stands for Chief Financial Officer.

Anything for the Florida Netroots!

While I'm in the Obama camp right now, I like your style, Trey.

I think if Richardson isn't nominated, there's a VP possibility, and he certainly has more than earned a place in the cabinet (Secretary of State, for sure.)

Stick to your guns man, even those of us in different camps respect that.

Keep dreaming Jerome.

the SC numbers are what sinks it for me. They're way off compared to what every other pollster has found.

Obama leads or is very close to Clinton in every poll in South Carolina. This is way off.

I get their Stateside Dispatch every week, and its fantastic. I encourage all to visit and get on their mailing list.

Clinton was solid, as was Obama and Edwards. Richardson I thought really blew it. Dodd was good, but will anyone notice? Biden bellows WAY too much, and is a bit annoying. Kuncinich and Gravel, in typical fashion, are making themselves more irrelevant.

but listening to Gravel is like listening to fingernails on a chalkboard. Could he get any shriller or more obnoxious? Sheesh.

This guy is going for the throat. Love it.

I'm so happy to see Obama and Edwards on the same page. I love it when two great minds unwittingly connect.

keep in mind, in Arizona, state-level candidates are elected through public funds - so the fundraising potential of Napolitano is slim to none. However (and more importantly) such a system gives Napolitano an edge in the swing state of Arizona, because such a campaign finance system forces any candidate to have a good ground game. Not to mention the fact she won reelection handily there.

However, should McCain (however unlikely right now) be the GOP nominee, Napolitano's influence in Arizona would be marginalized. It could be a replay of '88, where Lloyd Benson as the VP nominee did nothing to put Texas into the GOP column because the GOP presidential nominee was, of course, Bush I.

Despite all of this, Napolitano would be a close third for me behind Obama and Sebelius.

only of having Obama as a VP to Edwards (though I certainly see your point, it could certainly be too much of one thing.) I wouldn't agree with having Edwards as VP again - I don't even think Edwards would agree to it even if it was offered.

I forgot to mention, I certainly wouldn't mind seeing Obama as the VP too. That would be equally fantastic!

I'm leaning towards Obama right now. Nonetheless, Edwards is my strong second choice. Either way, I want Sebelius as our VP nominee. We need more women in office for one, and two, we need strong leaders like her who have built the Democratic brand.

That's about the nicest possible way I can put it. Trying to put an origin to it is mostly pointless. If I had to pick a time - I think post 1968 would be the best guess (the same time the left starting going down hill.) It got worse under Reagan, and got really bad after '94.

However, DC has always been a cesspool of insiders and conventional wisdom. It truly has been a political "bubble." For pre-1968 stuff, look no further than Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.