« The Michigan Compromise? | Main | The Michigan Plan » Clinton Accepts PA Debate; Obama Trumps With NC Debate13 Mar 2008 05:05 pm Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign has accepted ABC's invitation for a 4/16 debate in Philadelphia. So has Obama -- but he's also accepted a debate for 4/19 in North Carolina, one hosted by Katie Couric and Bob Scheiffer of CBS News. A nice little trump. TrackBackTrackBack URL for this entry: Comments (69)
The day after she releases her tax returns? Bold move. 
Strike up the organ music...it's the Return of the Debates!
robert. You might want to give a source for your 'technical problems' statement. I for one have no idea what you are talking about.
I think they meant "technical" sheduling problems, Daniel. But I couldn't resist....:)
robert ethan with a comment that makes no sense? A dime a dozen... robert ethan admitting he's maliciously digging at Obama for no reason other than he likes another candidate? Priceless!
Oh this will be wonderful if she refuses to debate there. He can just run her Wisconsin ads and dub her name for his. Smooth.
I thought Obama didn't think any more debates were necessary? Perhaps the reverend's words are making some a bit worried...
lol, Alright, I can forgive that one. By the way, for all supporters of both sides. Have any of you noticed how when I ask a reasonable question, generally dealing with asking for sources, the discussion/argument with Tim K and robert ethan is generally more congenial? Might I suggest that those who support Senator Obama should take a page from his book, and use reason rathr than emotion to argue for him? In my opinion there are plenty of real reasons to vote for him, so to concentrate so much on the emotional attacks is really counter-productive. Remember, while we may be political opponents, we are NOT enemies! No matter how heated this gets, no matter what party you are a member of, we are all in the end allies. This is our nation, and we may bicker about how to go about running it, but we are still fellow citizens of the greatest nation in the history of the Earth. Don't lost sight of that. I look forward to the debates next month. I hope to see a Senator Obama still cool and collected and reasonable when he goes up against Senator Clinton, after what I imagine has been an exceptionally stressful month and a half.
Ha ha. Sort of takes the steam out of HRC's made-up issue about debates. I hope he said, "Meet me in North Carolina, Hillary!"
Why wouldn't Clinton accept a NC debate? Because she's going to lose that state? If she's going to lose anyway how can it hurt her?
HRC won't want to debate in NC because it gives the primary there importance. It was smart for Obama to make the challenge. First, because it ruins her "afraid of debates" nonsense. Second, because Obama has to get attention turned to NC. For too long HRC controlled what "counts" and what doesn't. A debate in NC will help do that.
Andrew Sullivan blogged today that the only way for HRC to beat Obama is to make him seem unelectable to the superdelegates...and by convention time she will continue to do what she's done on many fronts to accomplish that self-serving end. My opinion: enough people will have had enough of her stupid politics and venal staffers (in particular Wolfson) to perhaps swing a PA victory...or a close loss...to Obama. And then the fat lady shall have warbled. Sly on the timing of the NC debate...I hope he hits her hard on the tax thing (if they find anything out) and also tightens up his debate cred. He's a fast learner as we've seen. And at heart, America wants something better than just another old ankle-biting pol like HIllary. I hope.
Let's count the ways that Obama is winning: 1.) Pledged Delegates: (Using AP's numbers, with Obama's count in parenthesis) Obama: 1,390 (1,411)
Obama: 13,614,204
Obama: 16
Obama: 14
Obama: 30
Obama: 16 Red, 11 Blue
Obama: $168 million So that leaves the Clinton campaign with what, exactly? Big states! Big states! Big states! I addressed that one yesterday. Team Clinton has nothing except schemes of coup by super delegate, which they apparently think they can do by insulting entire Democratic constituencies and most of our nation's states. But really, what else do they have? Their campaign is losing by every metric possible.
Please, please, NO MORE DEBATES. I don't think I can handle another 20-minute discussion of the minutiae of health care mandates. I think we've learned all that we needed to learn from these two candidates; further debates are nothing more than theater at this point.
I don't think that Hillary is afraid to debate Obama on his "home turf", even when the "referees" are obviously in his pocket. Obama is notoriously poor trying to grasp problems and elucidate responses "live". He is a carefully airbrushed product of extensive studio overdubbing. Without his one note, carefully crafted speech, and OMINPRESENT TELEPROMPTER, he comes off about as incisively as a construction worker at closing time down at the pub.
You may be correct about the 'importance' thing. Remind me, do the Dems have much of a track record for winning NC in the general? It seems curious to me that Obama supporters are mocking Hillary for refusing to accept a debate, before she has even refused. Wasn't it Obama who mocked Hillary for asking for more debates? Didn't he say they weren't necesary? “When asked whether he would accept the invitation from Mrs. Clinton to attend four more debates in the coming weeks, he laughed. "I don’t think anybody is clamoring for more debates,” he said. “We’ve had 18 debates so far. I think we’ve had 10 more than we’ve had in the last Democratic contest.” Since Obama earlier had agreed to only one more debate I don't see how Clinton refusing a second does her any harm at all. He said they weren't necessary but now he wants two more. The lack of consistency shows this to be an obvious political ploy. Perhaps the both of them should concentrate on getting their messages out, explaining their policy proposals, and stop this silliness.
robert,
"Obama Trumps With NC Debate" Shouldn't that headline be: obama flip flops As mentioned above obama has said there has been enough debates.
robert ehtan=geraldine ferraro
Daniel - You have an excellent point about the need to remain allies. It's certainly a difficult task. I've noticed that the more this race drags on, the more entrenched in my support I become and the more likely I am to construe the actions of the other candidate negatively. I imagine I'm not the only person out there who sees this dynamic at play. KathyL - do your popular vote totals include MI & FL? Just curious.
Here's hoping Obama comes out and tears her a new one. God knows he has enough material now. Before we get going on this again, the debate situation before WI was different - compressed schedule, just a week to introduce himself to voters around the state, debates just a couple weeks ago. After 6 long weeks, and a lot of dirt being thrown by the Clinton campaign, we need to see these candidates head to head again. Before Clinton was complaining about not enough debates, let's see if she turns down a debate in NC.
DON'T BE DUPED!!! Large numbers of Republicans have been voting for Barack Obama in the DEMOCRATIC primaries, and caucuses. Because they feel he would be a weaker opponent against John McCain. And because they feel that a Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama ticket would be unbeatable. And also because with a Clinton and Obama ticket you are almost 100% certain to get quality, affordable universal health care very soon. But first, all of you have to make certain that Hillary Clinton takes the democratic nomination and then the Whitehouse. NOW! is the time. THIS! is the moment you have all been working, and waiting for. You can do this America. “Carpe diem” (harvest the day). I think Hillary Clinton see’s a beautiful world of plenty, and comfort for all. She is a woman, and a mother. And it’s time America. Do this for your-self, and your children’s future. You will have to work together on this and be aggressive, relentless, and creative. Americans face an even worse catastrophe ahead than the one you are living through now. You see, the medical and insurance industry mostly support the republicans with the money they ripped off from you. And they don’t want you to have quality, affordable universal health care. They want to be able to continue to rip you off, and kill you and your children by continuing to deny you life saving medical care that you have already paid for. So they can continue to make more immoral profits for them-self. Hillary Clinton has actually won by much larger margins than the vote totals showed. And lost by much smaller vote margins than the vote totals showed. Her delegate count is actually much higher than it shows. And higher than Obama’s. HILLARY CLINTON IS ALREADY THE TRUE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE! As much as 30% of Obama's primary, and caucus votes are Republicans trying to choose the weakest democratic candidate for McCain to run against. These Republicans have been gaming the caucuses where it is easier to vote cheat. This is why Obama has not been able to win the BIG! states primaries. Even with Republican vote cheating help. Hillary Clinton has been out manned, out gunned, and out spent 2 and 3 to 1. Yet Obama has only been able to manage a very tenuous, and questionable tie with Hillary Clinton. If Obama is the democratic nominee for the national election in November he will be slaughtered. Because the Republican vote cheating help will suddenly evaporate. All of this vote fraud and republican manipulation has made Obama falsely look like a much stronger candidate than he really is. YOUNG PEOPLE. DON’T BE DUPED! Think about it. You have the most to lose. The democratic party needs to fix this outrage. I suggest a Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama ticket now! Everyone needs to throw all your support to Hillary Clinton NOW! So you can end this outrage against YOU the voter, and against democracy. I think Barack Obama has a once in a life time chance to make the ultimate historic gesture for unity, and change in America by accepting Hillary Clinton’s offer as running mate. Such an act now would for ever seal Barack Obama’s place at the top of the list of Americas all time great leaders, and unifiers for all of history. But the time to act is soon. The democratic party, and the super-delegates have a decision to make. Are the democrats, and the democratic party going to choose the DEMOCRATIC party nominee to fight for the American people. Or are the republicans going to choose the DEMOCRATIC party nominee through vote fraud, and gaming the DEMOCRATIC party primaries, and caucuses. Fortunately the Clinton’s have been able to hold on against this fraudulent outrage with those repeated dramatic comebacks of Hillary Clinton’s. Only the Clinton’s are that resourceful, and strong. Hillary Clinton is your NOMINEE. They are the best I have ever seen. “This is not a game” (Hillary Clinton) Sincerely jacksmith...
First, every reporter needs to keep asking Hillary about those tax returns. My guess is that there's enough dirt in there to keep the RNC busy for years. Second, I am sick of all of these debates. They in the end prove nothing and seem to change very few minds. It's all some sort of reality show now, done to please the networks more than anyone else.
Hello jacksmith, if Republicans are trying to select Obama why is Limbaugh telling them to vote Hillary? Why have Republican votes suddenly shifted in favor of Hillary now that the Republican primaries are basically finished? Thanks so much for the magnanimous offer of a VP slot from your second-place candidate.
What flavor is your kool-aid?
Hillary Clinton has actually won by much larger margins than the vote totals showed. And lost by much smaller vote margins than the vote totals showed. Her delegate count is actually much higher than it shows. And higher than Obama’s. HILLARY CLINTON IS ALREADY THE TRUE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE! jacksmith: I believe you missed your meds today
Jack, How's the kool-aid?
jacksmith - some facts, if you please. What is the basis of your claim that Sen. Clinton has more delegates or that 30% of Sen. Obama's support comes from Republicans?
Once it was Obama who shrugged off debates. The tables have turned... http://www.political-buzz.com/
isn't it great that if Obama wins NC that in the General Election, NC will be blue, just like Wyoming, Alaska, Idaho, Georgia, Mississippi. For example in WY, in a state that has 60,000 registered Democrats and 500,000 people, and a total of 9,000 people voted in the Democratic caucuses with an Obama win (what that's like a huge 2% of the entire population), we know that he can totally carry that entire state in the General Election against McCain. That's why I love Obama - he's turning the whole country blue. He will unite us. Who really needs big states, like FL and MI? Obama can win without them, it's the small state strategy.
Trump?? Oh, because it's Katie @#$% Couric? Shoulda set that one for April 1.
"First, every reporter needs to keep asking Hillary about those tax returns. Posted by cm" Exactly. Because that is Americans main concern. Americans main concern is that obama sniff Hillary's panties. Or not. Because as a US senator for more than 7 years Hillary was required to release more information than you can get from the top sheets of a tax return. And then for 8 years before that Hillary's tax returns were released because she was First Lady. Anyway where are obama's tax returns? I have the 06 return that shows obama donated $22,500 to wright but can't find only other returns. Do you have links to obama's returns before and after 06?
isn't it great that if Obama wins NC that in the General Election, NC will be blue, On debates: I am not interested in any more, except for the diverting thought that many like Dan will be knocked unconscious by the 15 minutes of healtcare minutia, thereby enabling their children to tie their shoes together or something. However, there is something to the argument that some PA, NC etc voters weren't paying attention until after Ohio--not even reading political blogs, if we can imagine such a thing--when it turned out they had competitive primaries, too. And with more than a month before the next contests, it's not asking anyone to spend half their potential campaigning time prepping for debates. So, sure, have a couple more. Strategically, this keeps the remaining 10 contests in view, not letting Penn have his Pennsylvania=the country formulation. That alone makes it worthwhile.
oh, and regarding How Obama's going to win - WY is a total resounding victory for the Democrats. We know we will win that traditionally red state now in the GE because so many people (2% of the population) caucused for the Democrats and Obama won (by maybe a .0002% victory in the caucus)!! I don't really think we need TX, OH, PA in addition to FL and MI to win. Do you? I did the math! We don't need these states at all. Obama's strategy is to make the red states blue, and we will kick McCain's ass!
Just what is it that they're going to debate at this point?! The moderators are going to give Hillary a chance to respond to her ridiculous campaign tactics (see: http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/03/a-sociopath-on.html), Obama will rail at her about her Iraq vote, and she'll trump him on her healthcare plan, although it's ridiculous to debate healthcare to the detail that they did last time, since there's no fucking way they'll get their exact plan pushed through Congress - especially if Hillary gives Republicans a reason to show up and ruin the Democratic Senate and House seats up for grabs. Stupid. Although I guess you have to accept invitations - if you don't, it will be assumed you just can't stand the heat.
bbln - I don't think Obama is going to "re-draw" the electoral map, which you're right to point out (in your poorly-executed attempt at sarcasm). But you have to acknowledge that Hillary's "big state" argument is just as dumb. Neither of them is going to win Texas, yet she points at that. If either of them is going to make it competitive, it will be Obama, although as a Texan, I doubt that it will happen. Hillary was at first pointing to New York and New Jersey and California, saying "I take the big states, I am the winner!" as if Dems aren't going to take those. Then she realized no one was buying it, so she started squawking about the "swing states", citing Ohio and Florida (which she didn't really win), and ignoring Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, etc. Her argument is inconsistent, and that's assuming that logic carried any weight in the first place. It doesn't, as pointed out here: http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/03/in_the_general.php
he wants her to commit to north carolina so that she just won't quit after whe wins huge in PA. He wants her to compete until the convention so he can rack up a string of wins and potentially bad losses for her. If she quits after Pa, she could avoid the bad pr that comes with those bad losses cause, well she didnt comepete. That will look better than competing and losing badly.
but socctty - when I was in FL before their primary, Obama ads were playing on cable TV. I thought he wasn't supposed to campaign there. Are we to believe that Floridians just don't watch TV and read newspapers? I guess that is a possibility. But I am confident if they did a complete revote, primary revote of Florida, Obama would win big in FL. I don't understand how Clinton didn't win Ohio by 12 points, and even with the weather sucking for old people? Is it because primaries are faulty and everything should be a caucus- although I admit, in TX, the caucuses were a complete mess even as I begged older people (wearing urine bags and in wheel chairs) to stay for 6 hrs, they wouldn't. Wonder why b/c caucuses are so democratic. Regardless of states, if you look closer at Clinton's coalition, it does includes Democrats, and key swing voters - Asians, Latinos, older people, single women, women over 50, working class people and that would explain her wins in bigger states. Obama will have his work cut out to get these swing voters as his high margins in earlier primaries and caucuses, WI, MD, are going down amongst these demographics. But I'm sure that Ben Affleck and Matt Damon will help solve this.
freaktown - That doesn't make any sense. Why would he PREFER to devote time and resources to continue campaigning against her in North Carolina, if she quits after PA? And it's not exactly hard for her to back out of a debate in NC if she just up and quits. Anyway, she won't lose Pennsylvania. It will be Ohio 2.0. She'll gain 25 delegates, make a broad claim for momentum, propose again that she is the only one that can win big states, and then she'll go on to lose in North Carolina and Indiana by double-digits, losing whatever gains she made in Pennsylvania. She'll then continue to deceive her supporters by soliciting donations, even though she knows she has no chance at the nomination this year, and she'll continue on her plan to destroy Obama's chances for 2008 so that she can maneuver for election in 2012.
Jacksmith is just a troll who's posted the same nonsense post on lots of sites. If he has a legitimate point, fine, but at least mix up your argument once in a while. I think the new debates reflect the fact that the race will go on until the end now, whereas an Obama upset in either Ohio or Texas might have ended the campaign (and thus it would have been pointless to schedule one). Clinton's the one who wanted to debate in Wisconsin since she was behind and thought she could catch up, or at least gain some ground by portraying Obama as unwilling to debate. It didn't work. Oddly enough, I don't think debates really make that much difference at this stage. Clinton looked awful in her last debate in Ohio. The "kitchen sink" approach and the 3am ad swayed a lot more votes than any debate.
but truthfully - the reason Obama will win against McCain is this - so long as the media continues to do our bidding, and that it continues to cover up anything to do with Rezko, plus Obama districts in IL where tenants were freezing in run-down Rezko slum buildings, and so long as no one digs up Obama's IL senate records or his earlier tax returns before 2006, and as long as the media avoids overexposing anything to do with Reverend Wright, Farrakhan, Ayers, FARC, Auchi, GE's ploy to invest in nuclear plants that Obama voted for, and so long as the media and Olbermann completely smear the Republicans as racists, whether they are or not, Obama can win. I firmly believe that.
bbln - You're just a talking-point hack. As far as the "campaigning" in Florida bit, that's attributed to the fact that when you buy TV airtime, you generally buy it for a region. He bought ads for the Southeast and they were aired there. As far as I know, he never set foot in the state to drum up votes.
Not so long ago I was in Iowa listening to Bonnie Raitt and Jackson Browne at an event for John Edwards. Mellencamp was singing "This is my country" too back then. Things still seemed hopeful for my party in the coming election. Now I am listening to Geraldine Ferraro and Reverend Wright and, no matter how either side says that their words are "taken of context," or "express truths even though the tenor of the remarks is unfortunate," things don't look so good. We are on the verge of making the Kerry/Edwards campaign look supremely successful by comparison to what's coming if we can't put this genie back in the bottle. I hope Obama can do it, because I doubt that Hillary will.
KathyL,
(re: Obama and teleprompter) Robert- Have you ever seen Obama speak in person? When I saw him there was no teleprompter in site. No podium, no notes. Just Obama in a suit with a microphone. It wasn't his stump speech. He just talked to the audience for about 45 minutes on his thoughts and philosophies of governing. I saw Clinton in person too. At a similar setting. A fundraiser in NY. She also did not have notes. But it was more like a toned down version of her stump speech. It felt memorized, you could see her trying to think of the what was coming next. It was also completely defensive and oftentimes sarcastic in tone. The differences were striking. (The only positive was that she definitely knew what she was talking about and came off as very intelligent, which no doubt, she is.) I would also suggest you read "Dreams of My Father." If you haven't already. It may change your mind about Obama. If Obama wins the nomination, every Clinton supporter with doubts about him should read it. They will probably be surprised.
One of the funnier Clinton tailspins... "Dig up his tax returns before 2006..." Unlike Hillary, all of Senator Obama's (and Senator Durbin's as well) prior tax returns are public and have been well analyzed by the conservative Chicago Tribune. For example, Senator Obama's 2006 return was publicly compared to his 2005 return on April 16, 2007. Nice try though.
One of the funnier Clinton tailspins... "Dig up his tax returns before 2006..." Unlike Hillary, all of Senator Obama's (and Senator Durbin's as well) prior tax returns are public and have been well analyzed by the conservative Chicago Tribune. For example, Senator Obama's 2006 return was publicly compared to his 2005 return on April 16, 2007. Nice try though. And where are Hillary's 2000-2006 returns? Tax Returns you can Xerox.
Nevermind- Yes sorry. Thanks Kos. We are all on the same side.
"Unlike Hillary, all of Senator Obama's (and Senator Durbin's as well) prior tax returns are public and have been well analyzed by the conservative Chicago Tribune. For example, Senator Obama's 2006 return was publicly compared to his 2005 return on April 16, 2007. Nice try though. Posted by Eman" It's a sick joke but one you and your candidate want to play. Where exactly are obama tax returns before and after 2006? Like I typed above all I can find are the 2006 that show obama donated $22,500 to rev wright. And if you really have to sniff Hillary's panties you can get the senate releases for the last 7 years and the releases for Bill's 8 white house years that include Hillary's. Meanwhile as long as you want to play this game I await a link to obama's returns that you say are public.
Kathy L Have you heard of the electoral college? Obama has more supporters than Hillary in Alabama, Utah, Wyoming, Idaho, and other red states. However, the Republicans are projected to win in all the red states in the General Election. The "big swing-states" are more significant, and Hillary is beating Obama.
It's excellent they will debate again after all the messes of recent weeks. Obama can make her explain these on camera. Bill Clinton Went On Rush Limbaugh’s Show Day Of Texas Primary http://www.cbc.ca/news/reportsfromabroad/macdonald/20080310.html But an offhand remark by a political staffer is just a starting point so CTV brought Tom Clark, the network's bureau chief in Washington, into the picture. Clark is known to be on friendly terms with ambassador Wilson. In short order, Clark contacted Wilson, putting to him the tip from Ottawa. We know this because the embassy later confirmed the call. The actual conversation between the two men remains a private discussion, but by the time Clark went to air Wednesday night, his angle was no longer Clinton. It was Obama. An embassy official acknowledged that diplomats here in the U.S. do reach out to campaign advisers, but stressed that at no time had any adviser suggested Barack Obama was misleading voters about his true intentions. There was no mention, of course, about ambassador Michael Wilson's chat with the CTV's Tom Clark. And in any event, Hillary Clinton and Republican John McCain weren't listening. Both of them latched onto the hypocrisy angle and rode it hard. In the days to come, the problem became worse for Obama. CTV, citing sources "at the highest level of the Canadian government," changed its story, naming Goolsbee as the Obama adviser, but substituting Chicago Consul General Georges Rioux as the Canadian contact. As the questions continued, two news organizations wrote that Ian Brodie, Harper's chief of staff, had been CTV's original tipster. The stories generated a storm in the House of Commons, but what really interested the Obama campaign was how the story had so quickly morphed from a tip about Clinton to a story about Obama. I asked Sally Southey, the Canadian embassy's spokeswoman in Washington, how it could be that CTV began with a tip about Clinton's campaign, but after a conversation with Michael Wilson, wound up reporting a distorted version of an Obama adviser's remarks. That, she said, is a good question. But, she added: "All conversations the ambassador has on background with journalists are private."
Kathy you have forgotten this: Hillary vs McCain http://www.270towin.com/2008_polls/mccain_clinton/ Obama vs McCain http://www.270towin.com/2008_polls/mccain_obama/'
What if Obama loses big in Pennsylvania like he did in Ohio and N.C. becomes a Texas?
socctty - forgive me my ignorance - so when Obama ads air in Florida, you claim that this is not campaigning in Florida, even if Floridians are able to see Obama on TV? I thought that was what campaigning in a state means...so according to you, campaigning is based on which advertising package one buys - if you buy the SouthEast advertising package that happens to include advertising in Florida, then you are not campaigning in Florida. I think you are brilliant. Thank you.
socctty - Oh, and it occurred to me before I lay my head down on a pillow again how brilliant you are - that when Floridians SEE Obama on TV and they realize he bought the SouthEast advertising package, that they will immediately put out of their head all the content that they saw from the Obama ad on their TV! You are so brilliant. Everything you say is just so logical.
Like to everyone of Hillary Clinton' "extended faith family" (here words, not mine) "Through all of her years in Washington, Clinton has been an active participant in conservative Bible study and prayer circles that are part of a secretive Capitol Hill group known as the Fellowship. Her collaborations with right-wingers such as Senator Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) and former Senator Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) grow in part from that connection.” "When Clinton first came to Washington in 1993, one of her first steps was to join a Bible study group. For the next eight years, she regularly met with a Christian "cell" whose members included.... YOU CAN READ MORE ABOUT IT HERE...
The national ad that Obama used wasn't the only way he campaigned in Florida! His website was there too! Just think, all of those pages and pages of "facts" and spin all about Obama and how wonderful he is. Chock full of policy and position papers, all available to any Floridian with a computer and an internet connection. The DNC tried to set up a barrier to keep any of the candidates from campaigning in Florida and further tainting their already tainted process. But Obama doesn't play by the rules, does he? No, he snuck his message in over the cable wires and the internet tubes. Why didn't he block any internet connection in Florida from viewing his website? He should have had a special filter that kept Floridians who were visiting friends in other states from viewing it too. Heck, he should have cut the cables that tie Florida to the rest of the internet until after they voted. That was the only way to be absolutely sure he wasn't campaigning there. (Although Fark might have had a problem with that). Same thing in Michigan. Everyone knows that Obama is Swahili for undecided. There's no need to do a revote. Just give Hillary the votes she honorably won in that hard fought battle, and give Obama his votes, although next time, Michigan needs to let everyone be on the ballot with their real name, not a translation.
of course we know Obama will win the North Carolina primary!
oh, and regarding How Obama's going to win - WY is a total resounding victory for the Democrats. We know we will win that traditionally red state now in the GE because so many people (2% of the population) caucused for the Democrats and Obama won (by maybe a .0002% victory in the caucus)!! Posted by bbln | March 13, 2008 8:35 PM TX and FL forget about it those are solidly republican at this point. PA you could stick a D on the right side Mickey Mouse in the middle and most of the people in that state would put their mark on the left, this goes for MI as well. Ohio is really anybodies guess my bet is on McCain he has a much stronger anti nafta stand than either Democratic candidate. bbln Wrong states fool! If that’s the case then John McCain has already won because Florida is firmly in the Republican camp at this point. To say that the people of Florida are upset with the DNC’s ruling about their delegates is the biggest understatement of the year. Then we have the Charlie Crist factor Jeb Bush left a rather large mess when he left office Gov. Crist has done a great deal to clean up after one Bush. So has exactly the right experience to clean up after the one in the oval office as either a McCain cabinet member or running mate.
This blog is soooooooooooo Pro-Obama that it makes me wonder who it is that you are trying to convince of his "goodness". Yourselves perhaps? Also, You seem to do more research of Hillary's distant past in relation to Bill than you do of Obama's present relating to HIS own past. The You Tube of Pastor Wright has been screamed all over the net since Jan 1, but no one was listening. There are many more similiar truths about him being screamed about that you choose to overlook and it has to do with our future! You talk and spin and concoct the biggest bunch of poo about Hillary and how holy Obama is. Blah. Every truth about Obama is tagged as lies by his supporters and every lie about Hillary is tagged as truth. I'm glad I'm a repub. I'll vote Ron Paul. Carry on now. Bite on that one will ya! See ya Dems at the finish line when you lose because of your false prophet. Buh BYE!
It is my believe, that further debates to com can only expose the contenders previous campaign statements they have made in genuity or otherwise for the purpose of winning votes. The good thing about deabates will be to bring the speaker to sustantiate their information, and the geuinty and the implications on how it will affect them as a future leader which in the eyes of the listener could either glue or sway their votes to their respective favourite based on the issues at debates. This can therefore inluence the minds of a very few educated elites and campaign captains can use it to defend their believe for their candidates and to further spread this over in order to xcapture more votes. My only doubt is that none of them would want to show their real self as per throwing of Kitchen Sinks if only they do not bring the roof down, which can be too desastrous to the general democratic party success at the general election.
Has anyone really truly listened to Barak Obama. Am I the only one who does not hear anything? Am I the only one that knows you cannot live or eat on hope or change alone? Am I the only one who is struggling to make ends meet? Am I the only one whose job is on the line and about to lose our health insurance? Am I the only one who knows that the best candidate to beat John McCain in the general election is Hillary Clinton? Am I the only one who believes she can bring jobs back to the US? Am I the only one who believes she can work with both parties? Am I the only one listening to what these candidates are really saying and has offered a plan to really change America and not just talk about it? Am I the only one who wants someone in this office who knows how to work with people in Washington? Am I the only one wants someone in this office to restore American's standing in this world? The only one who can do this is Hillary Clinton.
Note to Dan Interesting how Obama supports (like the candidate himself) get so exhausted and frustrated by all this democracy stuff. Suggest you go start your own fascist regime. You won't have to bother with the rest of us. And you'll just be told what to do. Please note: Dan and other Obama bullies. I will not be returning to this site for your sarcastic, arrogant comments.
Hillary Clinton: I am not a liar, I am not a crook. A leopard never changes her spots. I go back to this telling story. It’s about Mr. Zeifman firing Hillary. As you may know, Jerry Zeifman fired Hillary for unethical practices during the Watergate Investigation. Why exactly was Hillary fired? “Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said in a recent interview. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.” Zeifman’s story is important. Not only does it go to character, it goes to a lifelong pattern of lying and obfuscation. And, it took Zeifman twelve years to get it aired. After Watergate, Zeifman could not recommend Hillary for any subsequent position of public or private trust, nor furnish her with a letter of recommendation. Again, Hillary Clinton is a bold-faced liar, who will stop at nothing to get what she wants. Should anyone doubt Mr. Zeifman's veracity regarding the Clintons: http://theseedsof9-11.com The Clintons corrupted the soul of the Democratic Party. -Henry Ruth, Watergate prosecutor.
Why should Pwennsylvania bwe fooled by Hill -Liar of AL TIMES. I am NOT surprise that Obama will win down Hillary comes April 22 2008. KEEP it up PENNSYLVANIANS, that a GREAT IDEAS of yours. It is also The TRuth that you want in WASHINGTON and NOT ANOTHER ONE MILLION LIES FROM Hill- Liars.
Barack Oboma's latest speech which everyone is commenting on seems to me to be different than all of his speeches so far.What I mean is that it neither attracts the Republican Or Democrats who are looking for and interested in improved race relations, reduced taxes or homeland security issues. All it did was to point his finger at his concern that we are gullible, that is our faith based religeons and our constitutional based rights are somehow in his opinion unimportant and not the basis of our great country.He lost my vote.
|
Search
Subscribe to this blog by Email 
Recent Posts
Monthly Archives |
Copyright © 2008 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
|
LOL, the Obama campaign has been reluctant to debate due to "technical" problems.
What "technical" problems were those, difficulties with the audio hookup between Axelrod and his candidate while he was up on the stage?
Bring in Bill Belichek, he'll get things fixed.
Posted by robert ethan | March 13, 2008 5:14 PM