The Daily Five: Just Super

1. Sen. Pat Leahy: "There is no way that Sen. Clinton is going to win enough delegates" and so should quit....he later walks back his comment....but says that "there is no good reason" for Clinton to stay in the race. Clinton team rebuts with angry comments from Rendell and Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter. And Rep. Bruce Braley, an undecided frosh/superdelegate from Iowa, is happy to see the contest continue: "My preference is we let the system play out and we go to Denver. If it hasn't been resolved, then it gets taken care of there."

2. Clinton campaign talking point: In 1992, Bill Clinton didn't wrap up the nominee until June. Tapper truth: well, more like mid-March.

This notion that the 1992 presidential race was not over until June is literally true. But it was truly over about five or six weeks after the New Hampshire primary.

3. Newt Gingrich, on Obama:

Senator Obama gave us a very courageous speech. We owe it to him and to the topic to take it very seriously and respond to the level of eloquence and systematic explanation that he gave us. He asked historic questions, and that is appropriate. And I want to make quite clear, and this may well be a disappointment to the more partisan and the more ideological, my speech today is not an answer to Senator Obama. It is not a refutation. Hopefully, it is the beginning of a genuine dialogue in which people of all backgrounds can come together to have a serious conversation about America’s future.

Let me start by talking about the concept of anger, because I do think there’s an authenticity and legitimacy of anger by many groups in America. Senator Obama said in his speech:

That anger may not get expressed in public, in front of white coworkers or white friends. But it does find voice in the barbershop or around the kitchen table. At times, that anger is exploited by politicians, to gin up votes along racial lines, or to make up for a politician’s own failings. . . . That anger is not always productive; indeed, all too often it distracts attention from solving real problems; it keeps us from squarely facing our own complicity in our condition.

I think that that’s right, and I think that it’s important to recognize that anger can be a source of energy to create a better future—in which case it’s a very good thing. But if anger is a self-inflicted wound that limits us, it is a very bad and a very dangerous thing. And we have to be very careful about the role that anger plays in our culture. Tragically, what has happened is that cultural and political leaders have used anger as an excuse to avoid reality, as an excuse to avoid change, as an excuse to avoid accountability, because everything that is wrong is somehow somebody else’s fault.

Watch Gingrich's full speech here.

4. Chelsea Clinton, in Allentown PA:

‘Do I think my mother will be a better president than my father...Well, again, I don’t take anything for granted, but hopefully with Pennsylvania’s help, she will be our next president, and yes, I do think she’ll be a better president.”

Responds Hillary Clinton: "I have to talk to her before I answer that question."

5. Chuck Todd on language:

If someone says, "the process isn't hurting the party, let everyone have a say" you know that is code for "I'm still holding out hope for Clinton."

But if a supposed uncommitted superdelegate says, "we need to start thinking about what this is doing to our long term chances of defeating John McCain" that is code for, "I am leaning toward Obama but I hope Clinton will simply drop out so I can always claim to her and Bill that I was never against them."