than 94% of a small pie.

You are all overlooking the importance of black turnout.  It's likely to be disproportionately large in the general election.  So it's nice that the black percentage is just a little higher (nearly unanimous), but don't forget that a big turnout means 94% of a much bigger pie.

it may still be 90-10.

First of all, this is a more Democratic year, so you have more people across the board voting Democratic. More white men, more women, more evangelicals even. My uncle, for example, has voted Republican since Reagan and was voting Democratic whether it was Obama or Clinton (he's black). So that may explain a 2% shift, or more, to 92-8, where it still might be.

94-1 means 5% are still undecided. With the MOE that number can be anywhere from 90-10 to 98-2.

Fine, but you have a ham headed way of getting to your point.  I am open to the suggestion of Hillary as VP, but not as prez.  I also refuse to hold our Nominee hostage, but the numbers should be analayzed by Obama's campaign to see the potential for benefit to winning, getting a well suited VP for his agenda, and making sure he can mitigate the heavy partisanship within the nation.

My candidate lost.  Those nasty blacks are so biased.

well at least we can stop arguing with you since we know you arent interested in facts now.

If she had run an excellent campaign, she would have won. And she wouldn't be in debt and having to beg Obama's supporters to aid her instead of focusing on aiding their own candidate.

Um.  She had better coverage in the media prior to Iowa.  She was the inevitable, unflappable, flawless candidate for ages.  That was the narrative.  Her campaign made no mistakes.  Any she actually made were avoided in the media to maintain the narrative.

That lasted until the debate where she came out in favor of Spitzer's plan to give illegals driver's licenses.

Obama wasn't the media's darling on "day one."  You are entitled to your own opinion but not to your own set of facts.  Were you politically aware during 2007 or not?

A person that tries to contest the black vote, doesn't let her surrogates speak about "shucking and jiving", doesn't diss MLK in favour of LBJ, doesn't have her husband present Obama as the black candidate in the mold of Jesse Jackson, doesn't choose to emphasize how the majority of WHITE hard-working voters were for her (as if they are the votes that really count, you know, unlike the votes of silly black people), doesn't bash Obama for attending Wright's church, doesn't focus on flimsy connections with Farrakhan to scare away white voters from Obama.

At some point, early on, she completely abandoned all efforts to woo the black vote -- same as with caucuses she chose to simply surrender them to Obama and focus her attentions elsewhere.

Same as with the caucus votes, this was a mistake on her part.

Your talk about "race-baiting" is itself annoyingly contemptuous. How did Obama manage this great feat of fooling 95% of black people to believe Clinton was dissing them? Don't these silly black people have minds of their own? Can't they determine on their own if Clinton's dissing them or not?

elle oh elle

What do you want us to take from the fact that 90% of AA voters support Obama?

Flame-Bating: (v) use of words in an intentional effort to hamper discourse, cause offense, and lower the overall IQ of a discussion group by ten or more points.  Typically instantiated with the use of sweeping prejudicial labels or insults.

Usage Example: "All (members of a group) are (derogatory descriptive)."

May be indistiguishable from statements made by brain-damaged fascist thugs.

Hmmmm, so now we're "voting by number" interesting, but I guess that's what kids are into these days....whatever, for me I'll voting country before party.

BTW- I was an Obama supporter until early this year when I started picking up a weird vibe...sure enough his immaturity and that of the Democratic Party came shining thru...yeah, not at all what I'm looking for in a President. So good luck with that...meanwhile there are many other candidates out there, but for me I'm pretty comfortable with putting someone in the office who mirrors how I feel about myself...intelligent, thinks things thru and has not waverd one iota from their beliefs...oh and who possesses a great sense of humor and a thick skin...

It used to say:

"I don't give a shit whom you vote for."

And I really, don't.  It's a free country.  I would fight for your right to vote for any shithead you want.  Try to blackmail somebody who cares.

But please don't try to blow smoke up my ass with your line about arrogance.  Obama is ahead and has been for a long time.  The economy is getting worse.  They have an unpopular war that is costing us a fortune.  They have a candidate in his 70s.  And you try as hard as you can to ignore the fact that the polls consistently show us ahead.  Your whining pleas for attention are pathetic.

We're winning without you.  

We will win without you.

We'd love to have you.  You are welcome.  You would be valued, among friends.  But don't imagine that you are indispensible.

...he didn't need any help from the blogosphere.

And this election is not about you and your hurt feelings and how people in the MSM made you upset and said mean things.

This election is about a night and day difference beyween key issues.