Here's an article that I've found on JustHillary.com {It's all about Hillary--good and the bad} However, I personally think the site owner has been offering a pretty slanted bag of tricks on Hillary. Why am I providing information to such a site? Well, I believe we need to be fair and reassess our favorite candidates.

Here's the site: Clinton leads Obama, McCain in key matchups: poll, or you can go to the "Swing State's poll" link at the www.justhillary.com website.

Now, here the article:

Wed Apr 2, 2008 10:44am EDT
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic presidential contender Hillary Clinton holds a 9-point lead over rival Barack Obama among likely Pennsylvania Democratic primary voters ahead of the state's April 22 primary, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released on Wednesday.

Clinton, a New York senator who would be the first female president, leads the Illinois senator 50 percent to 41 percent, the poll found. She also runs better against the likely Republican nominee, Sen. John McCain, in Pennsylvania, Florida and Ohio -- all important swing states in the general election.

In a general election matchup in Florida, McCain closely trails Clinton 42 percent to 44 percent but McCain leads Obama, who would be the first black president, 46 percent to 37 percent, according to the poll.

"The difference between Clinton and Obama in Florida is the white vote," said Peter Brown of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

In Ohio, Clinton has a 48 to 39 percent lead over McCain after months of too-close-to-call results, the poll found. In an Obama-McCain matchup, Obama gets 43 percent against 42 percent for McCain.

In Pennsylvania, Clinton tops McCain 48 to 40 percent and Obama leads the Arizona senator 43 percent to 39 percent.

Among Pennsylvania Democrats, Clinton leads 54 to 37 percent with women and ties Obama with men at 46 percent support.

The primary vote between Clinton and Obama splits sharply along racial lines.

Clinton leads 59 to 34 percent among white Pennsylvania likely primary voters while Obama leads 73 to 11 percent among black Democrats, the poll found.

Roughly 44 percent of people in all three states said the economy was the most important issue in their vote, while about a quarter of respondents said the war in Iraq is most important.

"The economic concerns of voters make Ohio a tougher challenge for McCain than has traditionally been the case for Republicans, who have never won the White House without carrying Ohio," Brown said. "But Obama's weakness among white men is an indication that he has not yet closed the sale among the lunch bucket brigade."

The poll was conducted March 24 through 31. Quinnipiac surveyed 1,135 Florida voters with a margin of error of plus or minus 2.9 percent; 1,238 Ohio voters with a margin of error of plus or minus 2.8 percent; 3,484 Pennsylvania voters with a margin of error of plus or minus 1.7 percent including 1,549 Democratic likely voters with a margin of error of plus or minus 2.5 percent.

(Reporting by Joanne Allen; Editing by Eric Walsh)

Sen. Barack Obama, whose campaign has sharply criticized the role of outside political groups in the presidential race, has benefited more than any other candidate from millions of dollars in independent political expenditures, records show.

It seems that Barack Obama rhetoric is finally exposing him to be something less than the demi-god that media pundits have been professing.

The increasing support for Mr. Obama has given him a boost from the same sort of political activity his campaign has railed against, especially when millions of dollars in union and other special-interest money backed his opponents.

The following is the continuation of the first page of the article:

The political arm of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and other independent groups have spent more than $7.1 million directly supporting the Illinois Democrat's bid for the presidential nomination, campaign records show. By contrast, similar outside groups have spent about $5.1 million backing Sen. Hillary Clinton, New York Democrat.

Political specialists point out that Mr. Obama doesn't have any control over those expenditures because outside groups raise and spend money independent of the presidential campaigns.

"It's going to happen, regardless of what the candidates say," said James Thurber, director of the Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies at American University.

The Obama campaign, which had been vocal in criticizing such expenditures earlier in the race, says it asked groups not to mount independent political efforts on Mr. Obama's behalf.

Citing money from "big interests," Obama campaign manager David Plouffe wrote in an e-mail to supporters last year, "Outside groups are in the process of pouring more than $3.2 million into Iowa to support Hillary Clinton and John Edwards.

"Barack has repeatedly spoken out against the work of these outside groups, and this campaign does not accept any money from Washington lobbyists or PACs," he wrote.

Please click HERE for the complete Article.

A couple of weeks ago, I received a warning for making a diary that was, supposedly, a one liner. Now, After reading several diaries since that time, I've noticed that my "supposed one-line" outpaced the latest diary posts by several lines.

Well, it seems like there could be an issue with Hillary winning with superdelegates. However, one has to ask whether or not the survey takers would be satisfied if Obama should win with Superdelegates or if it would be acceptable should Hillary win the nomination by some other means.

This is a developing story that is garnering some interests...

I believe the Internet is urshering in a new grassroots movement for the better...

No longer will republicans be able to stop people from voting their economic and social interests...