Your comments are ironic given the way you're cherry picking what was wrong in the R2K sample and ignoring or dismissing everything that was right -- including the accuracy of the last poll.

You're making a whole lot out of being two points off a number of groups, which is unusual given that the margin of error in polling is 3 points and higher in subsamples.

Lumping blacks and latinos together to ignore how the black sample was just 1 point off is also pretty conspicuous. The same goes for independents.

I guess you're not voting for Clinton then, seeing as how Obama is leading in both delegates and the popular vote so far.

Where was Clinton yesterday? She didn't even vote on FISA!

If Obama was president, chances are he'd have vetoed the bill -- seeing as how he voted against it and all.

Demographically, the Virgin Islands are a lot different than Puerto Rico, and if hispanics turn out for Clinton the way they currently are, then she'll win Puerto Rico by a landslide.

Does it matter? If Clinton wins Texas, it shows she's winning. If Obama wins Texas, it shows that he only wins in states that don't count. It's hypocrisy at its finest, but that's in no short supply here.

Maybe it's just that we're getting tired of the same old "he doesn't have any plans" when a simple visit to his website could show you that he does.

not handicap her campaign playing by some bullshit rules where the goalposts are being moved by her opponent to suit his campaign.

Umm, everyone agreed that Michigan and Florida wouldn't mean anything, and now that she won them and we're in a tight delegate race, she should 'do anything to win'?

Now that's hypocrisy for you.

And by the way:
"[Clinton] is misrepresenting Obama's position on superdelegates -- it's his view that the superdelegates as a whole will follow the choice of voters and support whoever wins the pledged delegates nationwide."

Actually, conservatives hate McCain's stances on illegal immigration.

I came to MyDD for two years its even analyses until December, when Jerome started writing shit piece after shit piece after shit piece on Obama. It died down recently but is starting up, again.

If you look at the rec list here, you'll find that pretty much everything is about how Obama is a faux liberal.

Take a look at what he was writing in December and January, Kos was NOT shilling for Obama. He's supporting Obama now, but he's relatively evenhanded about it.

Haven't you heard? Only blue states count as wins. That's why we won the presidency in 2004, with 100% of all the states* no less!

*those that count, that is

Maybe, maybe not. CNN has Clinton ahead by 27 total delegates.

But after the Chesapeake primaries, he probably will start pulling ahead.

Not only is this inaccurate and tiresome, it doesn't even make sense. Unless you think a person can become president by winning only the blue states, the way Kerry did?

Oh yes, if there's one thing we learned in 2000 and in 2004, it's that one state should decide it all.

Well, she is doing well in Maine: after 3 30-point losses, she's only losing by 15 points right now.

Did you notice that Iowa and South Carolina aren't hilighted? He's just hilighting his victories from Toesday.