to commit fouls despite her team being down too many points with too few seconds left.
Seems like a breakdown in the campaign.
We had carpools to the carolinas, penn, wva, ohio, KY , and Indiana.
I think he has a point. I sense a dangerous amount of resentment building at the way Clinton is being treated by the Obama campaign and, yet again, maligned on blogs and message boards by Obama's supporters.
I reiterate that for me, I don't really care. I'm supporting Obama no matter what, within reason. But I think Krugman has a point.
BTW, this comment is not directed at this diary or anything in this thread, just generally.