More and more it's looking like either Clinton or Obama is going to have to yield.

[berni_mccoy]

WP is saying the votes will be split (short of a disaster for one of the two) and there will be no clear winner going into the convention. The DNC *really* wants to avoid this since McCain is becoming the clear winner on the GOP side. If battle for the Dem choice goes through to August, we may lose the G.E. and therefore, it's King Solomon's test: Cut the baby in half. Who is going to give up the presidency for the greater good of Democracy?

[MannyGoldstein]

1. Neither

Not gonna happen.

Enjoy the ride!

[EFerrari]

3. I agree. They're both fighters. Not gonna happen.

Buckle up, folks.

[polichick]

2. FAT Chance...

It's the superdelegates' job to make sure the nomination goes to the one WHO CAN WIN, according to an explanation I heard on NPR today.

[berni_mccoy]

4. What if they are BOTH capable of winning (and I believe they both are) assuming

we don't waste all the resource duking it out through August.

[polichick]

14. It could get very messy...

The NPR piece was really informative ~ I didn't realize the superdelegates were supposed to help choose the one who could beat the other side. I thought they were more about controlling the message of the party, which may or may not amount to the same thing.

[NJSecularist]

5. Hillary will have to be dragged off the floor kicking and sctreaming before she ever secedes

Her ego is that big. She thinks that she is the inevitable candidate. She isn't going to go away quietly. She may even take the party down with her if she doesn't become the nominee.

[ronnykmarshall]

13. Yeah, right ....

and Obama will just graciously bow out and the angels will lift him in the air.


Give me a fuckin break.

[murbley40]

15. And Obama ?.

[Blue_In_AK]

24. Yeah, and Obama's just going to smile and quit?

In what universe are you living?

[ProgressIn2008]

26. They both exhibit enormous ego and ambition. - neither wants to let go of the crown.

[JackORoses]

28. she has invested her whole adult life(35 Years!!!) in getting to this moment

she will sink the Democratic Party to satisfy her desire for the Presidency.

[Barack_America]

6. If Obama suppoters keep donating at the rate they currently are...

It will be them who defeat Hillary.

Not to mention how many are turning around to do phone-banking, canvassing and GOTV activities. And really, isn't that exactly what you would expect from a movement?

[LisaM]

7. What's the point of letting the Republicans know our candidate?

If there is not a nominee by convention time (and I hope there isn't), the convention will get huge ratings and we will get a wave of momentum heading into the fall (especially if the nominees agree to be collegial and then run together).

UNITED WE STAND.

[berni_mccoy]

8. Believe me, they know it's one of them.. They are building an arsenal against them both.

[Coexist]

11. well, a protracted primary means millions of $$$ that the Dems don't have for the GE

NOT a good thing.

[thereismore]

12. I agree. Let them squirm. nt

[AndyA]

17. I kind of like this scenario.

With no clear Dem nominee, the GOP will not be able to direct their attack spin machine at one single person, they'll have to distribute it among two.

This could build up to be as big as the "Who shot J.R.?" episode on Dallas, and there would be a ton of interest in our convention.

I think it might be a good thing if this drags out to the convention.

[jacksonian]

21. whoa, the BS piles up here so fast

only lunatics want a brokered convention. They're only "fun" if you have no stake - and that's exactly how people will respond - "glad I'm not part of that chaos".

Not to mention after 6 months of fighting like for their ticket, don't expect the losers to just go "well, now I'll be all fired up about the other one."

The whole point of government is to establish order and civility. People aren't going to turn to a party who can't control itself to control the country.

Convention fight = losing Dems. That's the truth of it.

[AndyA]

23. You just keep on believing that.

We've had brokered conventions before, and we all survived.

[frazzled]

9. Well, if it's still this tight by May or June, Howard Dean may well have to ...

reinvigorate his wrestling skills and hold both candidates in a hammer lock while Harry Reid does a drop-fall on their heads and Nancy Pelosi tickles them ... till one cries uncle.

Hope it doesn't come to that. But right now, it looks like it's mathetmatically impossible for either to get enough pledged delegates--let's hope one of them at least breaks into a decisive lead.

[tekisui]

10. Dean is suggesting it.

To save the Party.

[UALRBSofL]

19. Clinton has assured us she has no intensions of dropping out

And someone from her camp in Virgina said she wouldn't be strong armed out.

[tekisui]

22. I don't see it happening either.

Honestly, between you and me and those reading this message board, I think it would be Obama. If Clinton has any kind of credible lead in popular votes, I can see it as a beneficial move to take on Obama as the running-mate.

You still are running a woman for the highest office in the land, and putting to rest any worries of Obama's experience. He could bring his supporter on, and easily bridge the movement he is creating to the ticket.

This would only work if Clinton breaks out in front with a lead either way you cut it, delegates and popular vote. It would also take great humility on Obama's part, and for his supporters.

I don't see what the other options for a unified Party, with both of them running to the Convention.

[Samantha]

31. Hillary doesn't truly have substantial more experience than Obama

She's a second-term Senator and the first term was her first elective office. She was a partner in a law firm for 15 years and the First Lady for 8. She has vastly inflated her resume, and no one calls her on it. As for "Experience" accreditation while Bill was President, he had a co-President named Al Gore. Hillary's experience during those 8 years is more properly called "Exposure." I do not think Al Gore appreciates Hillary's inference she co-served with Bill.

At least Obama had a few years in the Legislature before he sought his Senate seat. He's been there about 2 years less than Hillary. A seat in the Illinois Legislature is an elective office.

So whatever the defining difference between the two ends up being at the end of the road, it will not be her claim of "Experience" over Obama. Hopefully, as the heat is turned up, someone in the Obama camp will start focusing on this.

As of right now, Obama is slightly ahead of Hillary in the pledged delegate count. That's by MSNBC's numbers, which they reviewed today. If the determining factor becomes the superdelegate count for Hillary, and Obama does have more pledged delegates, all hell will break out within the party if the nomination is thrown to Hillary. One of the first groups to break away will be the African-American contingency, and rightfully so.

Democrats need to be very careful this scenario plays out legitimately and by the rules, and that no one tries to change those rules in the middle of an election. To try to do so will only bring the stain of illegitimacy upon the party's nominee. And that's the last thing we need.

Here's hoping one or the other does break away in the traditional standard, and the other is left eating his or her dust!

[enki23]

16. they should simply neutralize the SD's

one way or another (easiest way would be to split them down the middle). and give the nomination to the one with the lead in pledged delegates, no matter how narrow. unless there's an actual tie of course...

[apnu]

18. Yeah, its a staring contest, and somebody HAS to blink

The question is who?

[Tellurian]

29. nah, it's a Poker Game..

and Hillary won't be out raised by anyone. Her supporters will never let it happen..

http://www.taylormarsh.com/images2/hillaryclinton_wideweb__470x308,02.jpg

[in_cog_ni_to]

20. Neither. They're going to have to be a ticket, whether they want to be or not. For

the Democrats to hold onto the WH...it should be Clinton/Obama = 16 years....at least.

[totodeinhere]

25. Yes, but who will agree to play second fiddle?

Both want to be president. The VP will just be the prez's little puppy dog. I don't think that either Clinton or Obama want that role.

[in_cog_ni_to]

32. IF they look at this pragmatically, Clinton/Obama. That gives the Dems the WH for 16 years

or MORE...if Obama chose a younger VP.

[Mr.Fitzgibbons]

27. well, I think Obama should yield -- far less experience and this will become a liability

vs. McCain. Yes, McCain is tired and uninspiring but I dread future presidential debates when the veneer of "hope" wears off and Obama gets hit hard by McCain on issues of foreign policy and defense. Hillary can more than handle the heat and Obama could run in 2016...

[THUNDER HANDS]

30. you know what they say, age before beauty

:)

[Vinca]

33. We should be grateful they're both fighters. nt