And when Obama is the nominee, what about the people from Pennsylvania, Ohio, and South Dakota? He certainly did not win the popular vote in those states. Are they not counted either?

I believe her argument was that she won the popular vote, which discounted states with a caucus system, like Washington. That's the root of the issue.

And when Obama is the nominee, what about the people from Pennsylvania, Ohio, and South Dakota? He certainly did not win the popular vote in those states.

Umm the point here is that Clinton claims a popular vote lead based that includes some states. If you count all states Obama has a popular vote lead. So the objection is not that Clinton did win our states (though she did not) but that she is claiming that if you add up all the votes she has the popular vote, arriving at that total by leaving our votes out of the total. That is the problem with unofficial tallies. You can always find an excuse for not counting someone. Clinton totaled up various states and claimed to have won the popular vote overall - by leaving 14 states out. That is a bullshit claim.

>I just hope that everyone else who was initially a Clinton supporter will, too.

Not going to happen. I don't know if I'm ready to trust someone who, four years ago, was a state senator. He hasn't convinced me that anything's going to change. I will not drink the Kool-Aid until I know what's in it.

I don't much care for the "drink the kool-aid" metaphor. Obama is my third choice, maybe fourth. But if the choice is him or "endless war" , "appoint more John Roberts" to the supreme court McCain, the guy who bravely spoke against torture and then voted for it, I have no trouble voting for Obama over him. If you support Clinton, I presume you support at least some of what she campaigned on. There are zero issues on which McCain is better than Obama.

Obama's speech was....

He knocked out of the park.

And when Obama is the nominee, what about the people from Pennsylvania, Ohio, and South Dakota? He certainly did not win the popular vote in those states. Are they not counted either?

That's not the issue. There are NO numbers from Washington in her popular vote tally. Zero. Because we're a caucus state that doesn't report official numbers of caucus-goers, we don't exist in her calculus. She literally is not including us. That's my issue. All these people in this picture [link] plus all of us already crammed into the gym when it was made, plus the thousands like us all around the state, the ones that supported her just as much as those of us who supported Obama, don't exist in that so-called "popular vote" number she's tossing around.

Obama's not deleting those votes from the totals, or totting up delegate counts only from caucuses or the states he won.

I didn't say he was. It was stupid for her to do, but there is a very real possibility that those voters will feel just as perturbed as Susan and Typo, albeit for slightly different reasons.

The problem is in the nominating process. This primary cycle has certainly shown that the current system doesn't work when it's this close. There's no way in hell a nominee should be decided by superdelegates.

I've got a funny feeling that the Democratic Party is not done with polarization. McCain's got to be loving this.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is the painfully high cost of new furniture: [link] (that's a couplethree days old. What is not shown is the swelling.)

Also? I have mutant strawberries. How'd they get that name anyway?

oww! I haven't had a bruise like that since I played Whirly-Ball.

Ouch, sara, that's NASTY.

Clinton totaled up various states and claimed to have won the popular vote overall - by leaving 14 states out. That is a bullshit claim.

It was absolutely stupid. She's not the first politician to make up numbers and she won't be the last, but she did win some very large states who need to go blue in the general election for Obama to prevail. When it's a close election, bitter feelings are amplified. (See the 2000 and 2004 elections.)

I don't much care for the "drink the kool-aid" metaphor.

Fair enough, but I stand by my right to use it. Clinton was not my first choice; John Edwards was, followed by Chris Dodd. My problem is I just do not know WHAT he plans to do. He's a fabulous speaker, but the substance is lacking for me.

I don't want to settle anymore, and regardless of who the Democratic nominee is, I think we would. Republicans are also settling.

There are zero issues on which McCain is better than Obama.

That's your opinion. I may or may not agree. I haven't heard enough substance from Obama to definitively make up my mind.

Susan and Gar, thanks for clarifying your positions. I was coming at it from a different angle, and I think I'm getting tired of the insinuation that Barack Obama is the savior of the Democratic Party.

See that faint line above it on my thigh? (below in the photo.) That's from where I fell off a dhow in Mozambique and gave myself a credible Virgin of Guadalupe icon bruise in 2000 or 2001. The dent is mostly gone, took years. No telling if weight loss will bring it back.

When I bruise, I do it good.