ABOUT FIRST READ

First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit. First Read is updated throughout the day, so check back often.

Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director

Mark Murray, NBC Deputy Political Director

Domenico Montanaro, NBC News Political Reporter



First thoughts: 95 days and counting...

Posted: Monday, October 01, 2007 9:49 AM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under:

From NBC’s Chuck Todd and Domenico Montanaro
*** The first day of the rest…: Today is the first day of the 4th quarter of this campaign (did we EVER think we'd get to this point?). There's no more "it's early" excuses. In as few as 95 days, Iowans will get together and caucus. That's right, 95 days!?!?!? As for what to expect TODAY, we should get a clearer sense of where the campaigns stand regarding money. The Democratic race is status quo -- though the cash-on-hand totals will be of interest; Has Obama outspent Clinton to date and is that a good thing considering how Clinton has become more of an entrenched frontrunner since we last got money reports?

VIDEO: NBC's Political Director Chuck Todd offers his first read on problems conservatives have finding a candidate plus the Iowa Democratic primary.  

*** Thompson’s first quarter: It's the GOP side of things where we're going to learn a lot. This is the first Fred Thompson quarter, and it appears his money isn't great; Compared to his current rivals, his $8-10 million seems competitive. But this is Thompson's FIRST quarter and comparing this $8-10 million to the first-quarter pulls of Giuliani, Romney and McCain, it's a relatively weak showing. But Thompson's not alone in raising a somewhat disappointing amount this quarter. Giuliani's total apparently isn't going to be great (see the finance firing last week) and Romney's having to contribute more of his own money and then there's McCain, whose money total is obviously lower than expected. Poor John Edwards, he'd be in the top tier in fundraising if he were in the GOP field, but instead he's had no choice but to take matching funds. Romney's obviously not taking matching funds, but what about Giuliani, Thompson and McCain?
 
*** Frontrunners under fire: There appears to be a shift in the tone of coverage for both Clinton and Giuliani. For Clinton, one could sense this last week, particularly at the debate, when she was the one under the most fire. But that tough love continued over the weekend with lots of electability questions (check out the LAT's Rocky Mountain story and the anonymous Democrats quoted in it). As for Giuliani, the big news today, of course, is the third-party threat from Christian conservatives, most notably James Dobson. No potential candidate is floated but how Giuliani deals with this threat this week will tell us a lot about his ability to win this nomination.
 
***
Poll position: The buzz of the weekend is the Newsweek poll showing all three Dems neck-n-neck-n-neck. The Obama folks are gloating over the fact they are leading among likely caucus goers, but Clinton isn't far behind (and leads among all Iowa Dems). The candidate hurt the most in this poll is Edwards. He's third among both likely caucus goers and all Dems. Two spins we're getting from EdwardsWorld: 1) The more polls show it close in Iowa, the more a victory will give them a boost; 2) Whenever national pollsters parachute into the state, they over-poll casual caucus goers, inflating the Clinton and Obama numbers. No matter, the buzz of dropping to third place isn't coming at a good time for Edwards, just days after he conceded he couldn't keep up with Clinton and Obama financially.
 
*** All eyes on the Hawkeye State: By the way, Iowa party leaders are going to be under enormous pressure regarding whether to pick Jan. 3 or Jan. 5 for the caucuses. Candidates who are worried about losing Iowa (read: Clinton and Giuliani) prefer Jan. 5 (and a 3-day gap between Iowa and N.H.). Candidates who would like to take full advantage of the Iowa bump want Jan. 3 (read: Romney, Edwards and Obama).
 
***
Who is Mitt Romney: the early state GOP frontrunner is the Newsweek cover boy. The article is not flattering, touching on his flip-flops, questioning some of his Massachusetts successes and spends a lot of time on whether his religion will be a primary problem. The "Romney-is-stuck" storyline seems to have some legs with various observers. The shift a few weeks ago to a campaign message that's focused on change has yet to take hold but it's only been a few weeks. 
  
*** Watching Freedom's Watch: Don't overlook the news that Freedom's Watch, the group of Republicans who have put millions together to support Bush's Iraq policy this fall, plans to raise some $200 million for the 2008 election. Will this make them the Republicans' ACT? Or Progress for America on steroids? A $200 million goal is jaw-dropping, but if it's done via soft money, then it's doable. Could Freedom's Watch be the group that ends up filling the gap in the spring when the GOP nominee (if it's NOT Romney) is out of money? By the way, Freedom's Watch has ducked real scrutiny (or fact-checking) on their ads to date but the higher profile they build, the more likely the scrutiny will come. They got fairly little grief for linking Iraq and 9/11 in their first TV ads.
 
***
He won't leave: Larry Craig is still in the Senate. Just how aggressive will Senate GOPers get in trying to drive Craig out? Now that he's NOT followed through on his Sept. 30 resignation promise, it could become open season on him. Republicans are petrified of having Craig get a high profile during this battle. This is turning into a nightmare scenario for the party, which is struggling to keep its family values mantra.
 
***
On the Trail: Biden speaks to county Democrats in South Carolina and holds a press conference in Columbia; Clinton lays out her “urban agenda” at a community college in Oakland; Giuliani campaigns in Cape May, NJ and Philadelphia; Obama campaigns in Columbus, SC and Tampa; Richardson raises money in New Mexico; Romney campaigns in Missouri; Thompson makes four stops in Iowa, including a coffee, a lunch, a walking tour of Iowa Falls and a meet and greet; and Bloomberg is in London, where the New York Mayor meets with the mayor of The Big Smoke.
 
Countdown to LA GOV election: 19 days
Countdown to Election Day 2007: 36 days
Countdown to LA GOV run-off (if necessary): 47 days
Countdown to Iowa: 105 days (or is it 95 days or 97 days or...)
Countdown to SC GOP primary: 110 days
Countdown to Tsunami Tuesday: 127 days
Countdown to Election Day 2008: 400 days
Countdown to Inauguration Day 2009: 477 days

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

Z  I agree Bush sucks big time, Cheney sucks big time.
All the repukes suck big time.
Keep on posting Z..I like your zinger, makes me smile!
Everyone who KNOWS bush sucks say so NOW!
BUSH SUCKS
The early primaries/caucuses in IA and NH are a real problem for Obama. College students will not be back in time to vote. Watch the HRC campaign really latch on to this and promote the early January dates...it gives her a bigger edge. I would like to see some polling results for college students...will they vote, vote absentee...who will they vote for?

Daily Presidential Tracking Poll
Monday, October 01, 2007

In the race for the Democratic Presidential Nomination. Hillary Clinton attracts 44% support followed by Barack Obama at 22% John Edwards is at 15%. No other candidate attracts more than 2% support from Likely Democratic Primary Voters (see recent daily numbers). Clinton also enjoys a double-digit lead for the first time in South Carolina."

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/daily_presidential_tracking_poll__1

Disclaimer:
(You can read the entire entry by following the link. I am trying to balance my posts between those who complain that they are too long when they are complete, and those who complain that I am, "distorting the facts", when I leave the reader to their own devices.)

Van
Nice hit piece on the republicans......oh is this msnbc, i guess that would explain why, you don't know what it means to be fair and balanced.  Is it any wonder that your rating suck!!!
I think maybe a lot of us was for this war in the very beginning when secrets were kept and we were lied to by this bush/cheney war machine, so I don't blame Hillary.
i love hillary clinton ,, she is a true american . we need her more than ever. i am proud of hillary and all her belives. we will a great nation again when she is president . does not obama sound like a terriost. think about it
Molly, Iowa City: '.... When asked if they think the country is ready for a women President...'

Sorry, Molly, Iowa City, the question ISN'T A WOMAN PRESIDENT !!
The question is: Do we want the SCANDALS ??
Do we want the DISHONESTY ?
Do we want the DIVISIVENSSS ?

Hillary voted for WAR AGAINST IRAQ !
Hillary supported WAR AGAINT IRAQ !
Hillary just voted for WAR AGAINST IRAN !!
(see Lieberman-Kyl)

Sorry Molly, I don't want a corrupt incompetent  crook !
I don't want Republican-lite !!

TURN THE PAGE

Hillary Clinton, 15 years of dishonesty, scandals and divisiveness
Molly,

There are always people who won't vote for you.  Here in North Carolina we have registered Democrats who haven't vote for a Democratic Presidential candidate in 40 years.

Big deal.

Again the numbers are the numbers.  They are rooted in scientific polling.  

The Republican candidate will have his problems too.  Some Republicans will bolt over the war.  Some evangelicals will bolt over abortion.  

At the end of the day there are about 42% of Americans that won't vote for a Republican, and 42% that won't vote for a Democrat.  

But the numbers are still the numbers.

Poll after poll shows Clinton taking it to Giuliani red and purple states.  Thompson and Romney evern fair worse.

Get some sleep Molly.  President Hillary Clinton will reside in the White House in Jan. '09.
Susan, Miami: '...statements about the Clintons,over and over until one wants to puke....'

You don't like to be reminded, do you ?

'...And again, I say to you that Hillary and many others voted for this phoney war that Bush and Cheney cooked up. She admitted that if she had to do it all over again, she would have voted against it and it STILL would have occured with or without her vote....'

LIAR !!
She's NEVER ADMITTED SHE WAS WRONG !!

'...Sierra,perhaps you are not a democrat- and pretending to be is disengenuous to say the least. It might be nice if Mr. Sierra admitted the REAL reason he hates the Clintons so much.. or is it Hillary(woman) being in charge that brings out all your male insecurities. Your venom against her seems over the top....'

If you can't win the argument.....
Attack the messenger !!!
So transparent....
Did you read the cited Richard Gizbert ?

'... I understand why Ms. Clinton has decided not to come clean on why she voted for the war, and why she feels she can't apologize.

To disclose the former would reveal the kind of
political calculation she'd rather not be known for,
but is. And when candidates apologize, that can be
seen as a sign of "weakness."

But I would hope that some of her fans could be honest enough to say what really happened in the Iraq vote. And why they still support her, despite hating the war....'

What he's saying is that Hillary pandered and sent us to war to further her own political career.
You can't admit that, Susan.
You can't admit that Hillary is an opportunist.

Sorry, Susan, Miami,
but she DID IT AGAIN !!!
Hillary voted for WAR AGAINST IRAN !!
See Lieberman-Kyl
Try explaining that one away, honey !!

Hillary Clinton, 15 years of dishonesty, scandals and divisiveness
Well Susan:

maybe if she answered the questions instead of hiding behind her husband and stop acting like a gutless Blonde, maybe we can find out more about her.

What is in those warehouses in Little Rock that she doesn't want anybody to see until after November 2008?
Dow exceeds 14000!!  Thank you President Bush and VP Cheney for the great economy!!!
Well Susan we know that Jerry hates women, looks like he hates blonde's the most.
Dickie Flatts, Charlotte, NC "Again the numbers are the numbers.  They are rooted in scientific polling."

Actually Dickie, they aren't rooted in "scientific polling" if you are referring to the numbers that show candidate preference at a Iowa caucus. As an earlier post explained, the polling sample isn't limited to known caucus goers, which makes the polling data regarding candidate preference statistically invalid. It also explains why the margin of error with likely caucus goers is admitted to be 7%. A very high number. But the polling numbers regarding whether the democrats polled think the country is ready for a women (African American or Hispanic) President, reflect concern among Iowa Democrats that the country isn't ready.

I'll vote for Hillary if she's the nominee, and most Democrats will, but the election will be decided by non-partisan voters, and if you believe Hillary is going to be President, and can not even open your mind to the possibility, that right or wrong (mostly wrong) that Hillary is not liked by an extremely large number of people, and that elections are won with turn out, and Hillary will turn out voters for the GOP in higher numbers than any of the GOP candidates. Then I suggest again you are not living in reality. Hillary could win, I'm not saying it is impossible, and if she is the nominee I pray she defies the odds, but there is a reason the GOP wants her to be the nominee, and it isn't because they think she'll be good for business, is the most conservative Democratic choice (which are both true), it is because right or wrong they believe to the core of their being that they can beat her.
HD : Z  I agree Bush sucks big time, Cheney sucks big time. All the repukes suck big time.

And yet, they've beat the day-lights out the Democrats the last two presidental elections, and will do so again next year.

Oh,

******* DEMOCRATS SUCK ******
******* HILLARY SUCKS ******
******* EDWARDS SUCKS ******
******* OBAMA SUCKS *******

Sometimes you just have to get down to their (2nd grader) level. It's the only thing they seem to understand.

"you don't know what it means to be fair and balance"

Isn't that precious? The little neocon has learned to parrot his first words - the stinking right wing lie that FOX SPEWS is actually "fair and balanced."

"Unfair" typically means anything that casts the neocon pedophiles and war criminals in a bad light. It's so gosh darned unfair, MSNBC! Quit picking on that earth-scum and human stains, and tell us all the GOOD things the GOP is doing (for themselves).
"And yet, they've beat the day-lights out the Democrats the last two presidental elections, and will do so again next year."

Two corrupt Sec. of State and the Diebold beat the daylights out of the democrats - you stinking liars and cheaters have never had the guts for a fair fight. That's why you're all a bunch of stinking chicken hawks who laugh at right wing voter fraud.
**** News alert.... Bush still sucks. Ha...Ha !!!
Ok, all Republicans ,including George W. Bush "suck". Awaiting your stupid reply. Thank you !

I discern assorted differences of opinion on this board.

Also there is, to my olfactory sensibility, the distinct fragrance of strong feeling amongst the various posts.

God, I love the smell of democracy in the morning!
Molly they have no core in their being!
If you are a Dem than how the hell do you know what the repukes want or think.  Even they do not know!
Let Iowa go what ever the hell way it wants, get out of the WAY! Vote for Hillary when the time comes and shut up already!
Come on everyone join in, "BUSH SUCKS".Pssssss  pass it on Bush Sucks big time ! Ha ! Ha !
Elrod, Dow 14,000 is still lower after inflation than it was before Bush took office.  Home values are down substantially from a year ago with the bottom of the housing bubble expected to be months in the future.  Unemployment remains stuck where it has been for a year, with the economy continuing to barely generate enough new jobs to offset increasing population.  The poverty rate has increased every year of the Bush administration except one.  Thank you President Bush and VP Cheney for the great economy!!!
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF "IMPEACHMENT" FOR OUR COMMANDER AND CHIEF, PLEASE SPEAK UP. AND REMEMBER HE "BETRAYED" US AND HE SUCKS !
GONZO -GATE IT JUST WILL NOT GO AWAY. WHERE IS KARL AND GONZO ? OH THERE TALKING TO THE PRESIDENT THAT SUCKS.
Focus
Ah, yes.  I am reminded once again that if one wishes to enter into informed and thoughtful discussion of res publica, this would be among the first stops along the path of the democratic ideal.  Right here.

The use of language the level of discourse, the provocative and refreshing humor... all right here.

Aristotle said it best, "The republic is only as sure as its people are wise."

One gets the sense he would feel right at home here.

Or not.

Folks: sorry this is not "free speech."
It is logorrhea.  

Know, and practice, the difference.  


Otherwise, we may indeed get the government we deserve.







Gloat?  That's almost as unbiased as calling his Campaign Manager "snarky" in your other post today.  That Obama really burns your britches, eh?  Try to hold back, you'll have plenty of time to bitch and moan once he's President.
Grow up John B.  The economy is booming.  Addddmiittt it you Lefty Loser!!  Admit that you can't stand that Bush rebuilt the economy from both a recession and an attack on the US!!  Go ahead, it will make you feel better.  But, even if you don't admit it, nobody really cares what you think.
Ha ha, Bob, I couldn't agree more.  PerezHilton.com has more consistent coverage!  
As I've said before I'll probably sit out the general election if Hillary (Eva Peron - $5000 to each newborn) receives the coronation.  The Republicans love her because not only is she their best chance to hold on to the White House but even if she wins, her negative coat-tails will return the Congress to the Republicans.  Not only that but her ties to Corporate America make her the one Democrat most likely to protect Republican interests.

And as one of those who still regard the concept of the principled candidate as paramount in making my choice, I will never forgive her for exercising horrendous judgment in voting to authorize the use of force in Iraq (or was this just triangulation, a disingenuous means to position herself as a pro-military candidate for a future run for the presidency).  And then to add insult to injury, she votes against the Levin oversight amendment which put the entire decision making process of going to war, in the hands of an incompetent president (and went against the grain and intent of the Constitution).  But the coup de grace, the ultimate irony, is that after five years, after claiming that she didn't believe that this deceitful administratrion would use the war resolution to actually go to war (when 80% of Americans at that time knew that we were going to war), after refusing to admit that she made a mistake in voting for the resolution because she she claims that she did so with the information available at the time (of course she didn't read the NIE, before the vote, that cast great doubt on the presence of WMD in Iraq), she then votes for the Lieberman (Alzheimer's victim)/Kyl resolution that recognizes the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization.  Well that's like giving a bottle of Jim Beam to your alcoholic uncle (any similarities to reality are purely co-incidental) in that she risks that this president will use this resolution as de facto permission for war against Iran.  Has she not learned about the workings of the mind (or lack thereof) of this president?  Is this some kind of a joke?  Did someone write this scenario for a screenplay, a political farce about the demise of a great nation?  This can't be the valued experience to which her husband refers.  Of course not!  No, I go with good judgement.  I'll go with the candidate who predicted the idiocy of this Iraqi incursion from the start.  I'll go with the candidate who wants to distance himself from the corporate special interests.  I'm for the candidate who can inspire Americans to do more by the excitement he generates.  I'm for the consensus builder.  I'm for the truly relevent candidate.
Obama '08
  I won't presume to tell others who to vote for as I sincerely believe that we will end up with the best for everyone only if everyone truly decides for themselves, only if each voter is disciplined to objectively resist being manipulated.  I do have reservations about several in seeing personalities that make me question their focus, loyalty and ability.  I will share those now just to provoke your thinking.  
   Fred Thompson's professional and political history clearly indicates an individual well qualified to be the next 'puppet' - one who readily takes direction, follows a script, subordinates himself and takes what he can get in the process while with few convictions of his own.  Rudy Guiliani is another ideal 'puppet' seeking to please and get the backing of those who now strongly support Bush.  If you want more of the same, either could be a good choice.  Then there is Hillary Clinton who also demonstrates a sociopathic personality much like the one we have in office now but only with less likelihood of being controlled by others.  

   There are many who have supported George W. Bush because they felt convinced he shared their concerns: Republicans, conservatives, Christians, hawks, immigrants and others with individual biases that he appealed to.  It should now be obvious to everyone that, while they were encouraged to have that confidence, the results simply tell a different story.  With the sociopathic personality (without conscience, experiencing no guilt, self-indulgent, able to say/do/fake anything without hesitation, gross dishonesty,,) of the Bush administration they have consistently demonstrated a focus on a private agenda to benefit Special Interests and a select few who return financial support and active backing while the majority is given only apathy, the costs, the problems and an abundance of subterfuge.  The proof is simply evident in who always benefits, who pays and the never ending, always adjusting, deceptive rhetoric arrogantly offered to distract, disguise and excuse.  And those influential and powerful few, the ‘Special Interests and select few’ who greatly benefit from most every position the Bush administration takes, they actively provide overt and covert backing, including aggressive efforts using their substantial resources to manipulate public opinion.  
   To avoid ‘more of the same’, which I see as what America desperately needs, the American voter now needs to not allow the calculated appeal to their individual biases to once again manipulate them and instead to clearly think, to see the total picture, and decide for themselves without being led by deceptive rhetoric or by someone else.  Then hopefully we will end up with an administration, Republican or Democrat, that will fairly and responsibly represent all of us and not just another 'puppet' to do a few's bidding.
I don't see how anybody is not making money in Iowa, with all that corn being used for food and fuel....

either you have to be incurably stupid or a bad farmer.
I'am Bush and I suck !
Vote for Ron Paul.  
Mitchell and REG:

You folks remind me of the early days on First Read when most posts were well crafted and thought provoking.

When I check in on this board once or twice a day I skim the postings for one of yours (as well as a few others).  

Today was particularly depressing.  It does make one understand why we get the government we deserve.

Sadly, my experience reading solid postings like yours today is that most don't read them, or if they do they remain silent observers.  Would that more had the courage to brave these acid waters and speak their mind with clarity and humility.

It seems that insults and the word "sucks" is the graffiti that fills the void most days.

This place is a fabulous opportunity for real discourse and it happens from time to time.  It is free speech when it rings of liberty founded on reason.  All too  much of what passes for"debate" on First Read of late merely accedes to the darkness.

Thanks for using your freedom to speak in a way which, by its civility and clarity, pays respect to the right that has been given.







Reg; East Valley Phx. AZ:  Thoughtful and well written piece.  But being that we are not voting for Jesus who do you think comes closest to your ideal.  No joke, I sincerely and with all due respect want to know your opinion because what you describe is what true (non-demogogic) leadership is all about.
Mark:

Is that really democracy you smell?  It could almost be mistaken for napalm.  Or maybe that's just my brain cells firing up from the fascinating discourse I have seen in the last hour.

The sad thing is that you are right - we get the government "we" deserve.  Unfortunately, the we is not made up of informed people who care about the issues, who follow the candidates, and who try their best to make the right decision on election day.  It's more commonly made up of people who catch a sound bite here and there, or people who are voting the way their parents always voted.  I know someone in that latter group, and I don't fight her on it - she thinks she is a Democrat but everything flowing from her mouth is pure GOP.  

Ah, well.  Such is the dilemma of democracy, I suppose.  
Bush Sucks  states: "Molly they have no core in their being!If you are a Dem than how the hell do you know what the repukes want or think.  Even they do not know!Let Iowa go what ever the hell way it wants, get out of the WAY! Vote for Hillary when the time comes and shut up already!"

1. I assure you I am very much a Democrat.
2. What kind of life do you live in where all Republican's are Repukes? And a person who has friends, co-workers and in my case (God forbid) a couple in-laws who are Republicans, must not be a true Democrat. By your standard Maria Schriver isn't a true Democrat, because she feel in love with a Republican. I'm sure her Uncle Ted Kennedy would disagree.
3. I don't ask what political party a person I work with, go to church with, serve on a board with, or meet socially belongs to before I decide whether I will develop any relationship. And when I learn that someone I have developed a friendship with is a republican I don't end the friendship.
4. I have friends that actually think Rush and Hannity aren't idiots. Sometimes we argue politically, other times we just shake our heads and agree to disagree.
5. A partner of mine was a Democrat for years, and became a Republican during the Clinton administration. I don't respect his political judgment, and I'd be lying if I claimed that our friendship was as strong as it was when we shared the same politics, but I'm not going to abandon a guy who in all other respects is a great friend, because he has gone to the dark side politically.
6. You are extremely judgmental, which is actually a fairly common GOP trait, but I won't question your loyalty to the Democratic party.
7. You don't represent Hillary very well. My guess is that you can't actually provide specifics regarding why anyone should support Hillary (i.e. any legislation she had actually sponsored that became law, etc)so you need to resort to telling people to shut up.
Sara:

I find your posts well informed and quite timely.  The only issue I would bring up to you is the fact that it seems to take alot of time on your part to defend Hillary.  The old remake/re-do/clarify/muddy the issue.  

A good candidate shouldn't need that much micromanaging.  To have, as the basic tenet of your campaign, a strategy to not reveal the true nature of your candidate's thoughts, experience, or successes.  

Where are Hillary's accomplishments?  I'd like to hear about those.  

You see, I do not think your candidate is, as she claims to be, the most qualified for the position.  But, instead of highlighting any legislation which she wrote and was able to get Senate approval on, we hear all the reasons she should be elected that have nothing to do with competence or success.  She has a record.  Let's look at it.  

Until I can see a tangible result from her efforts, that isn't directly linked to Bill's record, I cannot vote for her.  

The Clintons are trying to shove their way into the White House.  This Democrat finds that unacceptable.
BIDEN/OBAMA 08
Al, KS states "The early primaries/caucuses in IA and NH are a real problem for Obama. College students will not be back in time to vote. Watch the HRC campaign really latch on to this and promote the early January dates...it gives her a bigger edge. I would like to see some polling results for college students...will they vote, vote absentee...who will they vote for?"

AL, KS you can't vote absentee at a caucus, but I assume in NH it is as easy to vote absentee as it is in Iowa during elections.  You are making a lot of assumptions regarding the source of Obama's support. He has a lot of youth support, but plenty of AARP members support as well. HRC also has a fair amount of support among college students. You are also assuming that a the bulk of Obama's college student supporters live out of the state they attend school. The majority of students enrolled in Iowa's three 4 year state Universities, and numerous community (Jr.) colleges are in-state residents. While they have a respectable number of out of state students, most students are in-state residents. Has it occurred to you that a motivated college student (any one who attends a caucus whether a college student, or post college, high school drop out, etc. has to be motivated, because caucuses are a pain in the rear)at home during semester break might not only attend the caucus in their home town in as large of numbers as they would if they were at school, but they might increase the numbers by convincing their friends, siblings and parents to go with them.

Mitchell Feldman: Sincerely I have not made a decision yet and I do strongly feel everyone should make their own.  I do have reservations which I have expressed but the real fear I have is that once again people will fail to be objective and look beyond the considerable efforts aimed to use their individual biases to manipulate them and we will then again end up with 'more of the same'.  There are some powerful, resourceful and persuasive people out there that will stop at nothing to get their way, to continue the preferred treatment they are getting.   The challenge is to see through the subterfuge, to see the total picture and not to be led by those who have their own interests at heart.  We all need to vote our conscience but without someone else telling us what that should be.  Here's hoping!
Roge Parker, I have no time to call you names.  I'm too busy trying to build a company in a transportation sector that's been in decline for over a year.  I'd be thrilled if the economy really were strong.  The facts don't support it.  Keep dreaming.
History has taught us that pre-primary polls mean little when it comes to who actually wins the nomination. We will likely be in for some surprises when votes actually start to get cast in January.
It's pathetic how the liberal sheeple are so brainwashed that President Bush is so bad and horrible, no matter what his accomplishments are. People have blogs and websites devoted to how "bad" the US economy is, yet, Bush dragged us out of a recession that began at the end of Clintons term, and that's also DESPITE the tragedy of 9-11, and the DOW has hit ALL TIME RECORD HEIGHTS over the last year. How is that so bad?
People need to wake up and look at the good job that he is doing for this country, and the fact that NO terror attack has landed on American soil since he took proper offensive. Notice also how the death toll in Iraq has declined. The war against terrorism is one to be WON, not one that we can afford to retreat against.
HILLARY Clinton is literal SUICIDE for this country. We will be back to the days of bomb shelters and air raid siren training for grade schoolers if she gets elected.
Gladly we can all look forward to President Giuliani in 2008 to straighten this country up and unite us like we need to be united.


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):

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=388329

First Read e-mail alerts


Sign up for First Read alerts
The first place for key political news and analysis

Syndicate This Site

Add First Read to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google