Carter? Unlikely. Gore? Possibly. Hillary has been hurling some pretty nasty personal insults at Gore in her personal speeches:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/ ... 110/495187

“Any superdelegate who wishes to deviate from that opinion should be perfectly free to do so,” Carter said. “My hometown, my county, my state went overwhelmingly for Obama. But if I decided later on to support Mrs. Clinton, I would feel free to do so.”

“This is an incredibly close race and there are still millions of voters who haven’t cast ballots yet. We think every voter should have a chance to have their voice heard,” he said.

No matter who pressures her, this isn't going to end until the convention and it could be disastrous on the democratic party.

Having said that I don't think America will seriously elect another republican president, then again they've been complete idiots before so who knows.

If she is behind in Delegates and all that is left is superdelgates she be stupid to keep going. Probably Dean and others would pressure the Superdelegates to back one person. If it goes down to the convention the democrats will lose. The last three times that happened the party it happened to lost in a landslide.

Hilary is far too stubborn and really no matter which way Obama spins it and the media goes with his rhetoric, neither of them can capture the nomination based on delegates alone. With the superdelegates nowhere near confirmed yet (they are "encouraged" to vote the way of their district but historically have gone with the "popular" candidate) I think it is statistically a dead heat. Obama isn't doing any favors to himself with the continued acknowledgments about his relationships with questionable leaders as well as his comments of late.

not quite

http://www.nysun.com/news/national/clin ... kerry-gore

But if Obama is ahead in delegates and Popular vote after Puerto Rico then I think the SuperDelegates might support him. they better or they just might as well give the Presidency to MCcain now or it will be 1968, 1952, 1948, and 1924 all over again.

And those comments (which were directed at PA voters) may be beginning to show in the polls (if you believe them), since the latest Survey USA poll in Indiana taken (FRI-SUN) *his comments came FRI*, has Clinton leading Obama by 16 points. She was only leading by mid single digits a week or so ago.

And the latest PA poll taken by the American Research Group has her up 20 points again on Obama , and the poll was taken during the weekend same as the Indiana time frame. There is come dispute with this poll at RCP, though it's the first since the Obama comments, and it's not the only that has Clinton with a big lead. Survey USA had her at +18 last week.

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/04/13/report-carter-and-gore-to-team-up-against-clinton-to-end-her-presidential-bid/

Jimmy Carter and Al Gore are planning to call for Hillary Clinton to end her presidential run, according to an article published Sunday in a Scottish newspaper.

The Scotsman — the same paper that quoted Barack Obama adviser Samantha Power calling Clinton a “monster,” which resulted in her dismissal from the campaign — reported that the two politicians are teaming up because they believe it is in their party’s best interest to end the prolonged battle for the Democratic presidential nomination and unite behind Obama, who continues to maintain a lead over Clinton in number of pledged delegates.

“They’re in discussions,” a source close to Carter reportedly told the newspaper. “Carter has been talking to Gore. They will act, possibly together, or in sequence.”

According to the report, the two party elders will either meet with Clinton privately to urge that she withdraw her candidacy or they will publicly endorse Obama in the hopes that more superdelegates will follow suit.

Clinton still holds a lead over Obama in number of superdelegates. It is not known when Carter and Gore will make such an appeal to Clinton, but insiders say it is certain to happen, the newspaper reported. It added that both pols have clashed with the Clintons in the past.

In an interview that aired Sunday on ABC News’ “This Week,” Carter said he will not endorse a candidate until the Democratic convention in August.

“The only thing I know is that, I have not made an endorsement, and don’t intend to, until the time of the convention, but so far as I know, all my children and grandchildren are supporting Obama,” Carter said. “I got permission, by the way, from my children and grandchildren, and their spouses, to reveal their intention. I haven’t yet revealed what my intention is directly, or my wife.”

The former president also said that superdelegates should be free to endorse whomever they feel is best able to lead — regardless of the popular choice in the caucuses and primary contests.

“Any superdelegate who wishes to deviate from that opinion should be perfectly free to do so,” Carter said. “My hometown, my county, my state went overwhelmingly for Obama. But if I decided later on to support Mrs. Clinton, I would feel free to do so.”

Clinton has insisted on numerous occasions that she intends to remain in the primary race until the convention. Her campaign laughed off the report on Sunday, noting the one unnamed source for the story.

Clinton campaign spokesman Mo Elleithee would not respond to the report, but repeated a common refrain from the campaign.

“This is an incredibly close race and there are still millions of voters who haven’t cast ballots yet. We think every voter should have a chance to have their voice heard,” he said.

I am sorry Obama has a better chance at beating Mccain because the only way Hillary wins is the convention and if that happens Mccain wins by landslide much like Nixon, Coolidge and Eisenhower won the years they ran against someone who came out of a split convention.

There wasn't such great animosity towards the Republican party in those years those.

And this is 2008 a very different year ...

There wasn't such great animosity towards the Republican party in those years those.

And this is 2008 a very different year ...

Most people don't vote based on the intellectual nuances of policy. They vote based on a hunch, and America's favorite hunch is opposition to the Clintons. Even at the deepest point of the Wright imbroglio, Obama's disapproval rating never quite got as low as Hillary's.

Yes there was, Coolidge was President during the worse scandal in American history, the Tea Pot Dome scandal, but the democrats couldn't get a candidate until the 11th hour and that hurt them in the election of 1924. It took 26 ballots to get the nominee it was horrible. Also don't be so naive to think that McCain can't win either. He has the powerful Republican attack machine at his disposal. Bush won twice and he is an idiot. It shows the American people can be easily manipulated.

Small town America is huge in making the decision. They tend to be more fundamentally religious and more conservative. It was (in my opinion) because the Christian Coalition (and other similar groups, that is just the first to come to mind) stirred up small town American and the religious front that Bush won his second term in office.

In other words, Obama shouldn't have pissed them off! Heh.

As far as a 20 point lead, I don't think anyone will deny that is statistically significant. Even with a 4% margin of error, Clinton is taking a definite lead. Will be interesting to see if she maintains this once the dust blows over. What I don't see is her making the same mistakes as Obama with some of the stuff he has said. She seems to have a much better advisory team, something Obama could have used.

Corpse youve been calling a 20% hillary win for weeks Now that its a week away and polls have her with a 6% lead your saying 10% is wonderful? No, no, no. Not how it works. Im not convinced she has it in the bag yet though; shes Hillary. Shell do something else stupid soon enough.