Previous wallflower states now treated like the prom queen

Well, all these states who are used to their votes not mattering now might get to decide who our nominee is. Pennsylvania for one has had Chelsea Clinton in the past few days and a massive influx of resources and staff.

Will Bunch of Attytood thinks that it's not PA Gov. Rendell who's the ace in the hole for Hillary, but rather Philly mayor Nutter, since his prominent support of Hillary assures white voters that they aren't being racist by voting against a black man.

A blogger finds that Obama has a hard time in Appalachia. This has big portents for Pennsylvania and explains a good deal about the Ohio turnout.

Puerto Rico is changing up its June 7th caucus to a June 1st primary (in a move that can only benefit Hillary.) Don't forget that one of the largest concentration of Puerto Ricans is in New York State, and that also Hillary has been doing better in primaries than in caucuses, where her field staff don't get how to organize (and admittedly the seniors have a hard time getting to, so there is an age discrepancy.)

Michigan will revote, Florida (in the form of Democratic senator Bill Nelson) is trying to shake down Howard Dean's DNC for money for a recount. I heard the Michigan definitely will revote line a few weeks back from an on the ground source. I'm glad that Michigan will revote - I'm all for people voting and being able to vote. But Florida - this is really ridiculous by the way - if the state hadn't decided to flaunt the rules to begin with and try to draw more national attention and prominence to their state and increase the value of their votes, then they shouldn't have changed their primary date. Now, they get the prominence that they want if they decide to schedule revotes in June, and they're trying to bribe/extort money for that revote from an entity that is supposed to be neutral?

If Dean gave Michigan and Florida the money, it would encourage other states in 4 years to also flaunt the rules and then whine and cry and extort more money to hold revotes. Moreover, holding a revote and paying for one would be seen as being partial to Hillary since it 1) encourages rule-breaking and 2) Michigan and Florida both went for Hillary already. That's not the role of the DNC. If Florida finally decides they want a revote, they have to figure out how to pay for it.

Lastly, on the press and bias, I wanted to point some attention to Marc Ambinder's excellent analysis. He brings up white guilt (I can't believe no other reporters have the guts to use this term.)

Then there is white guilt, magnified by the progressive political impulse found within the professional set's cultural liberalism. We are transfixed by race, obsessed with it, we whites are obsessed with expiating the collective sins of our country, and that works to Obama's advantage. I think we feel we are done with gender (we aren't, but we feel as if we are) and so we don't meditate on those questions as much.

Whether or not you agree that the press has been treating Obama kinder, or whether you believe that the press leans left, you need to read this. I don't know that it's just white guilt because there is also a class guilt that comes from being the white collar tastemakers/spinmakers and being the Fourth Estate. That comes from some of the top reporters and editors having been Ivy League educated. That comes from reporters generally being educated, and therefore falling into the Obama demographic camp is they tend to be Democratic.