On the contrary, if McCain and Obama are only responding to each others arguments, then it makes Obama seem like the frontrunner.

Or...if he is sucessfully able to take them both on at the same time, how much stronger is he going to look?

Reading the newspapers this morning, I believe that Obama is scheduled to give one of those meaty, detail laden, speeches in Janesville, WI, at the General Motors plant on the economy.  It is a pretty impressive backdrop for such a speech because the plant was saved by GM back in 2005, at a time when they were slashing their workforce everywhere.  (The plant has been there for 80 years.)

For excerpts from the speech: www.democraticunderground.com/.../duboard.php

The specifics attack works for Hillary, but it seems ridiculous coming from McCain, the guy who's still waiting (after all these decades) to be "educated" on the economy. McCain is many things, but detailed, intellectual, and wonky he is not. If I were him I'd stick to the rhetoric of terror. It's his only hope against the Harvard allstar.

CW is that when the GOP attacks a Democrat, this rallies partisan support around that Democrat. I think that's about right. One of the things that Hillary could of done better this campaign is that she could have picked more fights with the GOP (though for her, this may have had the perverse effect of convincing people that she's an unelectable divisive candidate).

The only way McCain's attacks might hurt Obama is by turning off some of the indies in some of these open primaries...I guess...

So if Hillary's and McCain's attacks on Obama sound similar, they're going to HELP Hillary?

Hillary is in a tough position.  Having positioned herself to Obama's right and hoping nobody would notice, she now has no good way to attack him without appearing to be siding with Republicans.  Her only "left" flank attack has been the "universal" part of her health plan, but that's convinced about 5 people in America, 4 if you exclude Jonathan Cohn.

Well, she sort of has to position herself to Obama's right because (and though you would never know this from the press) he's the most authentically left-wing candidate we've considered running since Adlai Stevenson. Howard Dean was a moderate by most standards, and he was considered too far to the left. Best case for Obama: he loses badly in the general (sooner or later, he's going to have to defend a very left wing record on issues like gun control, the death penalty and other hot button issues) but paves the way for a resurgence of leftwing politics in America a la Barry Goldwater paved the way for the conservative resurgence with his defeat in 64. Of course, that doesn't bode too well for America in the short or long term, as we'll be saddled with the 21st Century version of Bob Dole and stuck in Iraq for decades.

Oh good grief. Obama needs to survive the primary. The general will be fine. McCain will not be president. Karma is against him.

governorjohn:

He's definitely liberal in the sense that a few of his positions might be vulnerable to wedging...but he's managed to avoid really crazy lefty positions. I think he'll get wedged a bit in the general, but it's hard to see him tarred as out of touch.

Plus, at the end of the day, the press/American people weight style over substance. Obama's bipartisan/post-partisan/whatever style allows him to sell liberal policies with a smile - much like Reagan sold conservative policies.

Governorjohn, so Obama being leftwing is the reason independents and centrists are flocking to him, but Hillary (freeze interest rates, insurance for all, $9.50 an hour minimum wage) is going to the right of him. You know, it would be helpful if you put up some facts to go with your opinion.

Here is his record

Voted against extending the Bush tax cuts on capital gains and dividends.

· Voted against permanently repealing the Death Tax. (Called the cuts a "Paris Hilton" tax break for "billionaire heirs and heiresses") · Voted against CAFTA.

· Voted YES on raising the minimum wage to $7.25 rather than $6.25.

· Opposed the lifting of $0.54 per gallon tariff on cheaper Brazillian ethanol. Said, "ethanol imports are neither necessary nor a practical response to current gasoline prices."

· Voted against the bankruptcy abuse bill.

· Opposes privatizing Social Security

· Voted against drilling in ANWR.

· Voted against confirmation of Sam Alito AND John Roberts as chief justice.

· Voted against extending the PATRIOT Act's wiretap provision.

· Opposed any bans on partial birth abortions.

Besides the last, what is likely to be viewed outside what is expected from Democrats? What above do you view as radical leftist? Please. Hillary got creamed, just accept it. Personally, as a centrist I only disagree with CAFTA and partial birth abortions.

Virginacentrist right you are... would also explain his comments about Reagan being transformational... on some level he has studied deeply just how it was that Reagan managed to do what he did...

I just feel this is breaking for him remarkably... if only the "Reagan Democrats" who are Clinton's core constituency stop being afraid of what he represents and realize he is by far their best hope... let's hope some of their kids and grandkids manage to convince them.

Can some one please explain to me if partial birth abortions actually ever take place and when and why?

My daughter-in-law had a miscarriage in her 4th month... waters broke after she was ill with a very bad virus... she thinks they may technically have done a "partial birth abortion" because there was the feotus did not come out... with the waters broken she couldn;t have carried to term nor could the baby have been delivered and lived .. the only alternative would have been a C-Section.  Far more invasive and dangerous.  She already had one child and had 2 more since.

Would one ban such really therapeutically necessary "partial birth abortions?" at far greater risk to a mother?

blackton -- his votes on bankruptcy reform are a bit cloudier -- the key to that battle was whether the bill would be discharged out of committee, where it had been succesffuly bottled-up by an ironic alliance between liberals and some GOP senators who got big contributions from the housing industry (such as Kay Bailey Hutchinson) because their states had huge housing exemptions for chapter 7 bankruptcies (remember Burt Reynolds and how he kept his expensive home while shedding millions in debt?)  

Don't worry Annabella.

Hillary Clinton is doing well amongst working class liberals, not "reagan Democrats". Reagan Democrats LOATHE Hillary Clinton.