A vote for Hillary is a vote for the republican nominee.

Gloria Steinam wrote a brilliant Op-Ed in the NY Times yesterday, entitled 'Women are Never Front Runners', and she expresses similar sentiments:
"THE woman in question became a lawyer after some years as a community organizer, married a corporate lawyer and is the mother of two little girls, ages 9 and 6. Herself the daughter of a white American mother and a black African father — in this race-conscious country, she is considered black — she served as a state legislator for eight years, and became an inspirational voice for national unity.Be honest: Do you think this is the biography of someone who could be elected to the United States Senate? After less than one term there, do you believe she could be a viable candidate to head the most powerful nation on earth?
If you answered no to either question, you’re not alone. Gender is probably the most restricting force in American life...
...If the lawyer described above had been just as charismatic but named, say, Achola Obama instead of Barack Obama, her goose would have been cooked long ago."
My favorite part is when she asks, "So why is the sex barrier not taken as seriously as the racial one?"
I've wondered this many many times. Women are the majority of the population all over the world but in every nation we are second class citizens.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/08/opinion/08steinem.html?th&emc=th
(hope the link goes thru)

would be interesting to see what the odds are now, as opposed to january 4th, which is what the link gives us.

"If a woman came in with two years of experience as Obama has had in the Senate, she'd really be laughed out of the campaign. But yet Obama with two years of experience is right there. And that's why we're still making Hillary our favorite."

Pretty much what the German press is saying:

"Barack Obama's vague pledges of "change" may be enthralling voters in America but they are raising eyebrows among German leader writers."

"Obama Is 'Intangible, Elastic, Hollow' -The fight for the Democratic presidential nomination has turned into a clash between style and substance"

http://tinyurl.com/3d3oox

Wow. Guilani at 6-1 while the Huck's at 10-1? Something's fishy here....

Wow.

Eckstein's comment about experience isn't terribly well-informed.

Obama's experience as an elected official is longer than Clinton's due to his lengthier service in the Illinois Legislature.

Much of Clinton's experience does not involve holding public office--merely being nearby as an observer. Much different than having to do the job one's self.

What Clinton accomplished during her time in the Senate is open to question.

So if anyone's litmus test is "experience" in this sense, it contravenes the Constitution and ill-serves the country. There is no first-in-line here, and obviously adjusting the who is "qualified" would vastly improve the process and the results.

Eckstein may be a gamblin' man, but if this is how he handicaps races, I wouldn't bet on his advice/line.

"Experience" is important to congressional newcomers. It does take some time to --

1. know your lobbyists
2. know which lobbyists will bring you the most $$ and other "gifts"
3. know how to ask for money
4. know how NOT to think for yourself
5. know how to forget an oath to our constitution
6. know how to raise and lower your hand in a parade
7. know how to parse words
8. know how to bow deeply to our 51st state
9. know the best of the winter junkets
10.shed some tears, show emotion when needed

Steve wrote:
Bookies Favor Hillary>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Maybe bookie Eckstein's shadowy inside contacts tell him "this race is fixed".

Shall we bet on it?!

Sorry to disappoint, but bookies turn out to be a lagging indicator, just like investors flocking to a stock after it's risen.

I was looking for the analysis but couldn't find it. The bookies dramatically changed their odds between 6:00 and 9:00 last night. They had heavily favored Obama but shifted as the votes were counted in NH, reflecting the outcome of that event, just like the pre-NH odds reflected the outcome of the historical event in Iowa.

asked increduously: Bookies are now newsworthy as indicators of America's political will and wishes?