"How can anyone assert that a candidate/campaign that began with such enormous advantages in polling, money, and name recognition, and then performed so poorly as to squander those leads to the point of being too far behind an "inexperienced newcomer" to be able to catch up or win, without massive help or 'divine interference', ... is still the one best suited to take on the GOP nominee in the general election?" - stephenhsmith 8Apr2008
Their "logic" escapes me. (but then again, they've never made sense to me)
