"This is the political contest that wasn't supposed to happen in the place that wasn't supposed to be important at a time that wasn't supposed to be contentious . . . " David Shribman, executive editor of The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, wrote Saturday in his Globe essay For once, the Keytsone State is critical
"The struggle for the Democratic presidential nomination was supposed to be settled two months ago, the candidates and their spouses weren't supposed to come to Pittsburgh, and the Pennsylvania primary was supposed to count as much as it always does. For nothing.
"Not this year, not with the Democrats, not with Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton.
"They're still slugging it out, slogging through Pennsylvania — from the Great Lakes to the Atlantic, through mill towns, mining communities, university centres, wrecked monuments to early 20th-century industries, shiny new high-tech and hospital complexes representing 21st-century hopes — hunting for convention delegates, manoeuvring for advantage, sliming their rivals . . . "
"Thus the Pennsylvania Primary."
Mr Shribman goes on to argue:
"Here's the calculus. Ms. Clinton began with a big lead, but, like all big leads in this political season, it has shrunk.
She's behind nationally in convention delegates and in the popular vote, and needs a big win here — a very big win — to maintain the argument that her nomination is plausible."
Whether you agree or not, it's a provocative thesis.
That's why we're glad Mr. Shribman was online earlier today to take your questions on his argument and on the U.S. presidential election.
Your questions and Mr. Shribman's answers appear at the bottom of this page.
Mr. Shribman, a former Boston Globe assistant managing editor, columnist and Washington bureau chief, took over as executive editor of The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette in 2003.
He was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for journalism in 1995 for his coverage of Washington and the American political scene.
Editor's Note: globeandmail.com editors will read and allow or reject each question/comment. Comments/questions may be edited for length or clarity. HTML is not allowed. We will not publish questions/comments that include personal attacks on participants in these discussions, that make false or unsubstantiated allegations, that purport to quote people or reports where the purported quote or fact cannot be easily verified, or questions/comments that include vulgar language or libellous statements. Preference will be given to readers who submit questions/comments using their full name and home town, rather than a pseudonym.
Jim Sheppard, Executive Editor, globeandmail.com: Welcome, David, and thanks for joining us today to take questions from the readers of globeandmail.com First of all, may I start by asking you what the latest polls are suggesting will happen tomorrow?
David Shribman, Executive Editor, The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: Who knows? Who cares? They're often wrong.
The big trusim is that there is going to be a poll tomorrow that really matters.
I say this while being almost literally surrounded by candidates. Hillary and Bill Clinton are two blocks from the office right now. Barack Obama is going to be two miles from my house tonight.
What a spectacle! What great fun for people who love politics!
Gavin Charles, Halifax: Everyone says Clinton needs to win Pennsylvania to win the nomination. But "win" doesn't mean 50% plus 1 here, does it?
How big a win do you think Clinton needs to make it worthwhile going through Indiana and North Carolina?
What do you think would need to happen tomorrow to make Clinton drop out, or is that even possible?
David Shribman: The great thing about being a presidential candidate is that you get to define what a "win" is — a little bit like Mrs. Clinton's husband talking about what the meaning of "is" is.
In any case, my guess is that Mrs. Clinton will find a reason to declare victory tomorrow no matter what happens and soldier on. I saw her last week when she came to the office and she didn't seem to me to be in a quittin' mood.
Joseph Cheng, Toronto: I think John McCain is the clear winner when these two [Obama and Clinton] continue to sling mud and slug it out.
I just can't understand why the Democrats are going for Obama. Obama's campaign slogan is for "change" but he has never spelled out what kind of "change" he is going to put forth or how he's going to go about doing it.
