First thoughts

Posted: Tuesday, August 07, 2007 9:13 AM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: First Thoughts

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, and Domenico Montanaro
*** Da Dems: In the words of Brent Musberger (oh how it cringes some of us to quote him), "YOU'LL BE LOOKIN' LIVE, From Soldier Field in Chicago..." -- home of Da Bears -- where the Democratic presidential candidates participate tonight in the first non-Mike Gravel debate, er AFL-CIO forum, moderated by MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann, which airs on MSNBC beginning at 7:00 pm ET. While the last Democratic debate took place just two weeks ago, much has happened since then, including the Minnesota bridge collapse; the Clinton-Obama spat over talking with world leaders; Obama’s remarks on Pakistan and his later comment on the use of nuclear weapons there; Edwards’ challenge to his rivals not to take lobbyist money; and Clinton’s defense of lobbyists. So who will be the aggressor tonight? All signs point to Edwards being that guy, since labor is more important to his primary campaign than either of the two Dem front-runners. Will Obama be as aggressive or will he want to keep a lower profile tonight, hoping Edwards does his dirty work? Fasten your seatbelts.

VIDEO: NBC's Political Director Chuck Todd offers his first read on tonight's Democratic forum in Chicago.

*** In A League Of Her Own: Just in time for tonight’s forum, a new USA Today/Gallup poll has Clinton with a commanding lead over Obama and Edwards (48%-26%-12%). Clinton’s 22-point advantage over Obama, in fact, is nearly double her lead from three weeks ago -- before the two Democrats began trading barbs over foreign policy. Now we know why the Clinton and Obama camps traded memos yesterday over the significance of the national polls: Clinton chief strategist Mark Penn penned a missive touting her lead in those polls, while Obama campaign manager David Plouffe responded by dismissing them, pointing instead to Obama's relative strength in Iowa and New Hampshire. Speaking of Penn, could he come up as a subject at the AFL forum? Today’s Los Angeles Times quotes leading labor officials who aren’t too pleased that the PR firm he heads has represented anti-union companies. Of course, Clinton's more difficult defense tonight may not be Penn, but rather her husband's record on trade. Remember, of all the Democratic interest groups, the one group where Bill Clinton isn't necessarily an asset is labor.

*** Is Obama In Trouble? Whatever any of us thought about whether he was getting comfortable going toe-to-toe with Clinton, there's plenty of evidence that Clinton is the candidate with momentum, at least nationally. Look for Clinton supporters to argue that the dust-up on foreign affairs has hurt Obama nationally, particularly in the area of electability. Also, don't miss the Quad Cities coverage of Obama today -- it indicates he's still being put on the defensive regarding his Pakistan-terrorism speech, at least with Iowans. By the way, why did the Obama campaign allow the perception to linger that he was somehow sending troops into Pakistan? It isn't what he said, but it is the perception and the Quad Cities paper notes it. Contrast how slowly the campaign has put this "he'll invade Pakistan" storyline away with how quickly they beat back the "Obama's a Muslim" chatter. Put it this way: Obama's had better press days, and today's not one of them. By the way, why does the chattering class give Romney more of a pass for his poor national poll numbers than Obama or Edwards? That USA Today/Gallup survey has him in fourth at 8%, behind Giuliani at 33%, Fred Thompson at 21%, and McCain at 16%.

*** Wearing the Union Label: No interest group worked harder to elect a Democrat in the last two presidential elections than organized labor, even if it eventually came up short in these contests. And perhaps no interest group has more to gain from placing a Democrat in the White House in January 2009 -- especially after the Bush Administration’s appointments to the National Labor Relations Board and stringent reporting requirements Yet it’s unclear how big labor’s role will be in the Democratic primaries. Back in 2003-4, Gephardt and Dean won most of the big union endorsements, and we know how those campaigns fared. It’s unlikely the AFL-CIO will end up endorsing a candidate (which requires support from two-thirds of affiliated unions), meaning that the individual unions will be free to make their own endorsements.

*** On The Trail: Before the AFL forum, Clinton delivers a policy address on home ownership from Derry, NH; Obama holds a rally at Soldier Field; and Richardson, in Iowa, becomes the latest Democratic candidate to unveil his health-care plan. Also, with just a few days until the Ames straw poll, Giuliani, Huckabee, and Hunter are all in Iowa. And McCain is in Michigan. By the way, what will be the tailgating beverage of choice tonight at Soldier Field: Old Style or Pabst?

*** And It’s Super Tuesday! For more on these events -- and especially tonight’s forum -- tune into another installment of MSNBC’s all-day Super Tuesday political coverage. Also, Dodd appears on MSNBC’s Hardball’s preview of the forum beginning at 5:00 pm ET.

Countdown to the Ames Straw Poll: 4 days
Countdown to MA-05 Special Election: 27 days
Countdown to LA GOV election: 74 days
Countdown to Election Day 2007: 91 days
Countdown to LA GOV run-off (if necessary): 102 days
Countdown to Iowa: 159 days
Countdown to Tsunami Tuesday: 181 days
Countdown to Election Day 2008: 455 days
Countdown to Inauguration Day 2009: 532 days

EMAIL THIS

Comments

President Hillory.

jus sayin (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 9:23 AM)

What, no Gravel????? he is the only honest democrat running for president! If the AFL-CIO endorses Clinton, then they will be 0-3 in the last three elections. But it is hard for Hillary to get their vote when she has such anti-union people working for her. Way to go Hillary, nice job on that one. Just send Hillary into the general election now, so she can slow roasted by Rudy or Mitt or Fred and we can keep the white house in GOP land for another four years.

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 9:28 AM)

I see Bush has been meeting with Karzai. Iran is helping Afhganistan with food etc. in some of the villages. bush doesn't know if that is a good idea or not. Karzai thinks so. Bush says he will find bin Laden when we have "actionable inteligence".Well 6 years and a lot of dropped bombs surely haven't done it. See, gotta have intelligence on the ground to act.I am waiting Mr. President.

Desmond (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 9:31 AM)

Good morning America ! Bush continues to "suck" big time and Gonzo-Gate still isn't frighin going away.It's now been over 6 1/2 years that we been govern by the Bush administration dictatorship. A sence of goverment ,that the "majority" of the govern's opinions means nothing to them. As long as the good "old" Republican "money" party is in power.Forget the "middle" class out there every day ,just trying to survive in a fake economy, with a dollar not worth much of anything. A country still in the "middle" of a "cival" war for over 5 years and no political solution even in sight. An our country spending over $200,000.00 a "minute" in Iraq, while the infrastructure of the U.S. is falling apart.The American people have had enough, if the Republicans can not put some sence in the mind of this President, the American people will speek loudly come election time in November 2007 and the Republican party will be over.Thanks for listing and have a nice day.

Z (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 9:35 AM)

Just a reminder Gonzo-Gate is not going to fade away.

Z (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 9:37 AM)

I am so glad that Hillary is maintaining her lead; she will make an awesome president.

Aidyn, NY, NY (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 9:40 AM)

why do you think hillary has the mo? because the press has made sure it was so. The swiftboating of both Edwards and Obama this season has been awful. First you guys tried to destroy Edwards campaign by harping on his damn hair. Now you guys are trying to make Obama look green and foolish.
has anyone who pundits or reports on his speech bothered to even listen to it. no.
Because if anyone had they would know that the way it was misrepresented by the press was disgraceful.
It was an amazing speech full of diplomacy and working with other countries. But, in order to keep your daily Hillary cheerleading you guys in the press simply disregarded what he really said and decided to make him look bad.
I don't know why you guys insist on interfering in our primary and think you have the right to decide the storyline and who will be our nominee.
Just like tonight. I can already tell you what the after debate spin will be because you guys have already decided it.

diane (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 9:42 AM)

God help us, Hilarity is the big leader in the polls, which means !.) her machine will get ther the nomination, 2.) the Republican Propoganda/Lie/Smear Machine will gleefully swiftboat and smear her into nothingness, and 3.) we will have another damn republican for president. How sad that the Dems do this losing strategy over and over, election cycle after election cycle, loss after loss.

Class Warrior, D.C. (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 9:44 AM)

Poor Jerry ..he continues to live in GOP fantasy land ... the more you and your fellow conservative morons bash the dems, the more money Hillary Clinton and her fellow candidates raise ... Just think ...Hillary as President and Nancy as Speaker of the House ... now THAT would make Jerry's day :)

Ricardo in California (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 9:51 AM)

IT'S PRESIDENT HILLARY CLINTON, THE FIRST WOMEN PRESIDENT IN THIS GREAT "UNITED" STATES. FOR MORE INFO JUST GO TO..hillaryclinton.com

Jack F. Hunter, Key Biscayne, Fl. (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 9:51 AM)

It is interesting how Mark Penn did not like the USA/Gallup poll in June when it did not read well for his candidate... usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2007-06-04-poll_N.htm

will gibbs (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 10:05 AM)

MSM know that it will not be very interesting in the general if anyone but Mrs Clinton is the nominee and hence their hard work to see that happen. All the dirty laundry of the 90's will be good for primetime cable news.

Republicans want nothing more than Mrs. Clinton, which is why they all went out against Barack. It sounded to me that a memo was circulated before the debate began that they should all attack the candidate that they don't want in the general election.

I am sure Americans are smarter than MSM, spin doctors, negative ad. pros.

UniversalLove (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 10:09 AM)

hillary in front of a union crowd, yikes, she best wear a flack jacket, probably will be florescent pink, hopefully they will boo her off the stage, she's never done anything for the wage earner, and doesn't intend to, she needs to go hob knob with the wealthy elite somewhere, they are the only people she can relate to

MK,MO (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 10:11 AM)

"Z"'s 9.35am post just about says it all. Rudy, Mitt, or Fred will not have a chance in hell of winning a general election, when their policies are 100% in line with the current occupant of the White House, with whom about 75% of the American public disagree with on just about everything. These guys and the other wannabee Bush's are a waste of time. Not putting any daylight between possibly the worst American President in modern times, and possibly one of the most unpopular Presidents in modern times and possibly one of the most corrupt Presidential administrations in modern times, will not win any general elections. As the Iraq debacle worsens, the scandals pile up by the day, the erosion of the Constitution continues, the GOP suffers. Certainly those respected members of the GOP, harshly criticizing Attorney General Gonzales, know the damage he is inflicting on their party, and how this will work toward tanking them in November 2008. Fortunately, for us Democrats, the Bush White House has not figured it out, or just don't care anymore.

Coy Reese, Shady Spring, West Virginia (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 10:12 AM)

jerry,...you're full of crap as usual.
Gravel was a "drag" on the Democratic debates thus far. It's obvious that jerry and other republiCANTS like him because of the divisevness he brings to the table. I'm glad to see he won't participate in this particular forum. Perhaps we'll see some substantive discussion in place of Gravel's Circus-clown-like antics.
It's pretty clear at this point that Hillary is the candidate to beat, and the nomination is hers to win or lose. Obama's inexperience has shown through these last couple of weeks.
He's a good man. But, he needs a little more "seasoning."
Still, I remember 2003 when Howard Dean was hailed by the media as the people's choice...and he wound up not winning a single state primary before dropping out of the race.
Nobody has been affected more negatively by Bush's economic policies than labor unions who's membership has sustained layoffs in the auto and air-transportation industries, and who's retirement benefits have been substantially cut down by bankruptcies and government pension plan "buy-outs." The AFL-CIO, and The Teamsters may not endorse a national candidate...But their membership certainly knows which side of the bread is buttered. Look for middle-class working families to go for the Democratic candidate in a big way next year. They, along with the anti-war crowd, COULD BE one of two voting blocks which decide the election in '08,' much the same as evangelicals and "seniors" did back in 2004.
Oh....and finally, I've always been a Pabst man myself. Good drinkinig beer for a barbecue. (But, it has to be iced down very well!)

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 10:23 AM)

I think you may right, Jack F. Hunter of Key Biscayne, Fl.....I think you just might be right indeed!

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 10:26 AM)

jerry, just 4 more years of GOP in charge? Why set your sights so low; why not a 1000 year reign?

nuanced (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 10:40 AM)

Obama doesn't have a chance. Never did, never will.

John Edwards, even if he wasn't such a raging hypocrite, didn't have a chance.

Hillary has been the anointed one for years now.

DFAL (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 10:44 AM)

Is anyone getting to be as tired as I am getting to be with this year(s)of endless campaigning? Over a year to the general election and I am already sick of it. I am a political junkie - what does that tell you about the general populace?

I'd really like to find the genius(es) responsible for moving the primaries earlier in the cycle and slap him/her/them around.

sigh.

ps - bloggers: yesterday was really a fabulous day on this blog. Please revisit those threads that have fallen off the front page. Some conversations were so enlightening that I bookmarked them so I can have some of the info as reference points in my writing. Thanks to those of you who taught me alot.

Independent, Texas (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 10:46 AM)

I just have to throw in, as someone who edits for a living - "it cringes us?" You guys need an editor.

Butch, Pine, Colorado (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 10:50 AM)

Pressure will be on Obama tonight to step up after his big FP speech last week and the various attacks that followed. He should be grateful that Edwards is actually on his side in the attack-Pakistan issue. Otherwise, he'd get shredded.

http://political-buzz.com/

mpp, williston, fl (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 10:52 AM)

My first thought is Bush is not doing a very good job.

Sidney, Pa (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 10:56 AM)

Don’t the DEMS ever learn their lesson!! Now they are going to try and nominate another divisive candidate like Hillary and complain when they lose in 08 as if they never saw it coming. The GOP is salivating at a chance to run against her because of all the baggage she carriers. People wake the hell up!! She cannot and will not win a general election. Obama or Edwards are the best chance to win in 08. I cringe ever time I hear people say she can win. She is not Bill and she never will be. She has a cold demeanor and no charisma. I ‘m not saying this to be rude but if the DEMS are dumb enough to nominate her then we will have another 8 years of hell. Think about it!!

FL (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 10:58 AM)

Independent - Don't blame Iowa! Our caucus has been the first in the nation since 1972. But I agree, it is getting to be a bit much now, with there being so many on the same day so early in the cycle. Everyone wants their state to influence who is nominated, which I suppose is only natural. I don't think I mind the primary/caucus season starting in January so much as I mind that the campaigning started more than a year before that. It's exhausting. But, on the positive side, look at how many debates they have been able to have on both sides. I guess there are positives and negatives to such along election cycle. We get to know the candidates better, but then we also get sick of them (or more accurately, the process) well in advance of the election.

Carrie, Eastern Iowa (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 11:00 AM)

clinton nor obama can win the general election, why else do you think the media is pushing them, edwards always has been and still is the only dem that can win the general election, enjoy yourself looking at the corporate created poll numbers each day, they are good for a hearty laugh, but use your brain when you vote or put up with rudy in the white-house

MK,MO (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 11:03 AM)

Don't get me wrong, but nothing will be more fun than Wednesday, NOV 4, 2008 when the DEMs take back the WH & seeing Jerry cry in his cheap Texas beer. But having said that, am I like a lot of DEMs who kind of feel empty and hoped we would have a more stellar candidate than Hillary? I will vote for her, as I am sure many DEMs will too, but I was hoping Senator Obama would catch on and become the nominee. At least Sierra, JAck F and I support him.

Steve, San Diego (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 11:04 AM)

To be honest, I really don't see this vast MSM conspiracy to get Hillary nominated. I see plenty of negative stuff about her, just as I do the other candidates. I see more people jumping up and down, screaming about how unfair the MSM is to their candidate than I see negative coverage of other candidates. I support Hillary, but I am not married to her - if someone else impresses me more, I will vote for them - so I don't think I am terribly biased either way. I just don't get all the whining about how Hillary is being covered. But did you ever stop to think that maybe the reason there is not a lot of negatives written about her is that she is very careful to not give the press an opening to attack her? When she does muck it up, she is called on it just as the others are. She just makes mistakes less frequently on the campaign trail.

And P.S. - remember all the hoopla surrounding a certain other man's haircut on Air Force One? He was named Clinton, wasn't he?

Carrie, Eastern Iowa (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 11:07 AM)

If her name was Hillary Smith she would not be the media front runner, she is admittingly running on her husbands accomplishmemts as described in an article yesterday, which if this was any other female candidate it would be caise for exclusion as she has none of her own.

She is not the most electable Democrat, she is the paris hilton of politics, all splash and no substance. She is not the smartest thing since sliced bread. Failed the bar the first time and will go down to a big defeat in Nov 08 as the nominee and then will leave the stage to run some Non profit org.

Real men Jack would never vote for her, she is a bad ex-wife type and when they are in the booth they will vote for anybody but her. I see more third party people or others on the ballot getting votes as Dem men may not vote for the rep, but will vote for anybody other than Hillary.

Working class families need to look at teir 401 ks and how much more they have in the last 6 years to see that Bush has been good for them in a real sense not a media hyper emotional sense.

All the political headlines of Plame and Gonzo and murtha and anything else is not as important as lower taxes and low inflation. That is where your money goes. If you want to freely give it to the government then go right ahead. They will always take overpayments, but I bet none of you will do that.

Alan in Phx (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 11:14 AM)

At some point, when everyone gets tired of the same old policies and rhetoric put forth by the front-runners, Joe Biden, with his remarkably thought out plans and vast experience will win the nomination.

Scott, PA (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 11:14 AM)

DFAL / calling edwards a raging hypocrite is a good example of the medias ability to completely obscure the truth, edwards is the only person running that came from a working class family and actually earned what he has, name a candidate other than edwards that has actually had to work they're way into wealth, there ain't any, edwards is the only candidate pummeled for spending money on personal hygiene yet every candidate spends as much or more on exactly the same thing, people are all to easily deceived, the wealthy elite know this all to well, blindly follow the herd to the slaughter house if you want, I will be voting for someone who can win the general election that has the best interests of this country at heart, and that sure as hell ain't hillary

MK,MO (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 11:17 AM)

While Clinton may not be my first choice for a Dem in 2008, there is no way that any GOP candidate can be as a Clinton in political "saviness". If one were to judge the outcomes in 2000 and 2004 on who won the debates, we'd have had Dems in office now. Bush was not and is not a debator.

Clinton, Obama and Edwards are all great at debates. They are all good at speaking and can speak in a candid fashion. It is an unusual position the Dems find themselves in, as they are the favorites to win in 2008. The GOP seems bent on sticking with Bush on so many issues that they will probably not be able to recover and win in 2008. The Dems have their own issues to deal with and it is in their bickering amongst themselves when they should be focusing on their rivals, the Bush Administration and the GOP candidates.

Hillary will most likely win, but we'll have to wait and see. She will need to adopt the policies of the other two front runners and be genuine. She will also need to be less cold in public and be honest in her speeches. The past will not haunt her if she addresses it in a bold and honest fashion. The Clinton's seem to thrive on adversity as they are excellent in the political arena and can generate tremendous support. Hillary should not forget nor ignore those who back Edwards or Obama. They are the backbone of the Democratic Party. She will need to act on her convictions and promises, otherwise we'll see someone else in office in 2012.

Nick, Ohio (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 11:17 AM)

Scott, PA - How about Biden/Clark in '08. The only two guys speaking the truth and making sense on the tellie today.

mad in Madtown (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 11:24 AM)

Merle, must be proud to have a carpetbagger like Hillary as your Senator huh? What's the matter, no native New Yorker up to snuff? Hillary has done not a thing for the people of New York (her record is living proof)and she will do anything for the people of America.

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 11:27 AM)

Alan in Phx/ "Working class families need to look at their 401 ks and how much more they have in the last 6 years to see that Bush has been good for them in a real sense not a media hyper emotional sense."
Alan what are the people that had to quit contributing to they're 401K because that money had to be spent on increased health insurance, food, fuel and other ever increasing costs supposed to look at, that's if you even have a 401K, do you think everyone does? they don't. most haven't seen a wage increase either, your statement has nothing to do with the working class which is taking a severe beating, your talking about the investmate class, get out and take a look at the real u.s. economy one time al, it sucks

MK,MO (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 11:32 AM)

Bill could only get 85 people at an event in N. florida yesterday. WOW that is overwhelming. at 2300 for a plate of rubber chicken and a chance to meet the Dem savior, Bill only 85 would pony up, was not even worth his time.

There is only so much money out there for candidates and because they hit the well sooner than before ir will run shorter and shorter. Average Americans just do not give that much to a candidate without expecting something in return. All the hype over the dems out raising the reps so far just means their voters parted with their money sooner, but in the end it will be even and once the Rep settle on a candidate the real money will flow towards them. Hillary has tapped out her sources and she is going to have to work hard to get money out of people tha already gave to any of the other dems.

Alan in phx (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 11:41 AM)

MK,MO..I could not have said that better! The statement made by Alan that bush has been good for them in a real sense, could not be further from the truth.

Ollie frenchburg ky (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 11:42 AM)

I can't believe you would ask what kind of beer they're drinking in Chicago--Old Style by a land slide. Pabst isn't even on the charts

Steve Old Chicagoan (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 11:45 AM)

MK,MO "..name a candidate other than edwards that has actually had to work they're way into wealth, there ain't any.."
What short-sighted exercise do you use to disqualify Joe Biden from working his way up from a working class family? His college education policies were put in place precisely because of his upbringing.

Scott H. PA (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 11:47 AM)

Surprise a lot of young men are voting for Hillary---when I ask why they say "because she is tough"They admire tough women.Also the men in my family have said they would vote for her if she wins the nomination.We will vote for any Democrat at this point as they are all more desirable than the republicans,except for Ron Paul.

HMT-MI (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 11:56 AM)

MK if you think it sucks now wait until your taxes go through the roof to pay for everything for everybody. cradel to grave government nanny.

The working class is the invester calls. If you have any real job or government job they all offer some sort of retirement plan, most offer matches to your investment and all are doing well. Even if you are na hourly employee there are programs for you. I know plenty of sub 40k workers and they are doing better than ever.

The ecconomy is the best it has ever been for all of us. The current food prices rises have more to do with corn going to ethanol than cattle so beef, dairy and food stuffs go up. Food for fuel is always a bad policy.

Home ownership is the highest it has ever been, and do not comment about the current fore closures as that is more about the flippers of the world getting caught than real people who bought to live in, that it why it is not huting the economy it is a correction to the insanity of a couple years ago.

Low taxes and low inflation helps everybody there is no debating that.

Alan in Phx (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 12:09 PM)

fl, you are ABSOLUTELY CORRECT!! You win the Hilarity Loses The White House For The Dems kewpie doll, complete with lceavage!
\Scott in PA, yeah, Biden's the right guy for the job, and, Mad, your ticket is PERFECT!! At least for a party that is smart and really wants to win in '08. Unfortunately, the Democrats don't seem to be that party. They'rd rather stay with Same Old Sh** Hilarity and her machine/lobbyists are okey-dokey with me brand of politics that got us into the mess we're in in the firrst place. (And the media's her little lapdog, so she has a lock on the nomination.) The Repubs'll swiftboat her down the river of oblivion and smear her like jam on bread. She's a gauranteed loser, unlike Biden. But, alas, the Dems have Hilarity Blinders on this cycle...

Class Warrior, D.C. (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 12:10 PM)

I think we will see President John Edwards in 08. Edwards is the stealth candidate, he drives the agenda, he's tenacious and like his wife says, he's incredibly hard working (talk about a change from lazy boy Bush.) The more people see Edwards the more they like him. I look forward to tonight's forum.

Amy B Portland, ME (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 12:18 PM)

Ollie, I bet you have made more and spent more and saved more if your a saver in the last 6 years than you did in the 8 before. You should have. Your tax rate is less and your deductions higher. Your house has gone up in value and as long as you did not spend all tha equity you ar richer than before. You have done better and if not than it is not the fault of the economy.

Alan in Phx (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 12:26 PM)

Pabst??? Must be a yankee beer. I was Lone Star forever. Still drink it when I can find it.

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 12:30 PM)

Check it out very interesting proposal on Hillary's web site. hillaryclinton.com

Robert Lewis, Mobil,Al. (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 12:31 PM)

Chuck's link goes to Kucinich video.
That was a mean trick...

RM (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 12:35 PM)

Once again, MSNBC is reading form the Clinton campaign talking points. Most political analysts agree that the national polling data is unreliable and not a reliable predictor of who the nominee will be. Yet, the media insists on shoving this garbage down our throats. Looks like they haven't learned their lesson from the Iraq intelligence data that they peddled around.
It's astonishing to me that no one from the media has called out HRC for shamelessly running on her husband's record. She is taking full credit for the successes in the Clinton/Gore administration. She is touting her 35 years of "experience" and no media outlet is questioning this.

Ashe, SF, CA (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 12:36 PM)

Alan - Hillary is a bad ex-wife type? Number one, what does that even mean? Number two, what does that have to do with her ability to be president?

And by the way...the fact that she failed the bar exam her first time is no biggie. JFK Jr. failed it how many times? One of my closest friends failed it, and she is brilliant. Another woman taking it at the same I did failed it because, of all things, she got the flu and couldn't finish the questions for all the running back and forth to the bathroom she was doing. I myself was very sick during the bar exam, and barely passed it. How well you do on the bar exam is not necessarily indicative of how intelligent you are.

Carrie, Eastern Iowa (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 12:37 PM)

"We will vote for any Democrat at this point as they are all more desirable than the republicans,except for Ron Paul."

That's the problem, voting for any democrat, just because they are a democrat. Or any republican for that matter. Voting party lines instead of idividual merit just doesn't work. I know, I screwed the pooch with GW that way.

John Doe (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 12:41 PM)

"By the way, why did the Obama campaign allow the perception to linger that he was somehow sending troops into Pakistan? It isn't what he said, but it is the perception and the Quad Cities paper notes it." Excellent question and an equally worthy question is why the did the media, including MSNBC, distort what he said?

But to answer the original question? Obama's Communications team is grossly overpaid and inexplicably incompetent!

Dee of VA (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 12:46 PM)

Next >>

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=306546