I guess it depends on the context. Of course I don't think they're evil in the literal sense but only in the sense of the analogy.

Well I'm voting in the Ohio primary March 4th, and it will definitely be in favor of Obama. I guess it's the conventional wisdom that Clinton is polling well in Ohio and perhaps Texas. But nearly every person I've talked to favored Obama over Clinton; but I do not deny that the Clintonites are perhaps the silent majority.

I'm not too sure about the whole Edwards bit. Edwards seemed highly interested in having a Presidency that will attempt to break the grip corporate lobbies have on Washington politics, and although I'm sure Hillary would make an okay President, she would definitely represent status quo, and being the polarizing figure she is, she would definitely give a one-up to the Republicans come midterm elections and perhaps even the next Presidential race.

It's not necessarily anything to do with Clinton, but the Republicans seem to have an infatuation with hating her, and they have a very easy time raising campaign funds and getting conservatives to the polls if doing so is against Clinton. I seriously think this is something the Democratic voters need to consider. Electing Clinton might mean the losing of any sympathy for the Democratic Party from the last eight years of Republican devastation.

Policy wise the two candidates are very similar, so who ever is more electable and whoever can bring people together better to get more done is a slam dunk. I definitely think this candidate is Obama. Not only because of the Republican Hillary-hate machine but because Democrats and liberals are more energized about Obama, and if Hillary gets nominated there might not be that great of a turn out.

Just like in 2004 (perhaps even moreso), by all rights this election should be a gimme for the Democrats. However, I seriously think this is a repeat of 2004. Only this time John Kerry is a woman and even more polarizing.