Posted: 02:09 PM ET

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/03/06/sot.cafferty.file.thursday.cnn?iref=videosearch

Click the play button to see what Jack and our viewers had to say.

FROM CNN’s Jack Cafferty:

Barack Obama’s campaign up to this point has been refreshing. He seems almost too nice to be running for political office. His message has been about hope and change and a future filled with the hard work of restoring the greatest nation on earth to its rightful place as a beacon of hope for the rest of the world.

And it’s a strategy that has propelled him to the front of the race for the Democratic nomination. But his failure to seal the deal this week in Ohio and Texas may bring change.

Hillary Clinton landed some body blows in the hours leading up to Tuesday’s voting. An ad about a 3am phone call that preys on women’s fears for the safety of their children. Questions about indicted real-estate developer Tony Rezko and Obama’s position on NAFTA didn’t help either.

Now Obama is starting to reciprocate, questioning what kind of foreign policy experience Hillary Clinton actually has and pointing out that she wasn’t negotiating treaties or handling crises.

Obama has dubbed Clinton the “most secretive politician in America today.” He’s criticizing her for not releasing her income tax returns after saying she would do so “earlier,” and calling on her to release records about her years as First Lady. She hasn’t done that either, and Obama says that voters deserve to know why Clinton is hiding information.

The Clinton campaign doesn’t seem too happy that Obama is starting to fight back. Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson was whining that Obama is acting like Kenneth Starr, the special prosecutor who investigated the Clintons.

Here’s my question to you: Does Barack Obama have to go negative to win the Democratic nomination?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Don writes:
Not yet. And only if he has to in order to avoid defeat. Barack has put Hillary in a really bad position despite her wins this week. It’s like a game of chess, he is approaching the end game where she will be checkmated. He can afford to be patient and let Hillary end this on her own terms and in her own way.

Steve writes:
Hillary’s campaign doesn’t get it. Many Democrats want change in Washington. That’s the attraction with Obama. Hillary’s team knows exactly what they are doing. The 3am phone call, Obama in the Muslim outfit…it is all desperation tactics and many Democrats don’t like it. Yes, Obama needs to get a lot tougher with Hillary, but do it in such a way that is effective without going too negative.

Susan writes:
Does Barack need to go negative or down in the dirt with the Clinton slash and burn machine? No. He does need to show that he has the mettle to push back and as we trial lawyers say, put the other side to their proof. If the Clintons won’t fess up their tax returns, make it an issue so hard to ignore that they will have to address it. What exactly is her history of answering the red phone when it rings in the White House? None, except for saying, “It’s for you, Bill.”

Frank writes:
Yes, Out of necessity, Obama will begin counterpunching Hillary with negative body blows. They will fight it out, down and dirty, while McCain watches unscathed from a safe distance.

Steve writes:
While we’d all like to know what’s in those tax returns, the longer it takes the Clintons to make them public, the more leverage Obama has to work with them. He really doesn’t need to go negative, he needs to go positively presidential and convince the American people that he is the one we want to answer the phone whenever it rings.

Filed under: 2008 Election • Barack Obama

Posted: 01:53 PM ET

FROM CNN’s Jack Cafferty:

“If there is a road to victory for Hillary Clinton, it is a fairly narrow one.”

That’s according to a piece in today’s New York Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/20/us/politics/20memo.html?ei=5065&en=54bceb4cb5012903&ex=1206590400&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print

It suggests Clinton needs three breaks in order to grab the nomination from Barack Obama. First, she needs a significant victory over Obama in Pennsylvania on April 22nd in order to support her argument that she can deliver big general election states. Then she needs a lead in the popular vote by the end of June. And lastly, Clinton has to convince superdelegates she’s the best candidate.

But here’s the problem: winning the popular vote seems a nearly impossible task for Clinton if these revotes don’t happen in Michigan and Florida. And at this point, it looks very doubtful they will happen in either state.

Also, Clinton’s campaign had hoped the uproar over comments made by Obama’s pastor would make voters and superdelegates question his candidacy. It might be too early to tell, but it seems like Obama’s speech on race was well-received and praised, even by some Clinton supporters.

Meanwhile, President Clinton’s former political adviser, Dick Morris, is even less optimistic about Clinton’s chances. He writes, “Senator Barack Obama has already won the Democratic nomination. It’s over.” Morris suggests Clinton can’t catch Obama in the pledged delegate count, regardless of what happens during the rest of the primary season. He goes on to say the superdelegates won’t override the will of the voters quote “unless Obama is in jail.”

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/printpage/?url=http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/wrights_rantings_wont_sink_oba.html

Here’s my question to you: How likely is it that Barack Obama will be the Democratic presidential nominee?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Tom writes:
Clinton has no chance. And the sooner she realizes that and throws her support behind Obama, the better it will be for her, the party and the country. Obama needs to concentrate on debating the Republicans, instead of being diverted by Clinton’s desperate, dirty, divisive tactics. Clinton is effectively working for McCain and needs to turn over a new leaf and get busy working for Obama.

Mike from New Orleans writes:
I’m not so sure. There could be an Obama gaffe in the near future. He claims to be “shaken up” by the controversy over his church leader. That’s cotton candy compared to what’s ahead of him from the Swift Boat Republicans. If he’s that faint at heart, I’m not so sure he can survive the remainder of Clinton’s campaign, let alone the Republicans.

Larry from Fulton, Illinois writes:
Barack’s the man, Jack. It’s like everyone has been saying since Super Tuesday: the math doesn’t come out in Clinton’s favor. She should concede so Obama can focus on the issues he needs to win in November.

Ingrid writes:
The more we learn about Obama, the less he is liked. He got a free ride from the media until a couple weeks ago; that has reversed. If the media had done their job to begin with, he would not be ahead in delegates right now. It is going to be Hillary; Obama has become unelectable.

Brian from Cincinnati writes:
It’s nearly certain he’ll be the nominee. The elected officials who are superdelegates value their careers, especially the ones in states that Obama won handily, which is quite a lot of them. The problem is: Clinton will stop at nothing to destroy him in an attempt to make him unelectable.

Erin from Battle Creek, Michigan writes:
I’d like to think it is inevitable but after talking to my mother, an avid Clinton supporter, I’ve recently come to fear that we are in the grip of a “maternal override”. Mothers make no apologies when stepping in and doing what they think is in the best interest of the children, even if the so-called children hold the majority view. My mother and many more like her are banking on the superdelegates to rescue the party from the misguided, starry-eyed young people

Filed under: Barack Obama • Democratic Race