the joshuablog just posted truly interesting statistics from CBS news: 
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/05/cbs-poll-support-for-obama-reb.php

As I was responding to the thread, I realized that this is an idea that has been fomenting for a while, and may be threadworthy itself.  The idea that the mass hiysteria we are all suffering through might actually be a disease.  It is one of the few things that would explain the statistics that he outlined in his post. 

Obama leads McCain 51% to 40%, nationally.  OK, we understand that is everybody.  Among Democratic primary voters (those who have voted or plan to vote in a Demnocratic primary) Obama leads Clinton 50% to 38%.  That would be pro-Obama Democrats (Obamacrats), pro-Obama Republicans (Obamacins), and pro-Obama Independants (Obamadents).  Not surprisingly among registered Democrats, Clinton leads Obama 45% to 44%.  What does this all mean?  I believe we are on the verge of the diagnosis of a far reaching social disease that can only now be identified by these statistics as Post-Clinton Traumatic Stress Disorder or PCTSD.

While reading these statistics memory brought me back to a wonderful quote from years ago.   "Statistics are like bikini's.  They reveal a great deal, but hide vital parts."  The quote was from the psychologist John Bradshaw during his groundbreaking PBS series On The Family.  I do think he was quoting someone else, but that is my source for the quote.  More importantly is the context for which he was using this quote, and the far-reaching information in this series on dysfunctional families and addiction.

If Obamcrats, Obamacins, and Obamdents have no trouble seeing who should be elected, why is it so difficult for registered Democrats to see things as clearly?  45% of registered Democrats, by nature of their political interests, are related to and identify with the Clintons.  They are family.  All other demographic groups do not relate to Hillary and Bill Clinton in as personal a manner, and therefore do not remember things with quite the same filter.  The filter of denial.
 
I look at this as everyone living in a Post-Clinton era, without Pro-Clinton advocates understanding that the era is over.  We can surmise that Pro-Clinton Democrats (at least 45% of them) don't know what is good for them, but the rest of the country (at least a majority) does.

The difference in perspectives is based on trauma.  When you identify with your dysfunctional family member it is much harder to reach clarity and quite often ends in co-dependant behavior - you are traumatized.  When you have no vested interest in the dysfunctional behavior you merely see the insanity.  It is in essense a matter of mental health.

The new national tragedy that we are all suffering the side-effects of is PCSTD - Post Clinton Traumatic Stress Disorder.  The symptoms are disassociation from your own best judgement, and a level of denial that allows you to vote against your own self-interests.  The nature of the dysfunction leaves you aligned with one who would actually hurt you, and not understanding the difference between "Post" and "Pro".

While the mainsteam media is looking further and further into polls (and exit polls) to see what socio-ecomonic, ethnic, and religious dynamics are at play, they have buried the lead.  The country is in a dysfunctional relationship with a political family, and these addictions know no such bounds.  Everyone related is suseptible.

Obviously we can also translate this as the trauma that enabled people to vote for Bush , CBTSD - Current Bush Traumatic Stress Disorder - but that is another disease.