Watch out for blowback in that event.

She can run all the way to the convention. What she should not do is run a nasty, McCain-surrogate campaign (the CinC test, the 3am phone call, using Ferraro’s racism, etc).

Not a chance. Her only “hope” is to convince the supers Obama is unelectable by trying to MAKE him unelectable herself. If you support her staying in, that is what you’re supporting. That’s your right, but do it with your eyes open, and think about whether Clinton would have a prayer in the fall after that.

A side note: This is a pretty idiotic system we have here

I call bullshit. And that’s all I’m gonna say on the subject.

But she may not be looking to win right now. Or, at least, only right now. Clearly the campaign didn’t go the way she had counted on; she didn’t clinch the nomination on Super Tuesday. So it’s quite plausible that, while still pulling every trick possible to get the nomination for this year, she is also looking ahead to 2012.

Support can certainly be found for the argument that she’s laid groundwork for Obama to not win against McCain (her many comments advocating McCain over Obama, for example) so she can have another crack at in in 4 years.

Morgan: “Besides, what happens if the super delegates DO decide this election tomorrow, and they end up electing Clinton?”

Just to be clear, you realize the “super delegates” DON’T get to decide the election, don’t you?

Bite me.

Is that linguistically correct?

Once again, SUPERDELEGATES were designed, even MEANT to step into situations like this one, where there is basically a statistical dead heat.

Pennsylvania. BIG state.

HRC will win here; only question is by how much.

The entire Primary season being an imperfect process; millions of Obama voters not even Democrats, caucuses run under wild-west conditions, votes counted in all sorts of different ways, need I even mention MI and FL?

After PA, a statistical dead heat. Obama has run a great campaign, but has not closed the deal and closed out Hillary.

She has a valid claim to put in front of the superdelegates: She’s within 5% of Obama in every area, and has proven that she deserves consideration.

The superdelegates’ job is clear: DO whatever’s necessary for the Party to win in November. Put the best Democrat forward.

In my book, that’s Hillary. A proven quantity, a solid record, a solid foundation of Democratic member support, not here-today gone-tomorrow crossovers and hangers-on and trend followers.

We will see in the months ahead just how solid the support for Obama is, as he takes the hits, the slander, the slime, and the mudslinging by the Right. Right now, post-Wright, Obama’s base looks pretty soft to me.

“Could care less” is not what you mean to say, Jay. If somebody “could” care less, then it doesn’t support the argument that the subject in question–in this case, “anything but [Hillary Clinton]“–is at the bottom of things that Mrs. Clinton thinks about.

“Couldn’t” care less is the correct phrasing, as it implies that the amount of care directed at the subject is already at the barest of minimums.

Hark! I hear somebody preparing to spell the phrase “a lot” as if it were one word! Off I go!

You guys seem to want this both ways. You say “Clinton can’t win, look at the numbers” but then you worry that she’ll steal the election. So she..um, can win, then, right? She may not be the best candidate, but she’s not an idiot. She’s not going to stay in this if she doesn’t think she can win. Same goes for Obama. We have elections for a reason; so everyone can have a voice. let the elections continue.

Besides, what happens if the super delegates DO decide this election tomorrow, and they end up electing Clinton?

Also, can we agree that just because someone supports Clinton over Obama, that doesn’t mean they’re a racist? Or a Republican? I mean, we are hoping to keep these people voting Democrat in the general election, right?

-M

Because the sound of the word “a” tends to blend into the initial sound of the following word when that following word starts with a vowel (orange, elephant) or an aspirated “h” sound (harmonica, historic). In those cases “an” is instead so the sound of the “n” can separate those other two sounds and make them more distinct.

This is a little archaic and it is very common for folks to use just “a” when saying H words. Like using impact as a verb, it’s become accepted even if not classically correct

(Interestingly, when Geraldine Ferraro was selected to run for vice president the cover of Time magazine carried the banner “A Historic Choice”. They got a fair number of letters about it.)

Ah. There’s the bell. Class Dismissed.