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: Fight night in Vegas

Posted: Thursday, November 15, 2007 9:20 AM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under:

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, and Domenico Montanaro
LAS VEGAS, NV -- Thanks to Drudge, last month's debate in Philly, and Clinton's new position on drivers' licenses for illegal immigrants, tonight's Democratic showdown here at the University of Nevada-Las Vegas could be pretty interesting. Will Drudge's report of a Clinton camp warning to moderator Wolf Blitzer not to "pull a Russert" influence the debate? (Blitzer and CNN deny hearing from the campaign.) Will Clinton go on the offensive after playing defense at last month's debate? Did the New York senator -- by issuing a statement yesterday saying that, as president, she wouldn't support giving drivers' licenses to illegal immigrants -- open herself up to further charges that she evades tough questions? And given the UNLV venue, will Jerry Tarkanian or Larry Johnson be in attendance? Actually, that famous UNLV team could be a good metaphor. They seemed unbeatable until they met a more cerebral, though less talented, opponent. UNLV lost their undefeated season and the championship because they couldn't handle the pressure of a rare close game. Can Clinton handle the pressure now that she doesn't seem so inevitable?

*** Vegas, baby, Vegas: Seven Democratic candidates -- Biden, Clinton, Dodd, Edwards, Kucinich, Obama, and Richardson -- will appear on stage together here in Las Vegas. The two-hour debate airs on CNN beginning at 8:00 pm ET, and it's divided into two parts. The first hour is moderated by Blitzer, with additional questions from Campbell Brown and John Roberts. The second hour will consist of undecided registered voters asking the

candidates questions, with help from Suzanne Malveaux. (By the way, who will be the first candidate to make a "planted question" crack once we get to this part of the debate?)

*** A lot of ground to cover: It's been just a little more than two weeks since the last

debate. But that, of course, is an eternity in this presidential cycle. Among the events and issues since that night in Philly: the "politics of piling on" versus the "politics of parsing"; Plant-gate; Obama's speech at the J-J dinner and his performance on Meet the Press hours later (which was the basis of McGovern's criticism); Edwards refusing to say he would endorse Clinton if she wins the nomination; Dodd's shot at Edwards' seeming anger, as well as his criticism of Bill Clinton for lumping reviews of Hillary's past debate performance with the Swift Boat ads; and Biden's phone conversation with Musharaff. That's all in just in two weeks.

*** She said what? And the latest twist and turn in the Dem field, as we mentioned above, is Clinton's new position on the issue that became the climax of the last debate. On the very day that Eliot Spitzer announced that he was abandoning his plan to give illegal immigrants drivers' licenses, Clinton -- who had stated, for the most part, that she generally supported Spitzer's plan -- said yesterday in a statement: "As President, I will not support drivers' licenses for undocumented people and will press for comprehensive immigration reform that deals with all of the issues around illegal immigration." Come again? If that's the case, why didn't she say that when she was originally asked the question? Of course, as is the Clinton way, they have embraced her new position and even begun attacking Edwards for now being the only one of the Big Three not to have taken a definitive position on this. Actually, the Edwards indecision is surprising. Most rank-and-file labor folk are probably against the idea of driver's licenses for illegal immigrants. Actually, so is a large majority of the country.

VIDEO: NBC's Political Director Chuck Todd discusses Senator Clinton's recent decision to not support giving illegal immigrants driver's licenses, and why it may be damaging to her campaign.

*** Enter the Silver State: Tonight's debate also has inspired today's papers to look at the state's relevance on the primary calendar. The up side is that Nevada will be the only game in town between New Hampshire and South Carolina, and the pols here are very excited about their January 19 contests. But how level is the playing field? The state's politics is dominated by various power centers, much more so than other states and the early decision by Harry Reid's son to back Clinton spooked a lot of the other campaigns.

*** Mass. action: Today's date not only marks tonight's Democratic debate. It also marks the deadline that Massachusetts residents have to sign up for health insurance or face possible penalties -- the requirement that Romney signed into law when he was governor. And to mark the day, the Thompson camp today sends out this email: "Mitt Romney says his government-mandated health care plan is one of his most important accomplishments as governor. But what does his plan really accomplish, and is this the kind of health care plan YOU would want to be forced to pay for?" The email ends up hitting Romney's plan for allowing cheap abortions and then Thompson touts his own pro-life credentials.

*** On the trail: Before tonight's debate, Biden holds an event at his Las Vegas HQ. And afterwards, all the Democratic candidates attend the Clark County Democratic Party's Jefferson Jackson dinner. Elsewhere, Giuliani stumps in Florida; Huckabee is in Washington State, where he tours Microsoft; McCain hits fundraisers in California and Colorado; Romney also raises money in California, as well as hosting an "Ask Mitt Anything" town hall in Burbank, CA; Tancredo campaigns in New Hampshire; and Thompson holds a media avail in New York City. 

Countdown to Iowa: 49 days
Countdown to New Hampshire: 54 days
Countdown to Michigan: 61 days
Countdown to Nevada and SC GOP primary: 65 days
Countdown to SC Dem primary: 72 days
Countdown to Florida: 75 days
Countdown to Tsunami Tuesday: 82 days
Countdown to Election Day 2008: 355 days
Countdown to Inauguration Day 2009: 432 days

Click here to sign up for First Read emails.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments


Judgment is better than experience with world affairs.  You can have all of the experience in the world, and still make incorrect decisions.  I think Hillary Clinton is the perfect example of that.  When she voted in favor of the Iraq war, she had, using her own numbers, somewhere around "30" years of experience.  Her judgment was flawed, and she allowed herself to be douped by Bush, and by her lacking ability to JUDGE the data the US had.   Barack Obama, on the other hand, got it 100% correct.  In a speech in October of 2002, he said:
"I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.

I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars."

She has "more experience" playing dirty politics.  She has more experience being bought by health care lobbyists. She has more experience planting questions to try and make herself look better.  She has more experience not taking a stand on issues.  She has more experience not answering hard questions.

Barack Obama's judgment is uncompromised.  Uncompromised judgment beats BAD experience any time.  Everyone remember what Bill Clinton said back in 1992?  The demi-god of democrats himself... Back when people were saying HE didn't have EXPERIENCE?
"The same old experience is not relevant: You can have the right kind of experience and the wrong kind of experience," -- Bill Clinton.
If the clintons are REFUSING to release papers now, can you imagine how it will be when Hillary is Impeached LMAO
Condi Rice, both a black and a woman, wouldn't think about complaining over 'tough questions,' or having to give 'real answers.' She has my vote.

EXACTLY why this boy made America's only politically CONSERVATIVEW music CD--11 tracks of conservative facts. Just in time for Christmas (for you 'progressives,' that would be the 'winter holiday') Listen @

www.conservativemusiconline.com
owa is crazy to poll, but every poll this month has Hillary on top. I like the order of finish in this poll, and will be happy to see similar numbers on Jan 3rd.

Van,

Fortunately you won't be happy on the 3rd. Iowans aren't stupid!
Sierra-

Love your enthusiasm.  I'm with you.  No matter who you support, we deserve clear answers on the issues so we the people can choose who we want.  I actually like Hill and might vote for her (if Obama or Biden isn't the Dem nom and Mccain and Huckabee aren't choices on the R side).  But I feel Hill has tried to be a Manchurian candidate.  What do you stand for, what do you believe, and let us decide.  Don't try to fool us.  I know it's what pols do, but it's time out for that crap.  That's why I appreciate Edwards, Obama, and esp. Mccain's candor (despite his unfortunate initial MLK holiday vote and initial wishy washy confed flag stand.)  Sometimes decent people don't want for the country what the country wants for itself.  Don't be so married to being a pol that you try to fool us into voting for you.  BTW, I'm an independent who's voted for each party (and Nader).

If you're a smart person you know a Clinton will drop a bomb or send in a strike just about as quick as any Repub.  Dems- Is that what you guys want? Esp. young, far-left Dems. Is he the liberal idealist I get the sense you guys long for.  Ms. Fairly Conventional Wisdom?  The Dems have to decide between starting the old vet or the young draft picks.  All this, and Biden's probably your choice in another era.  I hope he makes some noise in Iowa.

one more thing-  surprised Obama hasn't caught more flak for admitting on Meet the Press that he wasn't anti-war at the '04 basically because that wasn't the time or place, he was on the docket to speak and he didn't want to criticize the nominees of his party (that is, i'm going to run one day and I can't p- off the leadership.)  I understand it politically, but I wonder how that washes w/ the avg. Dem.

Tonight it is on!  I'm excited.  Expect Hill to have some stuff to throw at Obama this time.  Expect Edwards, the most articulate Clinton critic, to have his ducks in a row, and expect Obama to take a slightly less circuitous route to criticizing Clinton leaving Edwards to do the dirtiest work (again.)  There almost seems to be some understanding between Obama and Edwards about this whole thing...maybe because they're not very distinguishable on several issues.
When it comes to which candidate delivered a punch in the last debate; I sincerely believe that Mr. Edwards was the one who was willing to take on Mrs. Clinton. Hover, it has been twisted in such a way that it is  as if Obama was the one who was the aggressor. Kind of funny, isn't it?
Let's hope that the Clinton successfully strong-arm the CNN-moderators in preparation for tonight's debate. Republicans are rooting for Hillary, and not Edwards or Richardson, to win the Democratic nod. The general population hates her duplicity and arrogance. She will lose the geneeral elections by a landslide.  
folks we're debating electing a pres. not a governor or congressman. the domestic agenda is decided by congress and to secure demo values in 08' we need the trifecta win[house,senate,pres.] the pres. doesn't control any bill or budget other than power of veto so what ever the minor domestic variances are on domestic issues between the candidates they'll be hammered out in congress and committee. nobody's position on that platform on any domestic issue will pass as is in tact thru congress but be compromised to reflect composit values of demos with trifecta. the foreign affairs and incursions are another matter. the debate should center on these issues as the president can get us in without congress approval. this is bidens fortee and his experience and foresight elevate him above the lightweights on the platform tonight. he has the only iraq plan passed and saw pakistan problem coming. that,s presidential folks.
Iowa voters will for electability just like last time when they liked Dean but decided he couldn't make a run against Bush.  

Dickie Flatts, Charlotte, NC

Like always non-Iowans have no clue about what Iowans thought in 04, or think now. Iowans didn't like Dean but vote for Kerry. The number of "I voted Dean but married Kerry" was actually very small. Also, while polls in Iowa are a joke because they don't sample actual likely caucus goers from prior caucus attendance but random registered voters. Even with the scientifically invalid Iowa polling Dean's finally caucus support (18%) was actually within the margin of error in all of the "Iowa polls" the Des Moines Register's trademark poll. Also in polling how those surveyed viewed the candidates Dean never was ahead of Kerry in favorability. I have the hard copies of the 8/3/03, 11/9/03, and 1/17/04 "Iowa Polls" in front of me. In each poll Kerry combined favorable (both very favorable and mostly favorable) were ahead of Dean's. Only in the August 3rd poll was Dean's very favorable 1% higher (27% vs. 26%) than Kerry's, but Kerry was still ahead in total favorability because his mostly favorable was 8% higher (Kerry 42% mostly favorable  and Dean 34%) Dean's very unfavorable also was always higher than Kerry's. In both the August and January poll Dean's very unfavorable was twice Kerry's.

And Iowans do care about the ability to win the general election, and regardless of national polls or  polls that are predominantly of non caucus goers, most Iowa caucus goers are concerned with Hillary's ability to win the general election.    
Whereas we could take all of your integrity, put it in a thimble and still have room for you compassion and intellect.


Van

I rarely agree with Hillary's biggest backer, but your dead on here! Thanks for making me laugh!
Putting out an APB for anyone at MSNBC who can moderate these boards. Can't you get an intern or something to take care of these things?
George, Seattle

The State of Maine does deny and take back  driver and other licenses of deadbeat dad's. It does get their attention.
So much for Edwards being out of the race and that having money problems will hurt him. Wants to hear no bawling when the the chalk gets beaten by the longshot.
"Hillary is an intelligent woman with guts.   That scares the hell out of you guys who THINK you are so smart.  She puts 85% of the men I read on these boards to SHAME.  It's not her philosophies and ideals that you guys have a problem with is it?  Let's be truthful here.  You are fearful of having a WOMAN in power.  Talk about a "flip-flop" then...if we DON'T elect Hillary in 2008, we may as well totally and completely forget about being a world power because she IS our last hope.  I see everyone pulling bits and pieces, out of context but if you look at the whole picture (if you can) you will surely see that she is the ONE we need."

HillaryIStheONE, Buford, Georgia (Sent Thursday, November 15, 2007 11:13 AM)

I thought we were through with this nonsense. Hillary puts 85% of the men on this board to shame? What percent of women? I'm guessing that less than 15% of anyone on this board (men and women) didn't attend Yale Law, so if that is what you are getting at, then yes, Hillary does put us to shame. And so does Obama (he went to Harvard Law).

I don't really know what you mean by a "world power". That is a rather generic term. There are lots of "world powers", and we will be one regardless of who is elected president. The only thing in question will be our place amongst them. I'm glad you have so much confidence that being a woman is what will allow Hillary to keep us where we are.
Jerry, you've stated your 2 candidates are Mitt and Rudy.  Were you behind Mitt before he flipped, or after he flopped? And since you harp constantly on Hillary's connection to shady dealings, how do you defend the scandals to which Guiliani is allegedly connected?  
Van...this is why you are as disliked and ignored as the disingenious candidate you support.  You lame excuse for cherry picking the information is exactly in line with your candidate also.  You both are disgusting and I am embarrassed as a democrat that either of you are in the party.

Edwards isn't the only person who can't stomach the idea of having Hillary represent the democratic party.  John...count me in too.

Grace, (Sent Thursday, November 15, 2007 11:13 AM)

Yes, I am, "Ignored". Do you know what ignored means?
It means that no one pays attention to you. I didn't ignore your brilliant post Grace. You sure didn't cherry-pick that one...
Grace, NY: '...Van...thought I'd help you out


Poll: Obama, Clinton Virtually Tied
Web Editor: Michael King
Last Modified: 11/12/2007 10:25:12 PM...'


I never got to thank you for, "Helping me out."
Aren't you the Grace who posted the SIX MONTH OLD POLL before you knew if it was TRUE or not?
I posted the link in the post, and you are as wrong as you were to post that poll as you are to accuse me of all people of cherry-picking facts or polls. I have consistently, without FAIL posted the links to any information I post.
I am, as you say, disliked, because HILLARY is disliked, and in the lead and on her way to the nomination and the presidency, and it KILLS you and all those like you you harbor an irrational hatred for her to see her STILL leading everywhere despite your daily attacks and spurious claims that the tide has turned.
If I posted something as quickly discredited as your blunder, YOU would be among the first to mention it. As it is you posted your hoax and then ran away only to return as if nothing had happened.
When someone with ZERO credibility like you Grace attacks mine, it's a compliment. Your use of language indicates a limited vocabulary and your tone indicates an emotional age of about 12. Now go find some stale old polls to post that we can all get a good laugh over.

Van
Hillary is an intelligent woman with guts. <<<<


Proof please.
If Hillary were smart...she would say..."I made a mistake, and I have learned from my mistake and this is my position, and from now, I will answer the questions fully."  Hillary Team...if you are reading this....

\\\\\\\\\\

Thats not intelligence.  That humbleness.  Either way, Hillary has neither.
I wonder if CNN will bring up Obama's poor attendance record in the senate.  He has the highest percentage of missed votes in the senate.  I think it's interesting that he has repeatedly criticized Clinton on her Iran vote, and yet he wasn't even there that day to place his vote.  If it is such an important issue, why didn't he make it a priority to be there?  
I'll bet Edwards makes the first planted question crack.
For all the Hillary & Barack supporters:

This is what JUDGMENT and EXPERIENCE look like in a candidate.

Joe Biden's Senate career per Sourcewatch:

Biden is a long-time member of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, which he chaired from 1987 until 1995 and served as ranking minority member from 1981 until 1987 and again from 1995 until 1997. In this capacity, he has become one of the most respected Senate voices on drug policy, crime prevention, and civil liberties. While chairman, Biden presided over two of the more contentious U.S. Supreme Court confirmation hearings ever, Robert Bork in 1987 and Clarence Thomas in 1991.
Biden has been instrumental in crafting significant federal crime laws over the last decade, including the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, also known as the Biden Crime Law. He also authored the landmark Violence Against Women Act of 2000, which contains a broad array of groundbreaking measures to combat domestic violence and provides billions of dollars in federal funds to address gender-based crimes
Biden served as the chairman of the  International Narcotics Control Caucus, Biden wrote the laws that created the nation's "Drug Czar," who oversees and coordinates national drug control policy.
Staunchly supportive of education, Biden's legislation has promoted college aid and loan programs and has allowed families to deduct on their annual income-tax returns up to $10,000 per year in higher-education expenses. His enacted Kids 2000 legislation which established a public/private partnership to help provide computer centers, teachers, Internet access, and technical training to young people across the nation, particularly to low-income and at-risk youth.
Biden's expertise in foreign policy, national security, and arms control issues has won him considerable bipartisan respect. In 1997, he became the ranking minority member of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations and chaired the committee from June 2001 through 2003. His efforts to combat hostilities in the Balkans in the 1990s brought national attention and influenced presidential policy: traveling repeatedly to the region, he made one meeting famous by calling Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic a "war criminal." He consistently argued for lifting the arms embargo, training Bosnian Muslims, investigating war crimes and administering NATO air strikes. Biden's subsequent "lift and strike" resolution was instrumental in convincing President Bill Clinton to use military force in the face of systematic human rights violations.
Plus, as we all know......
The Clinton's bring all this to the table on their own.
from whitewater to threatening to shoot people who ask tough questions....
".....The Clinton's have a 100,000 sq ft closet to keep all their dirty laundry in.
jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Thursday, November 15, 2007 10:31 AM)....."

Better quiet down with the sacandal talk jerry.....Gigolo Rudy 'G' has a few problems of his own to deal with now.
I wonmer if Rudy will be called to testify at either Kerik's criminal trial or his civil trial.
I'll betcha' a dollar right here and now that he's called to at least one of them


Jerry, you've stated your 2 candidates are Mitt and Rudy.  Were you behind Mitt before he flipped, or after he flopped? And since you harp constantly on Hillary's connection to shady dealings, how do you defend the scandals to which Guiliani is allegedly connected?  

Lisa, Fort Worth TX (Sent Thursday, November 15, 2007 12:29 PM)


You use the word "alleged".  There is a fine line between what Rudy allegedly is doing and What Hillary has done.  With the problems with Chinese dishwashers and Chinese moneybundlers, we have all seen this before; back in 1996 during Bill Clinton's second run for President.  Hillary has been named, her fingerprints are all over the problem.  I haven't seen the media stories about Rudy; could there be a bias?  He is connected to Bernard Kerik or whathisname is.  But there is no proof of him doing anything as far as what he did.  Every candidate; from Obama to Hillary to Rudy to Fred has had some shady people.  Fred and Rudy have cut their ties to the shady people.  Hillary still has them in her campaign (Sandy Berger).  She supposedly has given back the money that Norman Hsu raised for her, yet there is another bundler (Mauricio Celis) who is a boat load of trouble and if the grand jury announces it's verdict here today, Hillary's name will be coming back out under people who are criminals.  By the way, I have not seen the charity that Hillary gave back Norman's Hsu's money to; Have you? If Rudy has some dirty laundry that was worth something, don't you think it would be all over the media right now?  And this is supposed to be the liberal's best friend; the media today.  But it seems that Hillary and her past supplies the juiciest stories.

As far as flip flopping, yes Mitt has made some mistakes early on and has fixed a few of them.  However, I have not seen anything like that from Hillary Clinton.  OK, she FINALLY came out about illegal's and drivers licenses; Why didn't she give a straight answer at the last debate?  If she had just stopped taking both sides of the issue and just been honest, it would probably be game over.  But NOOOOOO, she had to play the gender card, her stupid husband had to get involved and now it looks like she cannot defend herself against the simple questions, yet alone the tough questions.  Mitt has had everything thrown at him from abortion to being a Mormon to tying down the dog carrier to his rooftop to beauty creams.  Yet he seems to be gaining and climbing.

You liberals are so blinded by your hate for President Bush, you would vote for anybody no matter how sordid their past is.  A few of you are just voting for her just because she is a woman.  The other liberal candidates are debating the issues and coming out with ideas.  I don't see that from Hillary at all.  What is her stance on Social Security?  Never mind all she suggested is a panel to study; what does she think?  She never tells you and you are supposed to be voting for people who have answers.  Hillary has no answers and as long as she hides behind her husband and says "elect me because I am a woman", she will never get to the White House.  All you liberals that are voting for Hillary are doing is guranteeing that Rudy or Mitt or Fred will be in the White House on January 20 2009. And when that happens, I predict the democratic party will seperate itself from the DailyKOS morons and Moveon.org people and go back to what the democratic party originally stood for.
Van:

Doesn't it say something about your candidate that you have to defend her so often?  I am sure you can see that at least half of the people responding to this post don't support her.  I will wait for the exact total from you (unless it doesn't favor Hillary).

Often I have asked you for some examples of Hillary's accomplishments.  Polls are not accomplishments.

I ask again that you provide examples rather than polls.  Show me the issues and causes she expends her political capital on.

Waiting.....
There's one reason Hillary changed her mind on immigration reform ... Obama.  If you look at the national polls, the vast majority of voters didn't agree with Spitzer's plan.  Yet in the last debate both Hillary and Obama seemed to back it.  By now saying that she is against it, she aligns herself with the voting majority and gives herself a point of attack on Obama.  She may spin it as "being receptive to the will of those she will serve" or some crap like that.  Watch for it in this debate.
".....And now, a whole new set of scandal.....
Planted questions, Peter Paul, Norman Hsu, evasiveness......

Hillary's character is the issue, Merle
She's responsible for 15 years of dishonesty, scandals and divisiveness....."
Sierra, SF (Sent Thursday, November 15, 2007 11:03 AM)

ahh sierra, look again cupcake.....
Obama not only wrote a book about himself ("Dreams fom My Father") in which he admitted to using marijuana and cocaine, but he also says the only reason he didn't use heroin is because he didn't like the pusher who was selling it.
Not only that.....
BUT...Barack Obama has been friends with Antoin ("Tony") Rezko since at least 1990. Rezko offered him a job in the early 1990s (declined), and has raised at least $60,000 for Obama's campaigns. In return, Barack arranged an internship in 2005 for John Aramanda, the son of a Rezko business associate (Joseph Aramanda, who himself gave Barack $11,500.)
There's more. In June, 2005, Obama bought a house in Chicago for $1.65 million. The same day, Rezko bought the vacant lot next door for $625,00. Seven months later, Rezko sold Barack a slice (1/6th) of his lot so the Obamas could have a bigger yard. There's no evidence that Rezko bought the vacant land for any other reason than to do Obama a favor.
The problem with all this, is that Rezko is under indictment in a federal government corruption case for demanding kickbacks from companies wanting to do business with Illinois Governor Blagojevich, another politician that Rezko has befriended and donated to. (Rezko is also under indictment for shaking down a Hollywood producer for $1.5 million in campaign contributions for Blagojevich. The guy takes care of his friends.) In fact, Joseph Aramanda is an unindicted co-conspirator in one of the kickback cases.
I hate to break it to you sierra, but it would appear that 'Lil Barracky" is not as pure and wholesome as you and others would have us believe.


 Even thogh I am a Biden supporter,(or McCain in a pinch),I have heard a rumor that there are sixty lobbyists for every Washington official,and if this is true,I suppose the election is allready decided.Can anyone verify this statistic from the BBC?If true,our only option is to vote everyone out in the next two election cycles.Clinton,Obama,and Edwards are pathetic,Kucinich is nuts,and Dodd is irrelevant.This is pathetic.

I get email...

A friend writes, "...have you become so cynical that no candidate could possibly please you?"

The point is well taken.  In some way or another, each Democratic candidate brings necessary strengths to the table.

I just no longer idealize politicians, candidates, or presidents.

I work for one I admire (mostly).  I would accept any legitimate Democrat in order to retrieve our nation from the Gates of Bush/Cheney Hell.

Having said that again, it is apparent to me that the process of running for office leaves a stain on the soul of just about anyone I have known.  

Ultimately, none of the bastards are worthy to guide and nurture the Great Cause that is America.

I really loved Jimmy Carter until I got to know the sanctimonious prig.  His ideals were immaculate, his personality was all the charm of prunes for breakfast.

That very righteous personality kept him from being a competent leader.  He is a good man without a lot of self-reflection or humor.

I was wild about Bill until I saw him close up.  Charming, ah yes!  A self-infatuated infant, ah there was the rub.  Brilliant?  Absolutely.  Foolish... well you know.

Yet Clinton was nonetheless a great president.

Bush you could have a beer with, but he would get s--tfaced and vomit on you.  And he has, and ever more shall, in perpetuity.

Presidents are great only in retrospect.  Most of the time they bumble along like the rest of us, but most of them have better poker faces.

Vote for chumminess and get the drunken AWOL air guard guy.

Vote for ideals and get the First Puritan off the Mayflower.

Besides, my deepest intuition is that none of vote our minds any more since we are told what to think every minute.  We vote other people's minds and and I say in that regard we don't have a lot to choose from.

We do, I hope, have a choice between psychotic Strangeloves and and double-talking liberal capitalists. Go for the gobblety-gook.  It's important

Which reminds me that the most honest came campaign I ever saw was run by the famously crooked Governor Edwin Edwards of Louisiana a few years back.  His slogan, running against David Duke the malevolent Klansman, was, and I quote, "VOTE FOR THE CROOK! IT'S IMPORTANT!"

Now there's an inspirational thought for the day.


What?  Me cynical?



You know Jerry can't wait for the debate to be on TV tonight so he can salivate over the image of the love of his life...Hillary.

pat huntington ny (Sent Thursday, November 15, 2007 11:12 AM)

That's why god invented TIVO.....
Some of us have to work for a living.........

Love of my life LOL.....
Got rid of one flip flopping woman......
married a sensible woman.....
She would destroy Hillary in the debate, so badly, Bill would get his butt whipped too if he got in the way......
Condi Rice, both a black and a woman, wouldn't think about complaining over 'tough questions,' or having to give 'real answers.' She has my vote.

EXACTLY why this boy made America's only politically CONSERVATIVEW music CD--11 tracks of conservative facts. Just in time for Christmas (for you 'progressives,' that would be the 'winter holiday') Listen @

www.conservativemusiconline.com
Elizabeth in San Diego:

perhaps I can help you since Van cannot.....

Here is a list of what she has done in the US Senate:



In five years as the most influential Democrat in the Senate, Hillary has managed to get the following laws and resolutions enacted:

• Establish the Kate Mullany National Historic Site

• Support the goals and ideals of Better Hearing and Speech Month

• Recognize the Ellis Island Medal of Honor

• Name courthouse after Thurgood Marshall

• Name courthouse after James L. Watson

• Name post office after John A. O'Shea

• Designate August 7, 2003, as National Purple Heart Recognition Day

• Support the goals and ideals of National Purple Heart Recognition Day

• Honor the life and legacy of Alexander Hamilton on the bicentennial of his death

• Congratulate the Syracuse University Orange Men's Lacrosse Team on winning the championship.

• Congratulate the Le Moyne College Dolphins Men's Lacrosse Team on winning the championship

• Establish the 225th Anniversary of the American Revolution Commemorative Program

• Name post office after Sergeant Riayan A. Tejeda

• Honor Shirley Chisholm for her service to the nation and express condolences on her death

• Honor John J. Downing, Brian Fahey, and Harry Ford, firefighters who lost their lives on duty.


I think that this country might just have a chance if the Democratic nominee is somehow Barack Obama and the Republican nominee is somehow Ron Paul.  Other than that, this country is in serious trouble.

At least these two have shown that they can be trusted, and that they stand by their principles.  Other than Dennis Kucinich on the Dem side, I don't see another candidate out there that doesn't change their positions every time the wind shifts.
Edwards  or hillary are just fine with me.I think Hanity is hilarious and a big scairdy cat the way he goes after Hillary,Edwards and Obama.He has introduced Rudy at many fundraisers and probably has a position all picked (gift from Rudy).He even defends kerik---shows how far they will go to run this country.
Van is a Mark Penn. Drudge has reported anyone using stats on various political blogs are indeed paid employees of the Clinton Machine. Just kidding. Polls don't mean a thing at this point. I think it is fair to report that the polls do not include cell phone users (youngsters that support Obama). That could be the difference in Iowa.
Hey everyone, guess what! Apparently being ahead of everyone running for President, male or female, democrat or republican means Hillary is toast. I'm so glad that logic makes sense.
Jerry, who said Hillary doesn't have what it takes to debate a man. I can't wait till tonight. I think you'll have to eat those words.  Jenny in Georgia
I ask again that you provide examples rather than polls.  Show me the issues and causes she expends her political capital on.

Waiting.....

Elizabeth Sullivan, San Diego, CA (Sent Thursday, November 15, 2007 12:58 PM)


It says more about the fringe minority of attackers than it does about Clinton. The tactic of asking Clinton supporters for reasons for their support as a jumping off point for a new series of attacks is a well established and tired fact of the campaign, and one I stopped falling for awhile ago.

If you want to know why the MILLIONS upon MILLIONS of Clinton supporters who will be going to the voting booths in the next few months to sweep her to the nomination and the presidency will be doing so, you could take the time to find out on your own. It wouldn't be hard, she is the most studied analyzed and written about woman in America since Eleanor Roosevelt. You will have plenty of time between when she clinches the nomination (in March.), the conventions and the general election to complete your studies.

Perhaps you would like tell me why one of over 2,000 state senators, or a former one term US senator and VP candidate who failed to take his home state in a general election against an unpopular President is a better more qualified choice?

I don't ask Obama or Edwards or Biden or any supporters of any other candidate to answer those questions because the reason why someone believes in a particular candidate is PERSONAL, (as are MANY of the attacks posted here) and I am concerned enough to check out the candidates myself.

I am often the object of many requests and the target of many barbs because I support Clinton, but as there have been a couple of recurring accusations today about cherry-picking data and integrity, (From one person who's obsessed with a Hillary website they have REPEATEDLY accused me of working for, and another who derided me with a poll that turned out to be from last JUNE.) on my part, it's interesting to note that almost all of my posts are in SUPPORT of my candidate and not AGAINST anyone else's. How many of my detractors can make that same claim for themselves?


Van

vanreuter, NY NY: '...Posting the LINK to the story wasn't enough for you? If I posted the whole thing, there'd be complaints about how much space it took up. What do you think the link is FOR? A pretty blue thing to look at?...'

Calm down, van
It's been a tough few weeks for Team Hillary
It's gonna be OK....
I thought you were returning to your home planet, van

What happened ?
You said you were leaving us...
How can I miss you if you won't go away, van ?
Just when you morphed into tofun,disney.....

Stu, Saginaw, MI: '...Once again, I'm terribly disappointed with your "snarky" use of the "question mark".  I think you should totally eschew the use of it!...'

eschew obsfucation, huh van ?
Your alter-ego (and I do mean ego) is still here van ?
Weren't you gonna take him to a higher plane on the Clinton DeathStar ?

Jerry, who said Hillary doesn't have what it takes to debate a man. I can't wait till tonight. I think you'll have to eat those words.  Jenny in Georgia

Jenny Evans, Watkinsville Georgia (Sent Thursday, November 15, 2007 1:39 PM)


Being the betting man that I am.......
I'd have to say she will have no choice but to go after everybody in order to survive......

I say she will flub and fail........
Unless Bill is standing next to her.........
Those who say Hillary can't beat various Republican candidates because of the negativity factor need to remember that the GOP has essentially lost the base in this one.

The base being mal-educated, Bible-thumping, racist homophobes.

The Karl Rove 25% is all over the place in this election.  When the dude from the 700 Club endorsed Guiliani, well that was the death-knell for the folks with a lot of missing teeth and fried brain cells.

Any Democrat who loses to any of these these born losers the Republicans have scraped off the bathroom floor should be tried and sentenced for treason to these United States.

Hillary can win.

Obama can win.

Edwards can win.

Any of the rest... ditto

except

Kucinich can't.

There's your choices, all wrapped up and ready to boogie (except Kucinich, of course).

Let's get together and get to work.  

We have a nation to recover from the ashes.

The simple fact is: Hillary is an enemy of the Constitution. Her election as President will signal the End of the Republic. Blood will run in the streets. Tens of Millions will weep in the wake of their misguided vote!
BTW...

Let Ron Paul run as an Independent.

Throw in Mayor Bloomberg and make it a poker game.

That well may happen and needs to be factored into any Democratic national campaign strategy.

Forget the polls, the demographics will kill 'em.

Either or both seal the deal for the Democratic candidate, especially Hillary.

So, anybody who wants to drain Republican votes 2-1 over Democratic votes lost... we'll see that bet and go all in.

If Democrats lose this one, I'll join the Whigs.


Why drivers' licenses for illegal immigrants?  Just another scam by democrats to open the door to voter fraud.  Oh they would love to have a perfect way to get millions of illegal votes with no way to track the vote.   Motor voter laws would let millions if illegal’s to register to vote and they know they would vote democrat.  Have you noticed that every election there is always voter fraud stories and disenfranchise stories and it is always democrats doing the complaining and doing the fraud?  

I am getting tired of same old same old, the last five presidential elections:  Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, and for the sixth straight presidential election you people want another Clinton.   Maybe after Ms Clinton two terms someone from the Bush family will run.   I do not believe that there are only a few people with the talent to be president and there last name must be Bush or Clinton.

The reason I do not want Clinton as president I can not stand to look at her and hear that terrible voice everyday for the next 8 years.  If she becomes president we all will be force to relive all the scandals and garbage that the Clintons always bring with them.  Bill did this Hillary did that Bill did this Hillary did that and on and on and on.   Than will drive the country crazy.  

Mark Thieme / hillary can't win the general election, obama nor edwards commands the hatred of the masses like the hillary, a look through any blog will confirm that, or just ask someone.

 mention edwards or obama you get some people that would rather have a different candidate, maybe.

mention hillary and peoples heads spin round, profanity comes forth, guns are drawn, lives lost, not the same thing my friend.
Fortunately you won't be happy on the 3rd. Iowans aren't stupid!

mary Davenport Iowa (Sent Thursday, November 15, 2007 11:54 AM)

I'll be flying home from warmer climes to celebrate Hillary's victory that day, because as you so aptly stated, "Iowans aren't stupid", Nor are the folks in New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina...


Van


Van
Cedric, Charlotte: '...Tonight it is on!  I'm excited.  Expect Hill to have some stuff to throw at Obama this time.  Expect Edwards, the most articulate Clinton critic, to have his ducks in a row, and expect Obama to take a slightly less circuitous route to criticizing Clinton leaving Edwards to do the dirtiest work (again.)  There almost seems to be some understanding between Obama and Edwards about this whole thing...maybe because they're not very distinguishable on several issues...'


Thanks for the kind words, Cedric.
I guess we're just political junkies
I've ALWAYS been interested
I started this season out favoring Obama, then Edwards
I've flipped my choice because Edwards is more assertive
I think both are reformers, but Edwards is more of a populist.
I saw a piece by the pollster, Zogby calling Obama the Gene McCarthy and Edwards the Bobby Kennedy of this race.
Pretty apt
I waiting to see that debate !
ALL FIRED UP !!
Hillary never said she supported drivers licenses for illegals.  She said she supported the govenors who have to find a solution to the illegals running around in their state.  

It is not acceptible to lie in order to get a by-line.  
MK:
How far back in the hollows do you live?  

What the national demographic tells us that the millions of folks living in 8-10 huge cities provide the "bulk" vote and the "profit margin" comes in the small towns and suburbs.

True, Hillary will probably not garner much of the survivalist vote, nor the votes of the brave volunteer militia who want to guillotine all politicians.  

I know these people and I know where they live.  The nation may tolerate them, but they are a dying breed.  They kill their own.

Meth usually does the job or the fires they cause in their labs burn them to  a crisp.  I know about that too.

Do you take these people seriously as voters or is the water that bad in Missouri?

And MK, you are a bright person. Don't tell me you get your information from blogs. I would then likely lose the considerable respect I maintain for your opinion.


Hillary can win and she can kick ass... she is more of a survivalist than any wannabe Special Op.


We, the Grand Poobah Council of planet Remulak, are most impressed with your long list of esteemed candidates. Especially the Remulakian brothers, Kucinich and Paul. But even the earth aliens called Hillary, Ambassador (to Remulak) Richardson, and that hair-obsessed guy are also worthy of being granted green-person status on our great planet. They all illustrate our strong belief that no political leaders should possess strong beliefs.
The simple fact is: Hillary is an enemy of the Constitution. Her election as President will signal the End of the Republic. Blood will run in the streets. Tens of Millions will weep in the wake of their misguided vote!

Keith, Saginaw Michigan (Sent Thursday, November 15, 2007 2:23 PM)


My candidate for post of the day!
This may just be the quintessential anti-Hillary paranoid fantasy.
Keith's post is a prime example of why it's hard to take the Hillary haters seriously.

It's a toss-up as to which part of his wild-eyed prediction is worse; The part that depicts Hillary as the anti-Christ, or the sad lack of faith and belief in our government's institutions.

We survived Franklin Pierce. We survived Warren Harding. We survived Herbert Hoover, and with any luck, it looks like we will survive George W. Bush.


Van


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=467881

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