Aren't most people here talking about how they like Obama but still managing to find a way to argue about it, even though they agree on the same guy?

Apparently there is no connection.

yes glatt, thats what I was eluding to in my previous post.

You're an eluder?

elusive - er?

e-lucifer!!

1,170 to 1,168.

...1,170 to 1,168!
and thats counting superdelegates!

Is it just me or has the media already elected this guy.

The media wants to get on with the election, and skip the conventions.

Except for Fox News, the media follows the polls even better than the politicians.

The media seemed to be obsessed with Hillary up until just recently.

When it comes to politics, Fox News is proactive.

Ohh I think they became disenchanted with her weeks ago. Obama has been the more exciting storyline.

Prior to the primary process kicking off Clinton had seemed the appointed one. If you follow the tone in a paper known for its liberal lean, The NYT, it is quite obvious that even the press followed this notion that she would be the nominee. I think there has been a shift in this tone as the primary process has evolved. They have discovered what many of us have been saying for a long time, Ms. Clinton is a divider and many people in the Democratic party really do not like her or her group of supporters. Much of her underbelly of power hunger has been exposed through the years. To me Obama brings a fresh face to the race. We need to remember that it is not so much who sits in the White House that matters, as it is that the people the individual surrounds themselves with are of quality and can advise to the appropriate course of action in times of crisis as well as calm.

The media could give a rat's ass about the election or the conventions or whatever *as long as you're watching, especially the commercials*.

You'll do well to keep this in mind as you allocate your eyeball minutes this election season.

Allllll that talk about how expensive campaigning is? I'll tell you this, the cost of yard signs isn't the biggest expense. It's not office space rental. It's AIR TIME. The candidates, all of them with no exceptions, have to raise buxor to be able to be heard/seen. And that means media exposure. $$$$.

You do the math.

Sure, the process and the eventual (inevitable outcome--*somebody's* gonna be President) is important. But along the way, their main goal, their commercial imperative, is to make money. Their sole stock in trade is airtime.

Speaking of campaign signs...

When I voted yesterday, I noticed a sign as I walked up to the building. It said something along the lines of no campaigning or handing out literature past this point. I went in, voted, came back out. As I walked back to my car, past this sign, there was another sign, for Huckabee. I scratched my head, not remembering seeing it as I walked in. I got in my car and as I was driving away there was a young woman planting the Huckabee signs. Thus I wasn't crazy - the sign hadn't been there before. Anway, I found this odd. First, there were no other signs for any other candidate in/around the government complex where I voted. Second, it was in the afternoon, raining/icing, and getting dark. Why bother with the signs that late into the day?