Once more I ask "How is Hillary more electable than Obama?"

[intaglio]

You have a candidate who - even with FL taken into account is behind in the popular vote
Who is behind in the number of States won
Who is behind in the number of pledged delegates - (and will remain behind even after PA)

Your candidate had advantages of money and name recognition up until Super Tuesday yet lost those advantages due to poor fund raising, poor financial management, poor campaign management and poor personnel management. Your candidate decried voters in states she lost and has insulted the activists who she will have to depend on in the unlikely event of her winning the candidacy.

She has openly talked of suborning the votes of pledged delegates and overturning any popular majority (votes, states or pledged delegates) by the use of unelected Superdelegates. Yet when respected Superdelegates support Obama they are attacked as traitors to her and her husband.

She is a leader of the DLC which will replace Dean and his successful team at the convention if she is nominated what is more she will be expected to control a convention when she cannot even control her own husband during the campaign.

In addition she has a huge history of problems with fund raisers, financial advisers and political advisers yet seems to have gone out of her way to duplicate those problems in this campaign. She has shown inferior judgment in her choice of what to support and when to change that support; examples include Nafta, Cafta, Columbia and the IWR - where she not only failed to read the NIE but also trusted Condoleeza Rice and did not realise that the term "Authorize the use of Force" meant that the use of force had just been authorised by her vote.

Politically she has been maladroit enough as to praise the man she wished to challenge for the Presidency at the expense of her own party. In addition she is known to have the highest negative rating for any politician - with the limited exception of Dubya - and is a positive disincentive to vote for the young and the politically neutral. Beyond that she has claimed experience she does not have; lied about Bosnia, Northern Ireland and Africa; and expects the US to continue believing such lies.

=============================================================================

Now comes the kicker - I have posted such questions 3 times and NEVER have the Clinton "Democrats" bothered to answer. Just an occasional attack that the questions are not "substantive" or are "suppositions"

Not all Clinton supporters are unreasonable (bigtree to name but one); tho' supporters of Obama might find some annoying; others are just blind. Some of the acolytes here undoubtedly also post on the Obama hate sites like hillaryclintonforum.net where they feel free to indulge in their closet racism or plain infatuation with HRC. No criticism of their diva can be admitted and no compliments toward her opponent can be allowed.

One result of this mindlessness is that the Clinton clique cannot see that many who support Obama know him to be flawed, know that he is human but that he is not as flawed and is more human than Hillary.

So, as before, I expect nothing but the sound of crickets ... now prove me wrong