And, if that's her plan, it means she's got to win Texas and Ohio convincingly. She's raising expectations behind the scenes, and that may well spill over into the chatter on the talk shows. I don't know why the source, if he/she really supports Clinton, would do that. If she loses both, she'll be damaged beyond repair.
She's betting on Latinos in Tejas. But take a look at the polls: Obama's been closing that gap, barely losing Latinos in AZ and NM, and winning them in CT, and he's picking up key endorsements in the more Latino-dominated areas of Texas. She needs those areas to offset areas like Austin, where the college-town/liberal/young-professional lot should give Obama a huge advantage (or that's at least what I'd guess Austin looks like).
I'm not sure how Dallas-Ft Worth and Houston line up.
Texas is an open primary, too, and with the McCain nomination all but a mathematical certainty, Indies and moderate/liberal Reps could play a big role. The odd thing, to me, is that Clinton is winning with moderate Dems, while Obama is winning liberal Dems and moderate Indies/Reps. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
State Rep. Pete Gallego, chairman of the Mexican American Legislative Caucus, has announced he is endorsing Barack Obama for president. The Alpine Democrat had earlier supported his near neighbor, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson. The non-partisan Mexican American Legislative Caucus comprises most Hispanic members of the Texas House of Representatives. Gallego said he was in the process of contacting other Democrats in MALC to see who they are lining up for in the presidential election.
The Alpine Democrat had earlier supported his near neighbor, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson.
The non-partisan Mexican American Legislative Caucus comprises most Hispanic members of the Texas House of Representatives. Gallego said he was in the process of contacting other Democrats in MALC to see who they are lining up for in the presidential election.
I doubt he'll get the Richardson endorsement, but it's telling that Richardson didn't endorse Clinton, given the history. Obama-Richardson, perhaps? Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
He has nothing to gain by endorsing either candidate. By not endorsing he keeps the potential for being the VP nominee of the winning campaign.
His presence on the ticket opens some space for the Democrat by putting Arizona, Florida, and Texas into doubt, forcing the GOP to throw money and clout into those states.
I don't think we're going to win Florida, simply because of the fact that it's more conservative than people tend to think. To win Florida, you need to come out a few hundred thousand votes ahead in Greater Miami, which is tough. And you also need to win swing cities like Orlando and Tampon Bay by decent margins.
Clinton's strength would be with older women showing up big, potentially, while Obama potentially brings large black turnout in key GOP areas like Jacksonville and perhaps shaves some anti-war military votes from McCain. The last poll I saw showed soldiers were even more anti-war than the general public, so there's potential to capitalize on it, breaking the typical 80/20 GOP advantage.
But, even with all that, Florida would be a dogfight. McCain will get huge turnout in the panhandle, between Tallahassee and Mobile. (Tallahassee, itself, will go 2/3s for the Dem no matter what, but it's everything to the West that will be solidly McCainiac territory.) Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
I guess maybe the church was afraid to go after Richardson for fear of losing Latinos? Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
