"As demonstrated in Texas, Ohio and Rhode Island, there are still a lot of people in this country who favor Clinton"

Possibly, but it is also possible that in open primary states, many republicans are voting for Hillary because they think Mcain stands a better chance of beating her.

Obama is ahead enough delegate-wise that it's mathematically impossible for Clinton to win it at this point. However, the primaries are relaly controlled by the superdelegates--so who they nominate is really who gets it.

Turnout for the primaries on the Democrat side has been off the charts, while Republicans are showing a great deal of apathy this time around. I'm expecting a fairly convincing win by Obama in 2008.

Drudge ran a story suggesting Obama had the super delegates in his pocket.  Florida's delegates may become crucial as well depending on how things pan out.

A few conservative radio personalities were asking listeners to vote for Hillary in the open state primaries, as they believe she is more beatable than Obama

I can understand the appeal of Barrack Obama, eventhough I disagree politically with many of his positions.  He speaks of hope and change -- two things that can't be quantified but enage voters.  He is very charismatic. 

On the other side of the coin is Hillary Clinton.  She has argued that Obama doesn't have the right experience and is all flash and mirrors and put herself out as the democrat of substance.  And accepting that on its face I really cannot understand the appeal of Hillary Clinton.  I get that she's smart.  But what is her great experience compared to Obama (or McCain for that matter)?  She's been in the Senate for 7 years.  Prior to that she was First Lady.  Does being First Lady give one better experience than serving in a state legislature as Obama did?  As a US Senator she voted for the war.  She has been very pro-nafta (and will continue to be when not campaigning in Ohio).  Prior to being in the Senate or First Lady she was an attorney, not unlike Senator Obama.  In that capacity she sat on the board of Wal-Mart, hardly a pro-union shop.  Unless I am mistaken before 2001 she had never held elective office.  How does she have "so much more" or better experience than Obama.  What is it about her that people want to see her in the White House? 

QUOTE: How does she have "so much more" or better experience than Obama.

The experience proceeds from the presumption that, during her time as First Lady, she became familiar with the workings of the White House and some of the individuals on the world stage, leading to, if you will, a shorter "learning curve."

Supreme Court nominees are always a facto, especially when there are justices who are getting up there, but as important as the Court is, in a post 911 world, I am most concerned with National Security?  My vote will be determined by who has the most experiecne in that area and who can do the most to keep my family safe