Then just a few minutes ago, Keith asked an uncomfortable Tom Brokaw whether it is wise for Hillary Clinton to be Bush to Obama's Gore in Bush v. Gore.

Ho. Lee. Shiite. Did he really say that? That is several kinds of messed up.

just another fragile male ego. hey, Hillary's a rough campaigner. she reduced chris matthews to incoherent babbling.. ."i'm not obsessed. i'm not. "

It's still going on, 'cos Obama has 150 or so delegate lead...

Don't blame him!  He's not the one trying to come in from behind.

indeed!

Because Hillary has won a few battles but lost the war.  She needed to win by way over 10% to catch up on the delegate and popular vote count.

The bigger they are the harder they fall.  You just made my evening a whole lot sweeter Todd - THANKS!

Seriously, Keith is wasting his hard-earned political capital.  He was doing very well but now he's taking himself down by being so ridiculous.

These guys are so anti-Hillary it's unreal.  I guess she offers no tingle up the leg!  which suits me just fine!

I am SO glad I quit watching KO long before he became so anti-Hillary.  He was going a bit wild for me, with his rants.  Opinions are OK but hold the rabies please!

Keith is a joke.  The 'Clinton is Bush' statement should get him removed from moderating these events.  I literally tuned into MSNBC just to see how they would report the Hillary win.  Within 5 minutes Keith makes that pathetic statement and turned to another station.

So, why can't he close the deal? Seriously, he's gotten tons of positive publicity, the media adores him, yet he can't get it done. That's a big problem that shouldn't and can't be overlooked.

IMHO, a joint ticket is the only way to resolve this. I've heard all the reasons why they won't- but when 1 out of 4 of her supporters and 1 out of 5 of his say they won't support the other, is there really any other solution?

I don't think so.

Time to suck it up, folks, and get it done together.

Beautifully put, Todd!

He outspends her on media, somewhere between 2:1 and 4:1. He spend many weeks campaigning in the state. Then he loses by 10 points?

What's wrong with this logic? How can this primary not continue until the Convention?

If I was an Obama supporter, I'd be pretty embarrassed by some of the pretzel logic I'm reading right now. Kossacks' heads are exploding all over the place on the Big Orange at the moment, too.

Sad.

Todd, thanks for your breath of sanity here. Very much appreciated.

Garbage analysis.

Clinton gained 3 delegates. maybe 5.

Pathetic.

Man this website is shit. I am outta this den of delusion.

that anything bad that happens to Obama must have been Clinton's fault?

The Obama supporters have a good spin going now. Their candidate has a great chance to beat McCain, except that Hillary, but staying in the race, may be fatally damaging Obama for the general.

If he loses in November, they're going to blame it all on the Clintons.

I screamed a giant, "FUCK YOU !!!" at the TV - when Saint Pontifical Olbermann compared Clinton to Dubya. If he wants to be a PR person for the Obama campaign - fine - but let's not try to put on airs of unbiased coverage any more.

And BTW, Keith. Actually there have been cases of the person trailing in delegates receiving the nomination - as recently as Hubert Humphrey in 1968. So we are NOT in completely new political territory.  Does anybody give these guys history web links before they go one air?

Olbermann is just terrible, even Chris Matthews has to be the Clinton defender, over the top with stupidness.

I was amused when Olbermann started arguing that Hillary wasn't being gracious because she "mocked" Obama throughout her victory speech (by adopting Obama's hopeful language). Even Matthews seemed stumped by that one.

Oberman sounds a little bitter.  Does he live in Pennsylvania?

MSNBC is getting pretty hard to watch, and I'm an Obama supporter.  Matthews often uses phrases like, "the thing I fear" and then describes some potential hazard to Obama.  Doesn't seem to concerned about problems for Clinton.

Anyway, Olberman's shtick often includes some strange leap of logic in the form of a question that his guests have to reshape into something reasonable.  Generally more amusing when he's doing it against the Republicans.

you mean like:

"why hasn't Hillary been able to close the deal?"  :-)

Have you not noticed the format?  Some of them are pro-Clinton and some are pro-Obama.

And since he was called on the carpet for his tingling leg comment (which was stupid) Chris Matthews has been going out of his way to slam Obama.

Tonight's gems include: the results in PA are "regular people" against "white liberals and african-americans."  Also, on Obama's campaign - "It's too debonaire; it's too Fred Astaire; it's too Kumbaya."

That couldn't have come out better for the Clinton campaign if they had scripted it themselves.

Almost every time Olberman says something pro-Obama on the election-eve shows, it's been in response to baldly pro-Clinton comments.

And this is a longstanding dynamic - Olberman about lost it on Super Tuesday when half the commentators were talking about what a big night it was for Clinton - what a big win - when anybody who knew anything about the map knew it meant she was in big, big trouble.

So, yes, I'm not completely in the tank - Olberman is pro-Obama.  But he's scarcely the only viewpoint on the show.

Joe Scarborough and Harold Ford offer great analysis.   Pat Buchanan, too!

This is coming from a newspaper that endorsed Clinton:

The Pennsylvania campaign, which produced yet another inconclusive result on Tuesday, was even meaner, more vacuous, more desperate, and more filled with pandering than the mean, vacuous, desperate, pander-filled contests that preceded it.

Voters are getting tired of it; it is demeaning the political process; and it does not work. It is past time for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton to acknowledge that the negativity, for which she is mostly responsible, does nothing but harm to her, her opponent, her party and the 2008 election...

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/23/opinio n/23wed1.html?ref=opinion

If you can't understand Olberman's anger, you are not paying attention.

If that silly Clinton, who dares to go on because people are -- GASP! -- supporting her!

Those silly people, who have no hope!

How dare they stand in the way of Obama's coronation! This is insolence!

Hillary, for the good of the party, please, just step aside. We all want you to leave. No one wants you here. Certainly not the majority of Pennsylvanians who gave you that double-digit victory.

Not those silly people who just gave $1 million to your campaign in two hours tonight.

Why can't she just step aside? Things would just be so gosh-darned easier.

Then we could focus on more important issues. Like letting Obama eat waffles while he ignores questions. That's what politics is all about!

So, for the good of the punditocracy, er, the voters, please Hillary, no one wants you. Please go into the night.

:: rolls eyes ::

If only it would!

I was with a huge group of enthusiastic Hillary supporters this evening trying to get into the hotel ballroom to hear her. The atmosphere was electric and we were all quite hyped.

Nothing Olberthetop or Chris "Obama's Tingle Up My Leg" Matthews can say can dull the excitement and pure joy this evening brought to a lot of us.

Go Hillary!

You are right Olberman's head exploded and then he became Ogerman.

I don't think we can blame Obama for Hillary being a superpower candidate. Just because she's going to lose in the long run doesn't mean a lot of people aren't going to vote for her on the way.

The argument that it is Obama's responsibility to knock Clinton out ignores a number of things.
1) Obama doesn't want to alienate Clinton voters for the general election, so he has been decidedly un-critical of her. Clinton doesn't share this concern about Obama voters.

2) One would think that having made it mathematically impossible for her to win would be enough to, essentially, force her out.

3) This is the Nader argument. Nader blames Gore for people voting for Nader. I mean, it's true in part, of course, that Obama hasn't been able to convince all Clinton supporters to vote for him. But this argument is motivated more by some kind of belief that horserace politics are a moral determinative. If your goal is electing a Democrat, you should believe that the person who is hurting the eventual Democratic nominee should stop hurting him. There is only so much he can do back.

Keith has always been like this. Every time Obama does something against either Clinton or Mc.Cain, Keith practically has an orgasm. He as bad as O'Reilly is.

Perhaps Olbermann's head exploding could be a good thing.  Everytime I see him, I can't help but notice that his eyes seem to be getting closer and closer together, as though all that indignation is.. well.. messing up his face.  Perhaps this could sort of spread those features out again for him. Just sayin'  

I'm quite certain that Mr. Predictable will have a breathless "special comment" tomorrow about the "racists" in Pennsylvannia.  Count on it.

Todd,

Very well said!  I used to think my father (Republican) was crazy for his insistence that MSNBC was biased, and I used to think that FOX served no purpose.  But one of the things that this primary taught me, and this is a positive lesson that I will take regardless of who wins this nomination, is that the Left has media outlets that are just as irresponsible, and just as absurd, as the Right.

It has been very eye-opening.

Olbermann has been out of line for months and I hope that his pissing on half his audience comes back to haunt him.  I might wind up voting for Barack Obama in November, but I will never support this man Keith Olbermann again.

Like I say: when politicians politick, that's just doing their job.  Would-be journalists have NO excuse.  We shouldn't embrace it just when it happens to suit our particular view at the moment: the failure of the fourth estate is destructive to democracy.

Why can't Hillary make up the margins on him? Why is she is still so too far behind?! Why can't she capitalize on her obvious experience and network of donors to beat this upstart?

See. I can do it too.

For that matter, the same thing can be asked on the other side: why can't Hillary Clinton seem to narrow Barack Obama's lead in pledged delegates?

Why can't SHE put this thing away?

Why, if she is winning primaries, can't she go ahead of Obama in pledged delegates?

How can she be expected to beat John McCain, if she can't beat Barack Obama, that "electoral weakling."?

She gained 6 delegates in this primary tonight.  Excellent for her.  That means that she will catch up to and pass Barack Obama in only...30 more primaries.

Just one problem with that.  There's only, what, 6 more primaries?

You can't fight math.  

Someone at Talk Left just did the math and if Florida and Michigan are included Hillary is now ahead in popular vote count.  I'm amazed that Obama supporters are still so cocky when it's clear the tide is turning.    

The reason why Hillary is so far behind, is the fact that when she wins a state, she wins by 5%, 10%, 15%.  (Except New York and Arkansas, her two "home" states, and I think maybe Oklahoma.)

When Obama wins a state, HE wins by 10%, 20%, 30%.

He's getting wider margins of victory when he does win.

That translates into more pledged delegates.

Watch out Todd.  There are some guys here who have Keith Olbermann poster's on their bedroom wall who will be mighty offended if you call out our generation's Murrow (LOL).

Olbermann was so biased tonight, he made Chris Matthews seem balanced and thoughtful.  

Olbermann almost seems like he's going to scream or cry when anything pro-Clinton is suggested.  Again, I am not a huge fan of Obama or Clinton, but I find Olbermann's continued ripping on a fellow Democrat ridiculous, when it's not like Obama's run an angelic campaign.

In January Obama's fans complained that Olbermann was biased toward Clinton (while her fans weren't complaining about bias.)

Now the shoe is on the other foot.

Bottom line: The team that's behind always complains about the officiating.

I'll give Clinton and her fans the same advive they gave Obama and his fans after the last debate: QUIT YER WHININ'.

Chuck Todd just compared Hillary Clinton to the Soviet Union.

The Hillary Clinton = Osama Bin Laden analogy is 3 statements away in Rachel Maddow's queue.

on Jerome's post By the Numbers from March 22.  In the first paragraph he wrote:

...I can't help but recognize that the call to shut down the nomination battle before all the votes are counted, hopefully a position held by a vocal minority, is unfortunately reminiscent of the Bush supporters mantra against Gore in Dec of 2000.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/3/22/1237 27/461

I admit that I winced when I heard what KO said, just as I got pissed off at what Jerome wrote.  That doesn't mean that I think that either of them are bad guys.  I just think that if we are going to talk about people's heads exploding, maybe this site shouldn't be throwing stones while living in a glass house.

Jerome is free to respond as well, but I figured I'd direct it at you, as the author of the current post.

After all, you guys are all the same person anyway, right. ;)

Safest bet on the board tomorrow: Olbermann and MSNBC will go out of their way to emphasize the margin of victory drifted downward, after the networks ended their primary coverage.

Other than entertainment value, Olbermann has no business hosting election coverage.

I knew a Hillary call had to be eminent once CNN used "competitive race" and not "too close to call," so I stayed with MSNBC to watch it marvelously unfold. There was more whining and shanks during that hour than on Big Break Kaanapali on the Golf Channel later in the night.

IMO, Scarborough makes more valid points than anyone, during instant reaction to major events like debates or election results. Tonight he was very good while looking at the big picture along with Harold Ford, and called Hillary and Obama, "two incredibly gifted candidates."

Tonight Matthews disgusted me most of all, asserting the biggest question in the Democratic race is whether Bill and Hillary want Obama to win in November.

She has demonstrated her arrogant and amoral behavior throughout this primary.  In her quest to damage Obama, she has severely damaged herself and would make McCain's job easier against her in the general election than against Obama if she steals the nomination.  Murdoch and Scaife, who are Hillary's pimps, are getting their money's worth out of Hillary's Tonya Harding apporach to the Dem Prez nomination.

If Hillary is the Dem nominee, this Democratic woman voter will not vote for her in the general election.

She has demonstrated her arrogant and amoral behavior throughout this primary.  In her quest to damage Obama, she has severely damaged herself and would make McCain's job easier against her in the general election than against Obama if she steals the nomination.  Murdoch and Scaife, who are Hillary's pimps, are getting their money's worth out of Hillary's Tonya Harding apporach to the Dem Prez nomination.

If Hillary is the Dem nominee, this Democratic woman voter will not vote for her in the general election.

I found extremely ironic that after Hillary's victory speech, KO had the nerve to state that her tone was mocking.  He mentioned this not once, not twice but several times - the other pundits looked at him and reacted to his statement, like huh?  what are you talking about?

KO's faux outrage of Hillary giving a victory speech over her "tone"?  The majority of pundits(well all but KO) thought her victory speech was one of her best ones yet.

KO is a mocker - he mocks everynight - some people deserve it, some don't.  But for him to state that about Hillary?

KO - go home, play house and come back after Nov. 4th.  You can't take the heat.

that's just too funny and right on the money