Reply #27: I haven't seen any REALLY challenging, let alone convincing cases made that Obama is NOT stronger ..

[cloudythescribbler]

as a candidate. The argument that he just has lower negatives than Hillary because she has faced the music and he hasn't just isn't plausible. Not EVERY Democrat has the same negatives. Would this argument be put forward if it were Clinton v Edwards? Why assume that SHE is less likely to decline than he.

I suppose that with the upcoming Rezko trial, at least some of this reasoning will face a crucial test. I myself doubt that the Rezko thing will have any big impact, though it might have SOME impact.

"I have the ability to bring people together," he said. Because of that, he said, "I think I can beat John McCain more effectively," referring to the Arizona senator closing in on the Republican presidential nomination.

I think one key reason Barack Obama is winning in so many red states (the object of much sneering on DU -- how PERVERSE!) such as Alaska, Idaho, Kansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, Utah, etc. is that Democrats there are so much more painfully aware of what poison Hillary Clinton is downticket, something of enormous importance even in states like Nebraska which are virtually certain to go Repuke in November. (The impact in states like MA, also pretty uncontested, of Hillary Clinton is obviously not the same kind of problem, hence Democrats don't go into the polling booth or caucus thinking about what it would mean to have Hillary Clinton at the top of the ticket in an area where she is possibly the most hated American alive.)