First thoughts: 30 days to go

Posted: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 9:16 AM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: First Thoughts

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray and Domenico Montanaro
*** Thirty days to go...: ...until Iowa, where most of the Democratic candidates participate in the NPR/Iowa Public Radio debate… Plenty of news today about Hillary blasting Obama -- yet Obama not necessarily fighting back… Bill Clinton returns to the trail… And Bush holds a news conference this morning, where he’ll likely receive numerous questions about the National Intelligence Estimate’s conclusion that Iran stopped its nuclear program in 2003.

*** Is Iran off the table? Back in October, after Bush warned in a press conference that a nuclear Iran could spark World War III, we wondered if Iran was becoming the new Iraq -- and if that could possibly help the Republicans in a general election, because it would allow them to talk about that and not Iraq. But does the new NIE throw cold water on that idea? What happens if Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, or Fred Thompson can no longer raise the specter of a nuclear Iran in a general election? That said, Iraq might not be as big of a problem for the Republicans as it was in the fall.

*** Third-party groups galore: With less than a month before Iowa, evidence of third party groups deciding to get involved in the caucuses is popping up all over the place. There are the expected players, like EMILY's List and AFSCME (whose TV ads in Iowa begin tomorrow) for Clinton and local SEIUs for Edwards. There’s also this pro-choice GOP group against Romney. And now, another third-party player is for Huckabee, while a Democratic group today introduces a TV ad attacking Hillary. Who else is going to jump in? If you thought keeping track of all the Democratic and Republican candidates was a challenge, just think about also keeping tabs on all of these interest groups. We're guessing that every day between now and January 3 will bring rumors of some new group.

*** No counterpunch: Yesterday, Clinton whacked Obama -- this time over his record in the Illinois state Senate. But a funny thing happened: Obama didn’t really punch back. One gets the sense that the Obama folks don't want the next three weeks to be about Clinton and Obama "trading" potshots, for fear it could tarnish his image more than it hurts Clinton. Voters may expect Clinton to get involved in a political back-and-forth and not punish her as strongly as they'll punish Obama if he appears to get too negative. Edwards has seen this movie before now, hasn't he? Of course, it looks like the press -- just look at today’s New York Times and Boston Globe -- might be providing the counterpunch for Obama.

*** Maybe video didn’t kill the radio star: Seven of the Democratic candidates -- Biden, Clinton, Dodd, Edwards, Gravel, Kucinich, and Obama -- participate in a debate in Iowa at 2:00 pm ET sponsored by NPR and Iowa Public Radio. This debate, hosted by NPR’s Robert Siegel, Michele Norris and Steve Inskeep, can only be accessed via radio or the Web. There are no time limits for answers, and the candidates will have the opportunity to ask their rivals questions. Don't expect too many fireworks in the debate. Think about who's listening to it -- it's probably potential Dem voters who will not like negative back-and-forths. The NPR wing of the Dem Party is Obama's base, though no Dem wants to be on the losing end of the wine and cheese caucus.

*** Guess who’s back… back again… Bill is back… tell a friend: Bill Clinton returns to the campaign trail, stumping today throughout New Hampshire (in Keene, Claremont, and Lebanon). And after making news during previous campaign stops -- saying that he opposed the Iraq war from the beginning, and lumping criticism his wife received to the Swift Boat attacks -- you can be sure that reporters will tape record and jot down everything he says. Joining Bill in stumping for a spouse in New Hampshire will be Michelle Obama, who does a roundtable with working women in Portsmouth.

*** On the trail: Elsewhere today, Giuliani raises money in DC; Huckabee campaigns in Iowa and began his day by calling into Don Imus’ radio show; McCain stumps in New Hampshire; Obama, after the NPR debate, holds rallies tonight in Grinnell and Iowa City; Paul appears on The View in New York City and later visits New Hampshire; Romney also is in New Hampshire; Tancredo unveils a new TV ad in Des Moines, IA; and Thompson is in South Carolina.

Countdown to Iowa: 30 days
Countdown to New Hampshire: 35 days
Countdown to Michigan: 42 days
Countdown to Nevada and SC GOP primary: 46 days
Countdown to SC Dem primary: 53 days
Countdown to Florida: 56 days
Countdown to Tsunami Tuesday: 63 days
Countdown to Election Day 2008: 336 days
Countdown to Inauguration Day 2009: 413 days

Click here to sign up for First Read emails.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

The Dem debate will be a mess. Nothing more than a shout-fest between Hillary and Obama.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

matt (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 9:30 AM)

You see by squandering our treasure of men and women of the armed forces and the money we wasted in Iraq we showed those Iranians whos the boss they quit in 2003,there was no way that would have happened if we had not rushed into Iraq and let them loot and disolve thier army and overextend ours .That was Bushes plan all along and it worked now to just dig our image and strenght and power and constitution back,PRICELESS MISSION FINALLY ACOMMPLISED

kenn (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 9:34 AM)

Obama is right to try to limit the trashing going on. Not only because it would tarnish both but, it veers away from the issues and the voters and becomes a stage for personal attacks only.
Silly was the perfect word. It takes her attacks down to the level of childish and petulant rather than having the force of what she hopes for.
And also signals that he is not going to spend everyday playing her games. he has shown he is more than capable of holding his own against anyone, including Hillary and the republicans. Why waste valuable time letting her frame the final month with her game playing.
Silly. It is powerful in framing her in a negative way while making him look above her games.

diane (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 9:35 AM)

The NIE report that Iran was never a threat and not worth starting or posturing to start another Middle East war (one that could predictably turn nuclear) is going to have a MASSIVE EFFECT on the US presidential election:

The entire gutless pack of supposedly ‘first tier’, leading Democrat candidates anointed as they were by the MSM wouldn’t “take anything off the table” in threatening Iran with nuclear war.

Only Dennis Kucinich had the guts and brains not to fall for this pro-war posturing and ‘tough guy’ BS.

Now that the NIE shows that Iran was never any threat, it’s more than a bit embarrassing for the pack of ‘big name’ Democratic candidates that they were so fearful of appearing ‘weak on terrorism’, that they were cowed by Bush into committing Americans to another war in the Middle East just to protect their cowardly hides.

Hey, Hillary, here’s something that you shouldn’t “take off the table” —- your friggin excuse and lies about how you never accepted war with Iran as an 'option'.

Maybe you can use the same pack of lies that your hubby just did in his, “I was always against the Iraq war” BS.

This pack of gutless idiots, along with the lying MSM’s help in promoting them as being friggin ‘electable’ came that close to installing someone in the White House who would have gladly done anything “on the table” before this NIE news broke — and made them all look like the dangerous fools that they are.

Remember that, people when you go to vote next fall —– it’s actually more important to the lives of your kids than whether Bill will be more help to Hill’s campaign than Oprah will be to Obama —- in fact it’s more important than any of the BS smoke that the MSM blows up your posterior about this totally phony 'campaign entertainment'.

Of course, the proto-fascist Republican war-mongers calling for more war in the Middle East are all totally discredited even more than the dummy dems, with McCain taking the prize for his rendition of "Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" ---- which we think he will no longer be singing.

Alan MacDonald, Sanford, Maine (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 9:43 AM)

Daniel, NY (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 9:45 AM)

Obama threw mud, and now is SHOCKED, SHOCKED that he's being attacked.

The man has the makings of a good HighSchool class president.

Edwards! Why doesn't he get your attention?
Anyone?

Tiarap,Houston (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 9:47 AM)

Daily First Read Truth-Pak-

Trust no one...
The following sites devote as much time and space to Denis Kucinich and Joe Biden as they do to the big three. Whether you are a dem or republican, liberal, moderate or conservative, your candidate is represented equally at these sites. Forget about Big Media and the MSM, create your own narrative.

We don't need anyone to spoon-feed information to us about the candidates or the election, it's right there for everyone if you know where to go. Campaign money, donors expenses, go here

http://www.opensecrets.org/ Opensecrets.org is "Your guide to money in U.S elections."

Just about every poll from every pollster, averaged out, with a link to the source
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ Is THE source for political junkies, with links to every major political site on the right, left and center.

What the candidates actually have said about the issues.
http://www.ontheissues.org/default.htm This is a Great site! Every candidate on every issue!

How the candidates have voted and their LIberal/Conservative ratings
http://nationaljournal.com/voteratings/sen/lib.htm?o1=lib_composite&o2=asc#vr Has the voting records for all members of congress, and their Liberal/Conservative ratings.

http://votesmart.org/index.htm Here's what they say at the site;
Thousands of candidates and elected officials. Who works for you? Who is seeking your vote? Project Vote Smart, a citizen's organization, has developed a Voter's Self-Defense System to provide you with the necessary tools to self-govern effectively: abundant, accurate, unbiased and relevant information. As a national library of factual information, Project Vote Smart covers your candidates and elected officials in five basic categories: biographical information, issue positions, voting records, campaign finances and interest group ratings.

http://www.govtrack.us/ Do you take transparency seriously? Consider how important to you an open and transparent government is to a healthy society. More work needs to be done to make Congress open. Make a statement to your elected officials by joining now 200 others in signing a pledge for transparency.

Van

vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 9:49 AM)

Dot, Illinois (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 9:53 AM)

Check out this list of polls from very red states (Alabama, Kansas, Kentucky, Georgia) that show Hillary Clinton is very competitive -- she is in single-digits of Rudy Giuliani in all of them: http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2007/12/new-york-times-charges-again-that.html

Daniel, NY (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 9:45 AM)

Seeing as the general election is still a year away, I hope you aren't taking these head-to-head polls too seriously. You can bet your bottom dollar the Republicans will come out in full force when the time comes. Yee-haw.

CitizenJ (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 9:56 AM)

The pious Mr. "silly season" Obama is returning to his lofty perch above the nasty fray.

After touching down during the past weeks and shooting thousands of poison personal darts at Senator Clinton, the great one departs to on high again.

Now that Senator Clinton is finally defending herself and presenting Obama's record of non votes and being AWOL in the Illinois and US Senate, Obama can NOT defend such a weak record so he does the only thing he can do...go back to his holier than thou perch.

Good defense Obama, but do we really want a weak leader who runs and hides when he chooses?

Let's examine the real record and behavior of Obama, not the fake sugar coated one we've been fed constantly by the press and Obama-ites for months

Disgusted (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:02 AM)

On the contrary I don't see why Iraq & Iran can't continue to be an issue against Republicans in the campaign. In fact this new reversal just illustrates that the neocons have learned NOTHING from the Iraqi debacle and continue to rely on shady intelligence to justify their pursuit of American military domination of the world.

John B, Des Moines, IA (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:03 AM)

Barak Obama's support is unfortunately based on what people WANT hm to be...not what he actually is.

Linda Lou (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:03 AM)

So now we learn that Iran is not, in fact, currently working on developing a nuclear bomb. Does anyone really have any confidence in any intelligence information that this administration provides? How many more "Oops, we got it wrong" statements will there be?

Will this have any effect on Democratic campaign? Seantor Biden voted against Kyl Lieberman; Senator Clinton voted for; Senator Obama did not vote. Correct?
Dot, Illinois (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 9:53 AM)
===

It depends if the media has the guts to call out Hillary for being wrong. Obama missed the vote because of Democrat Harry Reid's (his son is on the Hillary campaign) disgusting move to push the bill to a sudden vote after saying that it would not be voted on. Obama released a statement immediately saying he was against the bill. Obama was 100% right. Again. Iraq, Iran, Pakistan- he obviously seems to know what he's talking about with foreign policy. He cuts against conventional wisdom, and ends up getting it right every time.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/02/opinion/02rich.html?em&ex=1196830800&en=5ead4c3bdc272622&ei=5087%0A

Ron, TX (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:08 AM)

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:08 AM)

I think the Obama campaign responded perfectly well to the attacks yesterday: they gave statements about the substantive issues so all the papers note that he had a great record in Illinois and those present votes were legislative tactics plus he put her down simply by refusing to dignify her personal attacks and marking them down as silly.

The last two days have been fierce but I think the Obama campaign has won. Plus, they made a serious mistake deciding to come after him on a character issue. Democrats, whether they support him now or not, fell in love with Obama's message and substance at the 2004 convention. And the caucus voters in Iowa have met the man and have a favorable opinion of him and who he is and what his message has been to date. They really like him; even those that don't support him. For a lot of Democrats he represents the better graces of the party. And it's not good for Clinton to have to fight on that track: saying he has no character and insinuating he's a liar. It calls to mind her negatives and plays into the caricatures of her personally.

I get the feeling that the HRC campaign knows they lost Iowa and are set on tearing Obama down to make an opening for Edwards who doesn't have the resources to fight them nationally. But in not taking the bait and swinging for the fences, basically playing their game, the Obama campaign emphasizes how desperate she is.

That's not a good place for Clinton to be right now.

Rhoda (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:12 AM)

There are so many two time losers on the issue of Iraq and Iran...anyone who knew the bushies were full of crap both times deserves a look...the rest were wrong twice and this nation can't stand more stuck on stupid at the top...in the meantime the real enemy in afghanistan and pakistan has regained strength while the bushies and their enablers in the dem party dithered on bomb bomb bomb iran

Rick in NC (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:15 AM)

You are right, Diane, Mr. Obama did not vote on Kyl Lieberman. He was the ONLY presidental candidate from the US Senate NOT to show up to vote.

Since August, Mr. Obama has missed the most votes of the other Candidates because he said in some cases such as Kyl Lieberman that he simply did NOT know the vote was coming up.

How did Biden, Dodd, and Clinton, as well as the other Senators, know the vote was coming up? Mr. Obama's explanation is very hard to accept.

AFTER the vote, after the debate that night, just before bedtime (10:00p.m.), Mr. Obama finally chose to speak out about the Kyl-Leiberman resolution that he said he felt so strongly about.

If he felt so passionately about it, why did he NOT show up to vote against it? The other senators stood up for their beliefs and voted.

Mr. Obama seems to have a record in the state and US senates of being AWOL on some "tough ..stand up for what you believe" votes. In the Illinois Senate, he often voted "present" which is not a yes or no...it is voting "I pass and do not wish to publically express my belief"

As president, Mr. Obama cannot do that. He will have to stand up and lead.

I'm very disappointed in Mr. Obama and his lack of leadership.

Sam St Louis (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:21 AM)

Dot,
I think it shows once again Biden was right, once again Hillary was wrong, and once again Obama didn't know what to do so didn't do anything.

Brad, Iowa (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:21 AM)

'... Voters may expect Clinton to get involved in a political back-and-forth and not punish her as strongly as they'll punish Obama if he appears to get too negative...'

So voters expect a negative gutter punching Hillary
Hillary's campaign has been negative all season
She's just doing publicly what her staff has been doing all along.

Worm tongue Hillary has nothing positive to offer voters....

So, she'll morph into Battle-Axe Hillary to sling mud

Ah, yes.... the Republican play book !!

Hillary Clinton, cold, calculating, dishonest, unethical, divisive

Sierra, SF (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:27 AM)

""""'iraq might not be as big a problem for the republicans""" are you kidding? the two most important issues to the american public are the iraq and the economy! at $2.4 tril over 10 years projected and the flood down effect on us economy of the war anyone who can't see the two are inseperable is an idiot! the only can=didate on demo side with a plan for iraq that's passed is biden, yet you put most of your columns on the top 3 who state "joe is right" on issues of foreign affairs! please imform your readers that the current bickering over domestic policies will be determined in the end by congress and won't reflect any one candidates agenda entirely as its pushed thru committee [civics 101] and that foreign affairs is the primary area of impact of the president. together the CE&O combined don't have the experience of biden [including obamas 4 years as a child overseas] in this area. as for hillary the phrase "fool me once same on you twice shame on me" comes to mind as she voted for iraq [understandable with the admin manipulation of intelligence] but then voted for iran bill, which obama dodged. vote for a candidate capable of handling foreign affairs, joe biden. he has the only iraq proposal that's passed, saw pakistan unrest coming, and voted for funding the war to supply the troops the necesary ied safe vehicles rather than use our troops as pawns for political points in the polls. why's his integrity and experience polling at 6% is beyond me! ANYONE.

karlos (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:30 AM)

"....Barak Obama's support is unfortunately based on what people WANT hm to be...not what he actually is......"
Linda Lou (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:03 AM)

EXACTLY, Linda Lou! That's the quote of the day.
Great job, you hit the nail right on the head!

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:31 AM)

From the NY Times:

'....Vulnerable Democrats See Fates Tied to Clinton
By CARL HULSE
Published: December 4, 2007
MANHATTAN, Kan. — Nancy Boyda, a Democrat who ran for Congress in this district last year, owed her upset victory partly to the popularity of the Democratic woman at the top of the ticket: Kathleen Sebelius, who won the governor’s seat. Now, with a tough re-election race at hand in 2008, Ms. Boyda faces the prospect that her electoral fate could be tied to another woman: Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Clinton is a long way from winning the Democratic presidential nomination, and over the last few weeks has struggled to hang on to the air of inevitability that she has been cultivating all year. But the possibility that she will be the nominee is already generating concern among some Democrats in Republican-leaning states and Congressional districts, who fear that sharing the ticket with her could subject them to attack as too liberal and out of step with the values of their constituents.

And few incumbent Democrats face a greater challenge next year than Ms. Boyda, whose district delivered almost 60 percent of its votes to President Bush in 2004....'

Who needs a skunk at the top of the Democratic ticket
Hillary will lose us the House and Senate majorities
Just like Bill did in 1994

Didn't bother him, he pushed a Republican agenda with his new 'Republican friends'
He froze out he Democrats

Is that what Hillary would do if she won (sic) ?
Invade iran to look 'strong' ?
Invade Cuba to clinch Florida in the next election ?

Sierra, SF (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:33 AM)

This is the real test for Hillary. I she can take on her own party and the rest of the republicans and win the nomination she will be the proven candidate to face any republican and their trash wagon. The way I look at it is that among all candidates running for the white house she is the only female. She is a woman so what? I admire her because she is taking heat from every corner. It is all against one and one against all.
Republican are doing everything possible to entice Obama against Hillary. If any of you listen to the right wing media you will think that they are for Obama. I know it could be an illusion, but is the truth. They are afraid of Hillary just beacus e is a woman.
On the republican side (a warning) Huckabee is trying to slide religion into the political, debate) this a very dangerous situation because from the beginning of time religion has been trying to run government creating totalitarian and imperialist government. You all be careful on Huckabee DANGER,DANGER,DANGER. KEEP RELIGION OUT. THIS IS COUNTRY OF MULTIPLE BELIEFS AND RELIGION.
That is the strateggy of the right wing religion, abortion, Immigration. Iraq Taxes. This are issues for the so call conservatives targets Right wing need to win no matter how.

Jose Alemar (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:33 AM)

Obama can't counterpunch because Hillary was right on the money.
He doesn't have the experience, nor the credentials to be President.
It's just like she said, running for the Presidency is not a qualification unto itself.

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:08 AM)

Neither is being First Lady. I guess we're back at square one.

CitizenJ (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:34 AM)

Diane, Obama did NOT vote on Kyl Lieberman. He did not show up as his fellow presdential candidates from the Senate did.

Obama has a pattern of not showing up to vote or casting a non vote.

Obama voted many times in the ILL state senate with a "present" vote which is neither a yes or not but a "maybe I'm for it or maybe I'm against it" vote.

Seven of Obama's "non votes" were on a woman's right to choose.

Two of Obama's "present or non votes" were on measures to protect families from gun violence on of which was a measure about firing guns on nor near school grounds.

Obama did not stand up and vote one these issues.

It would suggest a lack of leadership and a gamesman running for cover on controversial issues that could hurt his chances of running for a higher office down the road.

Leaderhip and the willingness to take on tough issues and deal with them is a very important trait our next president must have.

Obama's real record shows otherwise.

John A Very Concerned Citizen (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:35 AM)

RE: Hillary Tries to Commit Murder/Suicide in Iowa

Everyone!

The Clinton campaign is obviously reeling from the effects of their candidate's failed attempts to go after Obama over the weekend. Patti Solis Doyle, Clinton's Campaign Manager is now resorting to accusing the Obama campaign of playing "dirty tricks" in Iowa such as negative push-polling to test the effectiveness of anti-Hillary messages, and saying that Obama staffers are attacking Hillary's staffers - all of this to DRAG HIM DOWN into the mud. Here's the link from the Des Moines Register. You’ve got to read this for yourself.

Des Moines Register
Clinton e-mail warns more "dirty tricks" cropping up:
http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071204/NEWS/71204006/-1/SPORTS09

We all know Obama isn’t behind any negative campaigning. This is getting bad. Hillary is trying to commit "murder-suicide” in Iowa to prevent Obama from winning there!

They are accusing Obama of playing dirty tricks when in fact their planting of this total MIS-information IS the dirty trick. Unbelievable.

Jen (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:36 AM)

Clinton's campaign bloggers on here sure get old, repeating Hill's talking points with no thoughts of their own.

Fact: Hillary is losing.

Fact: Hillary is getting desperate. Hillary would NOT have publicly gone on the attack unless she WAS losing.

Ron, TX (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:41 AM)

BTW John Mccain was also not there for the Kyle-Liberman vote....guess he has no courage either or just wanted to avoid the vote.

Get your facts right or Shut up

grace (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:41 AM)

Dot, Illinois: '...So now we learn that Iran is not, in fact, currently working on developing a nuclear bomb. Does anyone really have any confidence in any intelligence information that this administration provides?...'

Yes, Dot..... Hillary Clinton does
That's why seh voted for Lieberman-Kyl
That's why she's 'talking tough' about Iran

'...How many more "Oops, we got it wrong" statements will there be? Will this have any effect on Democratic campaign? Seantor Biden voted against Kyl Lieberman; Senator Clinton voted for; Senator Obama did not vote. Correct?

Yes, Clinton did vote for war against Iran
Bear that in mind
She also used dirty tricks against Obama
She got Harry Reid to call a 'sanp vote' on the amendment (Reid's son works for Clinton)
to prevent Obama from voting.

Obama had already spoken out against the 'drift to war' in the media and among the politicians

Joe Biden, Chris Dodd, John Edwards come out looking
thoughtful and responsible on this issue

Hillary plays her usual 'pander bear' role

Bush was asked if he was the 'little boy who cired wolf' about Iraq and Iran !!

Great post, Alan MacDonald, Sanford, Maine !!

Sierra, SF (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:44 AM)

Chuck, Mark, and Domenico -- you guys are repulsive and emblematic of all that is wrong with journalism today. "The wine and cheese crowd"? What is this, 1986? NPR listeners are the intelligent ones; the ones who didn't listen to the fearmongering and LIES that got us into this mess in Iraq and were it not for the brave people in the intelligence community trying to stave off the apocalypse, would have helped this Administration of Crazies into yet another unnecessary war.

Maybe if the NPR crowd had more clout we wouldn't be in this mess.

JJ in NJ (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:48 AM)

The president of the USA can't vote "present" instead of "yes or no".

The president can not dodge the big fights...can not find political cover or have WORDS LOUDER THAN ACTIONS.

We need a president who is not afraid to take a stand rather than a "present or pass" on the important issues facing our country especially now after the disasterous George Bush.

We need a strong leader. We need a tested leader who has proven they are what it takes to fight for the American people.

We do not need a WORDS SPEAK LOUDER than ACTIONS president.

I've finally made up my mind. I am supporting Hillary Clinton for president because she is a "stand up guy" who is a strong tested leader who will fight for the Democrats against anything the Rep. will throw at her. She's tough and that is what we need to win in "08.

George IA (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:48 AM)

Obama, let her foam and howl for a month and go down in flames.

sonya, atlanta, ga (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:49 AM)

New poll just released from Kindergartner's4Hillary.This poll overwelmingly shows that children in kindergarten prefer to be Policeman, fireman, nurse's & married with children, (Other) came in ahead of wanting to be President.

Rick,ky (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:56 AM)

I love how people presume to know what Iowans like, what Iowans think and what Iowans want. If you haven't lived here, quit speaking for us. We are capable of speaking for ourselves.

As far as this debate today, I like the idea that they can interact with each other and they are not held to a 30-second or 1-minute time limit. There are some questions and some issues that do not lend themselves to such short answers. If this goes as the last debate went, Biden will again be the adult in the midst of bickering children - and every time that difference is shown, his stock goes up in Iowa.

Carrie, Eastern Iowa (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:57 AM)

Dear Friend,

I wanted to let you know immediately about reports our campaign has received about possible dirty campaign tactics in Iowa and New Hampshire -- and ask for your help.

In Iowa, we have heard reports that Hillary supporters are getting calls that tell them incorrect caucus locations. Supporters have also told us about push polls -- when they tell the pollster they support Hillary, they are given negative talking points about her and asked which attacks are the most effective.

In both Iowa and New Hampshire, we have heard that Obama staffers are berating Hillary supporters on the phone with negative attacks against her.

Here is one report we got from someone who received a push poll in Iowa:

I do want to let you know, Saturday afternoon, I had a phony pollster call from "an independently owned polling service" ... With my first choice as Hillary and undecided 2nd choice. I was asked if I approved of the direction the country was taking. The question then shifted. "Which of these three options best defines your candidate? 1) Inconsistent on major issues. 2) A weak contender in the general election. 3) Not able to bring change to Washington." I told them I would not answer because it was not a polling question ... I asked where they were calling from. Repeatedly the response was that they were calling from the United States and it was paid for by an independently owned polling firm.

Here is another report from a letter to the editor in an Iowa paper:

The bullying coming from some of the other Democratic candidates is childlike and not what the Democrats stand for. I even had some guy call me from the Obama camp and start bullying me over the phone when I said I supported Hillary. He started arguing and got aggressive on the phone. I did tell him his behavior was not appropriate.

And here is a report from New Hampshire:

When my father informed them that he was supporting Hillary they proceeded to talk to him about her failure to reform health care when she was First Lady. He said it sounded like they were reading something that was already prepared.

These reports are invaluable to our campaign! It is vitally important that we know about any unethical tactics our opponents may use. And as one of our best supporters in Iowa, you are in the best position to keep us informed. If you or any of your family, friends, or neighbors receive negative push poll calls or any misleading information about the election, please contact our Iowa headquarters immediately to let them know. Here is contact information:

Iowans for Hillary
Phone: 515-558-9600

Thank you for helping us make sure this election is a fair one, and for everything you do for Hillary.

Sincerely,

Patti Solis Doyle
Campaign Manager
Hillary for President

ObamaRama (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:57 AM)

Bill Clinton loves it in Iowa. Lots of the gals look like Monica.

Jerry Gregg, Ames Iowa (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:58 AM)

Unlike the president of the USA, the buck does not stop at the Illinois Senate.

In the state senate, a politician who wants to hide from an issue can vote PRESENT rather than yes or no and thereby avoiding the responsibility and the inevitable loss of support tht comes from actually taking a stand.

Barack Obama voted PRESENT many times on issues about women's rights and violence.

They may have been controversial issues but any senator needs to have the conviction to stand up and be counted.

As President Harry Truman said, "THE BUCK STOPS HERE."

As president, Barack Obama will not have the chance to vote PRESENT. The buck will stop with him. Will he be ready to lead?

Jeff Seattle (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:59 AM)

From USAToday/Gallup poll:

A. Hillary Clinton
Favorable Unfavorable No opinion
2007 Nov 30-Dec 2 47 50 3
2007 Nov 2-4 52 45 3
2007 Oct 12-14 53 44 2

Anybody see a trend here ?
Hillary is sinking in public 'esteem'
More negative than positive
How do you win elections that way ?

Is THAT WHY she's slinging mud ?

. Barack Obama

Favorable Unfavorable No opinion
2007 Nov 30-Dec 2 53 33 7 6
2007 Nov 2-4 53 30 7 10
2007 Oct 12-14 53 32 6 9

Sorry, Hillary
GAME OVER !!

Sierra, SF (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 11:03 AM)

J Merle what credentials do Hillary have, stealing the Whitehouse furniture while her husband was pardoning criminals, drug dealers, and terrosists that attacked US policemen, for hundreds of thousands of dollars, where they could move to your state knowing they could snowball you yankess into electing her Senator, the american people wont be fooled like you, cant you see the tv ads now, better start digging some Ostrich holes.

David Anders, Pharr, Tx. (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 11:03 AM)

hillary has unequaled experience as a cog in the corrupt 'business as usual' political machine, other than that she posses nothing noteworthy, and has none of the traits necessary to change direction for the better, ever hear the term "bush-lite"? hillary represents everything wrong with politics today, the wealthy own hillary, she has no concept of common folk, power and money are all she understands, she could not have won the general election in any event, so as she fades into obscurity vote for edwards, time to change the way this country is ran, and he has the plans and the compassion to get the job done

MK,MO (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 11:05 AM)

Hey I have no respect for the Clinton campaign after this...
Kindgergate:
The Hillary campaign is using the fact that Obama wanted to run for president since he was a child against him. And they are citing a essay he wrote at five.

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=4470
Quotes from the Hillary campaign about Kindergate:

“In kindergarten, Senator Obama wrote an essay titled 'I Want to Become President.' "Iis Darmawan, 63, Senator Obama's kindergarten teacher, remembers him as an exceptionally tall and curly haired child who quickly picked up the local language and had sharp math skills. He wrote an essay titled, 'I Want To Become President,' the teacher said." [AP, 1/25/07 ]

If you're thinking what I am thinking your thinking her campaign is either insane or desparate.

Dave Memphis, TN (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 11:05 AM)

There is an old saying Senator Clinton would do well to remember:

"Better to keep your mouth shut and have people think
you are a fool than to open it ..and prove them right"

That also goes for supporters

Joe (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 11:08 AM)

It's a beautiful thing:

Hillary Clinton starts thrashing around making petty and silly attacks on Obama...

and First Read concludes Obama will be the net loser because he didn't "fight back"?

You First Read folks LOVE HILLARY SO MUCH.

It's disgusting.

She's lame and she's falling. Wake up.

Betty in Baltimore (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 11:23 AM)

After reading these comments, I realize that more than being for the candidate they believe in, people are rallying against the candidates they feel are the worst.

Please find out where each candidate stands on the major issues that face us in the years to come. If they are being evasive or speaking in circles understand that as president they will act depending on where the greatest advantage is for them.

I am disappointed in the people that we trust to give us unbiased news. They are so quick to report on what will bring in ratings that they are failing the American people when it is most important.

Please take back the power to decide for yourself. Read about all the candidates. Look at what they have done, NOT just what they are saying they would do. This is the most important election of our time.

Toni Boyle (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 11:28 AM)

you are right dot. this administration is long on experience but short on good judgement.

ace p washington, d.c. (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 11:28 AM)

Sam St Louis:

Well said. I agree completely.

Elizabeth Sullivan, San Diego, CA (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 11:32 AM)

"Hillary Clinton, cold, calculating, dishonest, unethical, divisive"

Hillary is a politician - just like so many others. I don't support her for President but I don't set a different bar for her than I do other candidates. To say that Barack Obama is somehow above politics is not realistic. The exceedingly high number of "present" or missed votes on critical issues indicates a certain level of calculation on Senator Obama's part.

Deifying Obama and excoriating Clinton serves little purpose. Neither is perfect and neither is Cheney.

BIDEN '08

Elizabeth Sullivan, San Diego, CA (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 11:39 AM)

So here is the thing I want to say to all Hillary Clinton supporters -

I do not have a personal problem with Hillary Clinton. I have a problem with her deliberately distorting things, making repeatable sound bites out of them, and saying them over and over again as if she believes it is true. Examples you say?

"Obama's health care plan leaves out 15 million people." That is a statement of fact. However, that is not a fact - it is an "estimate" - and a disputed estimate at that.

This is a clear effort to distort a VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE and make the conversation be about "what the meaning of the word is is" instead of WHAT THE HELL ARE WE GONNA DO TO FIX THE HEALTHCARE PROBLEM IN THIS COUNTRY?

Her SLASH AND BURN tactics make it VERY DIFFICULT to work with her later if in fact she gets the nomination, because it creates alot of BAD FEELINGS between two people who are basically NOT THAT FAR APART on the issue.

It is this WINNER TAKE ALL mentality that is my primary problem with Senator Clinton. And that is the reason why I fear her adminstration would be very similar to the current one - not willing to LISTEN to others, not willing to WORK WITH people unless they completely bend to your will. That attitude is COUNTERPRODUCTIVE as governing style.

Regardless of which candidate you support, there can be no denying the Senator Clinton's record of building consensus is not a good one.

Nashville_fan (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 11:41 AM)

There are many posters here presenting the Clinton Campaign's latest theme (there have been so many) about leadership. I would like to know some examples of the leadership roles that Senator Clinton has played in her political career.

There is much talk of what Senator Obama has not done, but I don't see the counter balance of what Senator Clinton has accomplished.

Nashville_fan (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 11:46 AM)

Desperate: to continue from yesterday ...
Yes, I do dare abet, this lunatic idea that it's okay to go with your gut and vote in the guy that feels right.

Check out the likeability factor, I think it was actually pretty informational.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3096434/

It's not a coincidence that the most likeable candidates are rising in the polls now for both parties. But the one point that stuck out most was that both parties have good, valid ideas and philosophies. And both have bad ones, too. The majority of voters see both the good and bad in both parties or don't really care about some of the issues (I could go either way on the wedge issue of abortion, truly I could). What do you think they decide on? Likeability and trust. A gut feeling.

The subjective is important. Everybody is bound to make mistakes in office, and I want to know how a leader is going to respond to those mistakes. Do they accept them honestly and learn from them, or do they make it worse and lead us further down the wrong path? I don't care if they have the best policy stance in the world, but if they can't bring people together to get it done or lose the respect of the American populous, absolutely worthless. Policy isn't unimportant, but the subjective determines how a President enacts that policy. The problem comes when voters incorrectly follow their gut, but even if you choose highly arbitrarily based on policy, that is also frequently wrong, too.

--NSMSNBC (Sent Tuesday, December 04, 2007 11:48 AM)

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=495048