Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
StumbleDemocrats engage in substantive, tranquil and focused debate
Sen. Barack Obama , Sen. Hillary Clinton and former Sen. John Edwards acknowledge the audience before the start of Tuesday’s debate between the presidential candidates sponsored by MSNBC.
Tuesday, Jan. 15, 2008 | 8:33 p.m.
Outside Support
Viewing video requires the latest version of Adobe's Flash Player
del.icio.usSome of the most interesting sights and sounds of the Democratic presidential debate didn't come from Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, or Barack Obama on the inside of the Cashman Center. Instead the trio's supporters, along with a large legion of Dennis Kucinich backers, made their views, votes, and vocals known on the outside.
Audio Clip
- David Bonior, John Edwards' national campaign manager, talks about Edwards' stance on immigration
-
You need to upgrade your Flash Player
Audio Clip
- Sheila Leslie, Nevada assemblywoman, talks about Barack Obama's opinion on education for minorities
-
You need to upgrade your Flash Player
Audio Clip
- Rodney Slater, Secretary of Transportation during Bill Clinton's administration, talks about Hillary Clinton's view on aiding minorities
-
You need to upgrade your Flash Player
Jon Ralston's analysis
- Video: Still a Close Race
- Video: They Can All Get Along
- Video: Calm Debate
- Video: No Change in the Race
Presidential Debate Recap:
- Political Kumbaya
- Timing may sink lawsuit aimed at Strip voting
- Markets pick 'em better than polls
- 11th hour, Ron Paul holds to his maverick strategy
- Undecideds find little help in debate
- Out in droves
- Democrats engage in substantive, tranquil and focused debate
- Video: Haning out at the debate
- Video: MSNBC Debate Highlight: Yucca Mountain
2008 Caucus Coverage
- Caucus Guide: Biographies, Issues Overview and a how to caucus video.
- Political blog: Continuous updates
- Interactive: Candidate Selector and Trivia Game
- Caucus Locator: For Democratic locations, or GOP sites.
Trying to restore amity to a contest that has seen precious little of it recently, the three leading Democratic presidential candidates used a nationally televised debate Tuesday night to emphasize their belief that America would be better served by sending any of them, not a Republican, to the White House next January.
During a two-hour debate at the Cashman Center aired on MSNBC, Sen. Hillary Clinton, Sen. Barack Obama and former Sen. John Edwards repeatedly praised each other, underlining what they see as the Democratic Party’s better answers to meet the challenges of what Obama described as “a defining moment in our history.”
Clinton set the tone in her opening remarks. “We’re all family in the Democratic Party,” the New York senator said. “We are so different from the Republicans on all of these issues in every way that affect the future of the people.”
In particular, the candidates went out of their way to douse the political brush fire that dominated the campaign in recent days after Clinton seemed to diminish the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s role in civil rights advances by noting that it took the actions of President Lyndon B. Johnson to make them a reality.
“Sen. Obama and I completely agree that … neither race nor gender should be a part of this campaign,” said Clinton, who went on to praise Obama as having “such an inspirational and profound story to tell America and the world.”
“I think it’s appropriate on Dr. King’s birthday … to recognize that all of us are here as a result of what he did.”
In the wake of Clinton’s comment, Obama’s campaign was accused of trying to keep the controversy alive. His South Carolina press secretary, for example, distributed alleged comments by Clinton supporters on racial issues. “Our supporters, our staff get overzealous,” the Illinois senator said, echoing Clinton’s earlier remarks. “They start saying things I would not say. And it is my responsibility to make sure that we’re setting a clear tone in our campaign.”
Edwards, meanwhile, fielded a question that goes to the core of his campaign — and that perhaps helps explain why he has been unable to crack one of the top two spots in the Democrats’ first two contests in Iowa and New Hampshire — when asked about the difficulty of competing against the first viable female candidate and first viable African American candidate for president. “I think that the decision for every voter in this election should revolve around first whether you believe America needs change,” the former North Carolina senator said. “If you do, who do you believe will be most effective in bringing about that change?
“I have to say on behalf of my party .. I’m proud of the fact that we have a woman and an African American who are very, very serious candidates for the presidency. They’ve both asked not to be considered on their gender or their race. I respect that.”
The debate was not, however, an uninterrupted political lovefest, because the three candidates occasionally faulted each other’s policy positions and, at least obliquely, questioned their opponents’ readiness for the presidency.
Clinton pointedly refused to acknowledge that she considers both Obama and Edwards to be qualified to be president.
“I think that’s up to the voters to decide,” Clinton responded. Later, Clinton, trying to position herself as the candidate most ardently against the proposed nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain, pointed out that one of Obama’s biggest financial supporters is the Exelon Corp., an energy company that favors Yucca, and that Edwards twice voted for Yucca while in the Senate.
Both Obama and Edwards responded with strong rebuttals.
“It’s a testimony to my commitment and opposition to Yucca Mountain that despite the fact that my state has more nuclear power plants than any other state in the country,I’ve never supported Yucca Mountain,” Obama said. And Edwards said that “science that has been revealed” and other factors since his two Senate votes have left him unalterably opposed to Yucca. Less than an hour before the debate, the Nevada Supreme Court kept the event a three-candidate affair, ruling that NBC/MSNBC had the right to exclude U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio from the debate after initially inviting him to participate. Kucinich ran far behind Clinton, Edwards and Obama in this month’s Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary.
Discussion: comments so far…
Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.
Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.
No trusted comments have been posted.
Post a comment
Most Popular
- Viewed
- Discussed
- E-mailed
- UNLV can move forward without the burden of losing streak to San Diego State
- A wife’s wisdom shows birth control issue needn’t be divisive
- Motorcycle accident claims life of man in northeast valley
- Surprise links, negotiated deals addressed by commissioners
- Hope and change and … what’s missing?
- New York mayor has the right idea
- We don’t need a CEO in charge
- Paying our own way
- Country has ‘given’ citizens a lot
- Jerry Tarkanian: Mike Moser impresses yet again on a day to remember former Rebel greats
Blogs
The Kats Report
Color from scene at Thomas & Mack: We have a wire job! Rebels win, and Louie Armstrong sings!
South Point owner Michael Gaughan's take on 'Vegas Stripped': 'I'll give it an 8' (4 Comments)
Author relishes writing the life story of ‘larger-than-life’ Oscar Goodman (3 Comments)
Elsewhere
Landowner: All roads could lead to Uxbridge casino
Revel reveals smoke-free casino opening
Cirque du Soleil show in Sands China casino to close this month
Meet the woman behind Sheldon Adelson
The Sun
Locally owned and independent for more than 50 years.
senator clinton is very bright and knows her policy HOWEVER she has to dominate the discussion, show she is the smartest person in the room and never admit a mistake --
she also leaves out details - she said she voted against the 205 bankruptcy bill - and in fact she didn't vote on it --
she is too enthralled with herself and her own cleverness
that is why the republicans are dying to run against her - they know they can beat her -- just listen to msnbc, cnn and fox -- all their analyst say the same thing
the candidates the republicans fear is obama
the candiate the democrats fear is mc cain
Hillary Clinton is not interested in anyone else's opinion - but her own -- she id convinced she is ready on "day 1" - because her mind is made up on exactly what she will do
this is the same way she ran the health care debacle in 1994 --
Please Nevada - do not anoint someone who is interesting in disenfranching people who do not endorse her, subtly race baits (how many times did she say black-brown? - what about the non acknowledgement of Bob Johnson's remarks?-- not to mention Charles Rangel - Cuomo - Kerrey - Shaheen etc etc)
Her campaigns states with "factual" reference - that hispanics do not trust black"--
So lets she how Hillary Clinton will unite the country-- by pitting
man vs women
black vs white
black vs brown
old vs young
anyone who disagrees with her --
did we leave anyone out?
Although Edwards did well tonight, Senator Barack Obama absolutely won this one HANDS DOWN!!
Is Chris Matthews serious about Ms Clinton doing as well as he claims? Sure, he's mad that his buddy Guilini did so poorly in Michigan tonight, but Matthews, you all but corinated Mrs. Clinton claiming that she was flawless.
Hello? Earth to Chris Matthews:
Clinton was so annoying in her tone that we had to turn the tube down several times.
We've found our candidate and will proudly caucus for Senator Obama!
Go Barack!! Go Wranglers!!
Despite what the obnoxious MSNBC pundits might say, the general public seems to think that Obama won the debate.
From http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=...
Barack Obama
75%
Hillary Clinton
20%
John Edwards
5.5%
From http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/1...
Obama
49% 775 votes
Edwards
30% 474 votes
Clinton
19% 311 votes
I think a lot of the pasty white blowhard commentators are overlooking just how strong a performance Obama made in the debate, especially on issues of race. I can't help but think that his answers -- and Hillary's voter suppression efforts -- will win over many of the Hispanic and Black voters who were previously on the fence.
The debate was a snoozer. However, i though this was one of Obama's best debate performances, he had style and substance. Edwards displayed passion. Hillary was good but she tried too hard to dominate the debate- i found her to be annoying at times.
Thanks for that polling information Mark!
It's too bad that MSNBC doesn't put a poll up themselves.
Then again, the way they're trying to SPIN this thing, maybe they don't want to relay what the people who actually count are saying.
Go Obama!
Go Wranglers!
Obama won the debate - effortlessly.
Russert was obviously throwing soft-balls at Clinton, and NOBODY mentioned that she VOTED FOR THE IRAQ WAR. Nobody challenged her on any of her terrible decisions and manipulations. She is the one who injected gender and race into this - everybody knows it. She just wants to win.
Obama was regal, contemplative, thoughtful, told us precisely what he wants to do - especially the people of Nevada - and showed Clinton what a true leader looks like.
COME ON, NEVADA!
BARACK OBAMA! He is our only candidate.
Very tame debate, I was disappointed the at-large lawsuit was not discussed.
15 Jan 2008 09:37 pm
"The Clinton presidential campaign's apparent blind ambition for power runs the risk of destroying Clinton's reservoir of earned political integrity and affection among black people," -
Clarence B. Jones, former personal counsel, advisor, draft speech writer and close friend of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Hillary has lost mine and my entire family's votes with her bogus lawsuit to defeat polling on the strip.
For the rest of the week we all are going to work towards bringing out entire neighborhoods, work places, and churches over to caucus for Obama!
*Pow!*
Take that Hillary!
Sí se puede
I have been voting since 1958 and I am proud to say that Hillary Clinton has demonstrated what we have known for a long time......the United States needs a president who is intelligent, caring, aware of what our country needs, concern for ALL the citizens and is a WOMAN !
All the candidates who were allowed to speak tonight are virtual clones of each other. They all voted for war in Iraq or Continued War in Iraq (in the case of Obama) and its funding. They all voted for the Patriot Act. Obama voted five times for its renewal and Edwards led the fight to get the original through. They all voted for Yucca Moutnain and/or its funding. Edwards led the charge to get Yucca Mountain chosen as a nuclear repository and repeatedly voted for it. Obama and Clinton voted to fund it. All thave spoken in support of war with Iran and all have said they intend to leave troops in Iraq through 2013.
The only way Nevada votes for peace or against Yucca Mountain is if Nevada votes for Kucinich, the only candidate to vote against Yucca Mountain and its funding.
Many of you have expressed reasonable concerns about Mrs. Clinton, but I think she edged Mr. Obama to win the debate. Whereas both of them offered specific ideas and found agreement on many issues, and while they clearly outlined their philosophical differences, Mr. Edwards, on the other hand, often seemed to return to his familiar (and tired) stumping points. He seems to speak more in generalities with trial-lawyerly appeals to emotion (no offense). For me, the choice is between Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton. When comparing the two, I think they both have their strengths and weaknesses. I will have to disagree with the majority of posts here as I believe Mrs. Clinton edged Mr. Obama to win this debate. Whereas Obama comes across as capable and intelligent, inspiring and eloquent, for me it still comes down to experience. I think Mrs. Clinton demonstrated her strong grasp of issues and put forth good policy ideas (which, consequently, are not too different from Obama's). As far as the criticisms levied here at Mrs. Clinton, I don't think they reflect her true persona. I've followed politics closely for many years now and I understand she's a contentious public figure, but I also know that the real Hillary Clinton is resilient, hard-working, intelligent, compassionate and capable. I know she would make an excellent President. I am not as familiar with Mr. Obama who is relatively new on the national scene. I like them both, but Mrs. Clinton will get my vote.
does anybody agree chris Matthews analysis of post the debate wrap-up was shameful? He has no journalistic integrity . NBC needs to pull him off tv for a while.
Experience matters!
Hillary won the debate all the way! If we want to make real changes then we need a person with experience and a real plan! She is the best candidate to deal with world issues and keep our country safe. She is the only one with an economic plan and the experience to get the economy back on track. Hillary also supports better funding for education and protecting the environment. Hillary Clinton has the knowledge and experience to solve the serious issues our country is facing. She gets my vote!
Mark, in addition to the polls you cited above, I was just reading the Politico.com.
They too have a poll on their front page and Obama is running away with it!
I am so PROUD of Senator Obama!
Go Obama!
Go Wranglers!
Shame on you and your bogus lawsuit Hillary! >:-(
Reader sbeth7 above wrote about Clinton knowledge and experience. For Clinton's experience, I invite you all to read:
http://www.slate.com/id/2182073/
a very well-written column where it is shown, proven, by a national columnist, that Clinton's talk of "experience" is a big LIE, and very DANGEROUS!
To Hillary 08
Hillary is a wonderful uniter...OF REPUBLICANS!!
Her experience is a myth
Hillary
-First lady of Arkansas
-First Lady
-US Senator 6 years
yeah...real experience right there.
Obama has more applicable experience and will win Nevada.
Clinton could have had a shot, but her bogus unioon lawsuit may have done her in
They all keep saying the same thing, election after election. I'm going to do this, that and the other thing. Obama, Clinton, Edwards, who ever makes it.....try to do what you say. That will be something I havn't seen for a long time.
I am a counselor in Montana. We had a career fair in which a young lady from the Air Force presented to our students. She had previously worked as a flight attendant on the first lady's jet when Ms. Clinton was in that role.
Clinton ordered a spritzer and lime and apparently the attendant didn't put enough lime into the drink. When Clinton tasted it she threw the drink back into the face of the attendant. I don't know why this fine young lady would have lied about it. I think we can all see the elitist, angered attitude when Clinton doesn't get what she wants (post-Iowa Caucuses). That my friends is a basic and serious character flaw. It is time to break with the past! What kind of experience did Bill Clinton have when he took office? Don't let that argument sway you. We need a good person in office and we haven't had that in quite some time and again would not with Hillary!
Barack Obama.....he is honest to the bone!
This is a fight that deserves deep scrutiny. It is she WHO in her true colors started it raw. With un-professional punches on Obama on the stomach and on the backside. After they were found unruly, she stepped back and looked back with anger that she was being offended. Experience was partially forgotten and overtaken by rage and furry caused by fear of loss. I think i need to congratulate Obama for cooling it down into a truce. He has demonstrated truthfully that he is a unifying factor for America.
Look how he demonstrates at even supporting Clinton on some of issues! Very inclusive that man he was at the debate. I think he can turn America into leading the new world order that insinuates prosperity across the world. Turning the 20 billion war sellout that is going to cause persistent trouble in the middle east from a man who proclaims a road map to peace while holding the sword in his hand! I was very much fascinated when i saw him holding a sword! Dancing the Arabic Dance i have never seen but crying at Jews Graveyard!
Will clinton persuade this man to bring back troops in only one year? purely a campaign flip! But anyway, Obama have diplomatically winked they can work together, but will it be successful? a proposal from an experienced contender, ready to rule the world on day one! I think this was a fluking point i have heard for years! Why can't you be forward looking into your period of reign after being sworn in to the oval office? Instead of trying to work at the impossibles? I think America is just hesitating to choose the best out of the three frontrunners.
I advise America and democrats to either choose Obama or Edwards for president (with a possibility of one of them vying for vice president during general election if he falls short of deciding votes). This is because democrats will have to make a lot of bad tone flip flapping softening and apologies to republicans if Madame Clinton enters into the general election. How many times will Mr. Clinton go to radios to soften the tones? I think their reign period is now over. Mr. Clinton you were President for 8 years! Why do you want to be in-subordinated into FIRST GENTLEMAN status?
The Clintons and the Bushes should not be allowed to be the only two families ruling America for 28 years!!!!!!! G.Bush Sr 1988-1992, Mr.Clinton 1993-2000, G.Bush Jr 2001-2008; Mrs Clinton 2009-2016 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THIS IS PRETTY WONDERFUL! ARE YOU AMERICANS TRYING TO COPY LEADERSHIP STYLE FROM YOUR SULTANATE AND EMIRATES ARAB FRIENDS? IS IT A GOOD STYLE? ARE THERE NO OTHER CLEVER AMERICANS WHO CAN LEAD YOUR COUNTRY? GoOOOOOOOOOOOOBAMA GO!
All candidates scored points in the debate. Sen. Edwards on Campaign Financing. Sen. Obama on Bankruptcy Bill. Sen. Clinton on Yucca Mountain and 2005 Energy Bill. Sen. Obama wants to unite the country. I think he truly means it. However, his supporters don't seem to get it. They brought up the race issue and launched attacks on Sen. Clinton's personality. Surrounded by this kind of supporters, Sen. Obama won't even be able to unite his own party. His supporters will only further divide the country. I will not vote for Sen. Obama because of his supporters.
Why would Hillary be ready on 'Day One' and not Obama? This is something Obama should shoot down because I don't see what she has going for her that would qualify her better than Obama to take decisions on 'Day One', except Bill maybe but he's yesterday's news.
It was the Teachers Union and several religious orgs that complained not the Clinton campaign. Personally, I am Christian and I don't believe that we should have to go inside a casino to vote bc I don't believe in gambling. I am glad that the location is being petitioned bc it was poorly planned.
I felt that all three candidates were strong in the debate last night. Before last night I was split btw Obama and Clinton. In my opinion Clinton by far had the strongest performance bc she showed her wealth of knowledge. I think that she showed that her experience sets her apart for Obama.
While I love Obama I do not feel that he is ready to be President. There is no doubt that he is the future of the party but I will not vote for him bc of the troubling state of our nation. I think he should be Clinton's VP and get the experience and then run again. Hillary Clinton has already been properly vetted and I just don't think Obama will be able to defeat the republican candidate once the Republicans start there negative propaganda campaign against him. The republican party is going to unite no matter if clinton or obama get the nomination bc if you think they hate clinton wait to you see how much they don't want a black man to be president.
Clinton-Obama '08 ... Experience and Vision
Why didn't Obama confront Clinton as soon as she made the remark if it offended him so much? He should've said something right away and debated the issue in public before it got out of hand. Bill and Hillary said some horrible things to Obama and now they are saying all of this was done by somebody else? Over zealous staff members? What a lie. The Clintons attacked Obama and they will do it again. Obama was stupid to reconcile with them because they will go after him right away. This is really not Hillary's campaign either. It is Bill's. We don't have a woman candidate. This is truly not some historic leap for women in this country or an historic event because Bill Clinton is truly the candidate, not his wife. He can't run for a third term because of the 22nd amendment so he is exploiting that amendment's true intent and getting around it by running his wife for president. If she wins, he will be running the country again, not her. That's the reality here and everyone knows it. I am a woman and I say that at this time we truly do not have a woman candidate for president. That idea is false. Bill Clinton is using and exploiting his wife so that he can enjoy a third, illegal term as president of this country. Let's get a real woman candidate, one who can stand on her own two feet.
What I found to be most interesting about the debate is the knowledge of the candidates. While Hillary spoke with great knowlege about the topics and questions asked upon her, Obama seemed to talk around topics as if to try to hide his lack of knowledge of topics discussed. Obama seemed to just keep talking and taking up time without substance. There is no doubt in my mind after watching this debate that Hillary is the best person for the presidency. America needs someone that actually knows the issues that greatly affect our nation today. She does not have to go through the next four years learning the debt of these issues as obviously demonstrated in the debate last night.
To answer above posts... I believe that the experience Hillary is referring to is the many years that she was an active Governor's wife/First Lady. Hillary was the most active first lady since Eleanor Roosevelt. She made the first lady position a political position. I do believe that she had a incredible impact in the white house during the Clinton Admin. There is no question in my mind that she has MUCH more experience than Obama. Obama does not attack back on the day One readiness issue bc he knows that he has little experience in comparison so why let people make that comparison? Obama is new to the political scene and that is what is so attractive about him that he has the potential to one day be molded into what Americans want there leaders to be. While Clinton is who she is and will never change bc she has been in the system so long....After suffering 8yrs of a Bush Administration I would love to go back to the good old Bill Clinton days. He was a GREAT president especially in comparison to his successor.
About the race card, I think Obama's campaign was soaring and to quell some of the crowd adulation he enjoyed, the Clintons had to create a diversion, so they started saying he was all talk, which as worthless and that Hillary was a doer.
At that point, Obama had to respond by saying words were important and to illustrate that, he mentioned J.F.K. and M.L.K. and their important speaches. The Clintons then spun this to mean that Obama was comparing himself with these men and it deteriorated from there and Bill Clinton, denied he meant anything much by his 'fairy tale' comment, but that didn't convince many. Neither did billionnaire Johnson's assertion that he didn't mean anything by his comment about Obama and the 'neighborhood'.
I watched the debates last night and it was apparent, Senator Clinton is President Clinton. She is the Commander in Chief.
Obama and Edwards were mere cabinet members hoping to remain relevant.
There is no doubt in my mind that Hillary would make a fine president one day. But she is really part of the past and America must look to the future. This country cannot afford to go back-and-forth with Bush-Clinton its not healthy for our country, its too toxic. Her arrogance turns me off-during last night's debate she wouldn't even acknowledge that Obama and Edwards would make good leaders when asked by the Brian Williams. I mean, what kind of person would be so callous? she is too over confident for her own good. That is not a good quality in a potential leader. You decide.
[What I found to be most interesting about the debate is the knowledge of the candidates. While Hillary spoke with great knowlege about the topics and questions asked upon her, Obama seemed to talk around topics as if to try to hide his lack of knowledge of topics discussed.] by gsirod
I completely agree with you. Obama is a great and moving speaker but there is something missing. His answers are too general and not specific enough (probably because of his lack of experience.) I love listening to him speak but yesterday, I felt belittled by him. I see why idealistic young minds would be driven to him but to a veteran Democrat, he is simply too inexperienced (as seen in the debate)
I think he would be a good leader after many years of experience but right now only person who understand the tasks ahead is HILLARY. My decision was cemented after yesterday's debate.
I'm for Obama.
I think if Clinton gets the delegates. I will vote for mitt. Obama is the right choice the best choice. I don't want to just watch as history is made I want to be a part of it, this country needs someone new someone that is not politically saturated someone who can surround himself with the experience to make what needs to happen happen. Right now i'm proud to be an american more than ever.
In yesterday's debate, Hillary did try to appear presidential but she was just borrowing husband Bill's mantel and if hanging around the White House gives one the kind of experience that is needed in the White House, she has it in spades.
She did make mistakes though in her voting record as a senator that Obama avoided making and that was touched upon in the debate. It is also clear that Obama's stays above the fray of the dirty tricks, as opposed to the Clinton's. If dirty tricks and Washington grid-lock is the prerequisite, the Clintons win. If a fresh approach is the key, Obama does. Looking presidential is over-rated -- there's plenty of time for that later. Now is the time to assess the qualities of the candidates.
REM123
The principle reason I am against Obama being the Democratic candidate is that if he wins the nomination, he does not have even the smallest prayer of winning in the general election and that is due to his very weak record in the Illinois Senate and in the US Senate. He is a newbie in a very high stakes game. He doesn't even know the rules of the game and he wants to bet all of our futures on his incompetence.
He needs to finish this term in the Senate, learn how the rules work, introduce some bills that have broadbase benefit to Americans (such as a bill to prevent preditory lending in all circles of our country and cultures), get elected for another term to the Senate and in the midst of that term, perhaps he can then run on a well established record. Maybe then he will know enough to be effective.
Please tell me you know that no candidate can win the White House and lose all of the Southern states. Please tell me you know that the fundamentalist and the good-old boy and good-old girl networks in states like Pennsylvannia, Ohio, Michigan and New Jersey will simply not vote for Barrack for a whole myriad of reasons, one of which is his skin tone. You know, based on Florida alone, that it only takes a few thousand votes to make the difference.
This is the worst time in my memory for the Democrats to lose a national election:
* Predatory lending in colleges and in housing,
* The war in Iraq,
* An increase in terrorist activities by Muslim extremists throughout the globe,
* An increase in un-employement,
* Excessively high energy costs and the inflation that is causing
* An increase in the trade deficit,
* An increase in the budget deficit,
* A record low for the US dollar, and
* Three Supreme Court candidates who are getting OLD. The only youngish ones were put there by the neo-conservatives and they will be there forever.
Obama cannot win in the general election - no matter how much of a nice guy he is and not one of the Republican candidates will make the things I listed above any better for the working people of this country.
Congratulations to Hillary Clinton on her debate win. I wish more time had been spent on the economy. Hillary's economic recovery plan is the most responsive to the needs of this country and very well thought out in terms of how to invest in a manner that helps middle and low income populations and how to move this country to green jobs and away from imported oil. Her plan has received accolades in the media. If you care about the environment and the economy and want to see the war ended, then Hillary Clinton deserves your caucus vote. Vote Hillary.
Experience in what? Obama if elected president would not be running the country by himself, but would surround himself with competent people and probably some a lot more so than Hillary.
Obama will surround himself with people who are experienced at playing the Race card and dividing the country.
Michael, you're just being silly.
Clinton wins Michigan with 55% of the votes.
Obama supporters... I think I hear the Clinton bandwagon picking up speed. If you want on, you better do it now our you will just get run over by the wheels.
OUR NATION, OUR FUTURES, OUR CANDIDATE - HILLARY '08
I really hope Nevada votes for Hillary. Although, she doesn't have the "likeability", as some say as Obama, she has experience beyond him.
She can talk to all topics and have a plan for all of them. Someone earlier stated that they are not voting for her bacause she has a plan/agenda starting on day 1 of her presidency. I think that is a wonderful thing, don't we want a president who has an agenda and has been communicating this agenda clearly and specifically to the country, along with her positions. The great thing we can look at her voting history and her votes on issues, can we really do that with Obama: not too much because he hasn't been a senator that long and we really don't know where he stands, it's easy to say you are for/against something, but without any previous history on the issues, how do we really know?
Also, one thing about Obama that drives me crazy is, he will attack others on their votes (one example, the war, he wasn't even there to vote for it)!! So, it's easy for him to attack everyone else for their vote. He is NOT ready to lead a country, he should stay in as a senator for more experience to really understand him and his positions.
Clinton has the experience to make change because she understands the political process and has made a name for herself. When is experience a bad thing? We keep hearing Washington is broken, but how can Obama fix it if he hasn't been there long enough to understand what is broken. You have to know what is before you can fix it...Hillary has! She has been in the White House and the Senate, so she is diverse to many facets of the process!!!
It will be a very scary day if Obama is elected. The Clinton days were not a bad thing, it was the first time in a long time that we had a balanced budget and surplus, we get two for the price of one!
Please vote for Hillary if we really have a chance to make this a better country. We are not in a position to take risks!!!
Obama whines and then blames everyone else. He doesn't have specific plan of action and speaks to general. If you actual watch all the debates as I have, you will see Clinton is polished and specific. She is the Commander in Chief and they are support.
She isn't arrogant, she is confident because she has the experience to know what she is talking about, unlike the other two. Let's make sure we don't confuse them.
It also surprises me that so many people who have commented on things are rumors they hear and take it for granted. Please make sure you are commenting on facts and not heresay, you might actually see Clinton as a leader. Just because she is stern and clear doesn't mean she is not passionate, compassionate, empathetic, and a humanitarian (look at all she has done for people).
Know who you are voting for before making a decision become someone sounds/looks "likeable".
Go HILLARY!
Barack Obama does nothing to inspire me. He talks a lot about hope and uniting, but does not seem to have a plan to lead the country. Hillary Clinton seems to bring about more of the same blue state/red state divisiveness and Republicans can't wait to run against her.
John Edwards is the only candidate that has comprehensive plan to bring our country back together.
http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/
Go John Edwards!
Matthews is trying to make up for slamming her. He said the only reason she was a senator was because of her husband's indiscretion. (Another sympathy vote, which is basically true imo) I don't know why that old republican guy on MSNBC ever comments on the democrats, he is so biased & a touch bigoted. Every one of them on that station is on bended knee hailing the queen. It is quite disgusting. I really use to enjoy that station although I felt they were right leaning. However, watching them squirm just because they were wrong with the New Hampshire polls (everyone is running to kiss Hillary's ring) makes me ill. Media should stop giving opinion and just report. They are going to be wrong about this one too. Edwards may pull this one out.
If you get a chance, see John Edwards in person. He is in Reno today, Las Vegas tonight and Henderson tomorrow.
http://www.johnedwards.com/nevada/events...
Go John Edwards!
Yeah, John is in Reno. He is trying to get more campaign funds - keno
Way to be positive and constructive Darryl.
With your divisive nature, it's no wonder you're supporting Hillary. She certainly doesn't seem to be a great uniter. Of course, if you take our current President as the example of a great uniter, maybe she is fairly comparable.
You see my skills at work do you Spence777?
I am not a divisive person so much as I try to keep the flames down. If I allow someone like AW to go unchecked, she gets to spread nonsense and they build momentum from nothing. Obama does not deserve to be president, he is not qualified to be president, and the hype that was built around him by the press and the progressive wing of our party is dangerous for our country.
Regarding my comment about John, I thought it was funny. I kept wondering why, last night, someone did not ask them if they had earned any extra campaign funds while in LV.
John would have seen the humor but not you - why is that?
I do see the humor to a point. I just am uncomfortable that in our current system that money can buy votes. I really hope that people can look past the media filter that has been placed on this election, because of its historical precedence.
I really believe that John Edwards has his heart and mind in the right place. He really cares about what he is doing and believes in the plan he is putting forward to the American people. I will admit he can be repetitive. However, unlike many candidates (especially on the other side of the row), I do not see that his ego plays into his bid for President. I do feel that way from Obama and Hillary.
I would say your take on John is correct. He is very sincere and having come from a very similar background, I empathize with him.
I doubt seriously that he will win enough delegate votes to be a major issue in Denver, but I sure hope he will have enough to give him some influence on the planks.
I don't think he will settle for VP but I hope that if he does not get the nomination that he will at least consider it irrespective of who the candidate is.
Yep, I am waiting. But the problem you have right now is that the Republicans are bankrupt on every issue.
That is the change everyone wants - they want as far from the idealogues of the neo-conserative party as is possible. This is why I am surprised there are no moderate republicans. There is a whole cross-section of the country who would flock to them and yet. Having said that, I think they also want as far away from the hard core liberals who think political correctness is fair and balanced.
I think this is what the whole Blomberg thing in Norman Oklahoma was about - a third party devoid of neo-nazi conservatives and socialist liberals.
I believe, in my heart, if Gore had asked for Clinton's help and had somehow avoided Lieberman, Bush would never have won (we think he didn't but that is a different discussion). And regarding Kerry and Edwards, I keep telling people on this site that if they can take a war hero's record and make it look equal to that of someone who went AWOL during the war, then what the heck do you think they can do to Obama.
But Michael, this is a different time and different issues and the working people of the US are pissed off more than I have ever seen them. The Republicans would be smart to put up their worst candidate, go into hiding for a couple of years and hope like hell the American people have a short memory.
I love the fact that you people are so transparent that it's hilarious. I’m reading this “I'm not going to vote for Obama or Edwards and I'm a democrat crap” wondering whose falling for it. Please...you’re as Republican as they come using the little buzz words, for the foolish few.
Hillary isn't going to make it in Nevada or South Carolina. Edwards has a great chance and I'm not counting Obama out. Although Edwards is my guy, I'm glad as heck that Obama’s your worst nightmare.
thank you for your co-operation
Wildcat, I am not a republican; and I know the only chance we have in beating the republicans is if Senator Clinton is our candidate.
You are right, she will not win in South Carolina because the majority of white voters will vote in the republican primary and the black voters will vote for Barrack. I am not really sure why the campaign would bother to spend money there unless it is to pander to the people who have already made up their minds and they (the Clinton campaign) simply wants to avoid having to answer a racial correctness question.
"Transparent is my favorite color." Sen. John Edwards.
To anyone who saw Democracy Now's follow-up broadcast in which Dennis Kucinich, excluded from the debate after already having been invited, was allowed to answer the same questions addressed to the "chosen" three will realize that the only "viable" candidate was sitting on the sidelines. MSNBC asked for the submission of questions for the candidates and the one I submitted was "Did you approve of MSNBC's decision to exclude Dennis Kucinich from tonight's debate?" Not surprisingly, they were not asked this question, as all the time was taken to allow the three to preen themselves about their "qualifications" and take sly pot shots at one another. The failure of these three to go to bat for the right of a candidate to participate who had views very different from themselves speaks volumes for their commitment to the value of free speech, however much their empty words might otherwise indicate.
Darryl, just so I don't paint you with a certain brush...help me to comprehend your statement. So your position is that in the year 2008, minority votes don't have any standing in the Democratic party?
Hi Wildcat,
Paint me with any brush you wish. I cannot stop that and it really only matters what my family thinks of me. But one reality I know is that racism in America is alive and well and that sucks big time. And if Obama is the Democratic candidate in the primary, the world will see just how much racism continues to exist in our country. It is wrong, but that barely matters.
Right now, Barrack has three things going against him. He has to win enough Southern states, enough Western states and enough delegate-heavy states in the Iron Belt to get the needed number of electoral votes. He won't be able to do that. He may win a lot of the popular vote but in the end, he will be another Dukakis.
The Republicans know the value of this election with regard to the Supreme Court makeup and how that will impact everything from immigration, abortion, affirmative action, workers' rights, and same-sex marriages, just to name a few. They know what it will mean to the war in Iraq, and to the control of energy and the environment.
They will do any and everything needed to retain the White House and possibly regain control of the Senate. They are not stupid people and they have no problem with putting their morals on the back shelf in order to achieve their end goal.
They want Obama to be our candidate because he is a lightning rod for vile criticism that will sway both white and hispanic men and women. They know the gutless worms in their party will essentially do all that is needed to beat Obama, but they do not have the fomula yet, to beat a Clinton.
When all is said and done, this is a war and Obama thinks he can work across the aisle to bring about harmony. That is why I will not vote for him. He is so damn naive that I have to believe he is not mature enough to manage our country.
SCAMAOBAMA'S PLAN TO JUMP START THE ECONOMY
Put a tax on crack cocaine.
and say some magic words because words are always better than action.
SCAMABAMA'S PLAN TO JUMP START THE ECONOMY FOLLOW UP
Okay, okay,scratch the tax on crack cocaine - bad idea.
Instead put a tax on actions because actions are bad. Yeah, that's it, tax action and experience.
ADDENDUM TO MY (SCAMOBAMA) PLAN TO JUMP START THE ECONOMY FOLLOW UP
and of course, say some magic words because words are better than action.
If you truly support Obama, then spread this article to everyone on your email list, on every blog, and to everyone everywhere. Let his record and his years of selfless service to the American dream speak for itself. Remember, we are only separated from every other person in the world by 6 people. Send it to every American you know. Truth will always trump lies, so don't be afraid. Stand for truth in these dark times and let's take our country back from the elites.
Time Magazine - Obama's Political Experience
Wednesday, Jan. 16, 2008
Obama's Varied Record
By AP/CHRISTOPHER WILLS
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/...
I just read that Time article about Scamobama. It's right. All he did was spend his time and our money on Chicago's south side doing nothing for the rest of us in the state.
A breath takingly unspectacular senate record as one of our state senators is being generous.
But that's okay. He at least learned how to sprinkle magic words and we all know magic words are better than actions.
If you believe they are not waiting (praying) with bated breath for Hillary with a full load of artillery and then some, well....never mind.
You're a dreamer Darryl, and who am I to ask you to wake the heck up.
Enjoy your delusions..I mean dreams.
BTW Darryl, the more I read your comments, you appear to become increasingly agitated with the opposing opinions here. You should try to wean yourself off of that diet of Obama haterade... it just may help your clouded point of view.
"There's a wall around Washington and we need to take it down. The American people are on the outside. And on the other side, on the inside, are the powerful, the well-connected and the very wealthy.That wall didn't build itself or appear overnight. For decades, politicians without convictions and powerful interests gathered their bricks and their stones and their mortar, and they went to work. They went to work to protect their interests, to block the voice of the American people, and to stop our country's progress. They went to work to protect, defend, and maintain the status quo.
"You have a choice in this election. You have to decide what kind of person you want as your next president. Do you want someone who is going to pretend that wall around Washington isn't there, or defend the people who helped build it? Or do you want someone who is going to lead with conviction and tell you the truth, and have a little backbone? Do you want someone who is going to hope that the people who spent millions of dollars and decades building that wall, and have billions more invested in keeping it up, are going to be willing to compromise, to take it down voluntarily? Or do you want someone who is going to stand up to those people and fight for your interests, when the chips are down, when your backs are against the wall, every single day?
"We have a choice in this election. We can keep trying to shout over that wall. We can keep trying to knock out a chink here and there, to punch little holes in it and hope our voices get through. We can settle for baby steps, half-measures and incremental change, and try to inch our way over that wall and toward a better future. Or we can be bold and knock it down. …
-John Edwards, DNC Fall Meeting
Knock Down That Wall! Don't vote the status quo and vote in another corporate Democrat.
Make a statement tomorrow and caucus for John Edwards.
The total number of delegates for the Democratic National Convention is 4,049 delegates. Currently, Obama has 25, Hillary has 24 and Edwards has 18. It is NOT a foregone conclusion that the race has been decided and that the choice is only between Obama and Hillary. DO NOT BELIEVE THE MEDIA HYPE. Both Obama and Hillary are too divisive to be an effective candidate.
Bring back some sanity and civility to this race by choosing John Edwards.
Obama is much more progressive than Clinton, and yet he still appeals to many more Independents and Republicans than Clinton. If we want to get things done in DC, the right way, Obama is the one who has a history of creating the working majority necessary to accomplish it -- be it social security, medicare, a meaningful energy policy, enhanced natl security to real health care and a vibrant economy. Clinton's campaign continues to spread ridiculous and misleading information about Obama, which is just a signal that the old guard is threatened and is fighting for the position it feels entitled to. Long time loyalties to the family from Arkansas should give way to a true movement of change that isn't based on partisan politics. Vote your conscience. Vote Obama.
I'm a woman and I find nothing at all beautiful about having a third term of Bill Clinton. Who in their right mind would want to anticipate his next shady antic in the White House/Lincoln bedroom? Are we really up for more national embarrassment? I don’t owe Hilary a vote because of her choice to stay with him. I'm definitely not going to give mine to her.
I'm for Edwards with Obama as a very close second.
Wildcat? You are a woman who wants Edwards first and then Obama? Do you work in Nevada?
Thagan,
I just heard an interview with Senator Clinton on NPR and it seems you have your facts wrong - bad wrong. Might want to do some research before you continue spreading misinformation.