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: Classifying the candidates

Posted: Monday, December 31, 2007 9:39 AM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under:

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, and Domenico Montanaro
DES MOINES, IA -- After the last four days of watching the top three Democrats on the stump, we think we can categorize their sales pitches more succinctly. Clinton is the steady hand, Obama is the unifying change agent, and Edwards is the crusader. For months, the chattering class has struggled to classify Edwards. Was he a change agent or a populist? Well, after listening to him use a variation of the word "fight" more than "change" (39 times versus 10 at one stop yesterday, per NBC/NJ’s Tricia Miller), it's fair to say we know what he is: He's playing the role of crusader. Which message will ultimately work? The most tried and true method is the Clinton tactic (though it does put her in the position of being the "incumbent"). Crusader candidates usually hit a wall at some point because normally they have a hard time bring in new supporters (though Edwards does have ENORMOUS fav ratings). And change agents can do well in two-ways against the steady hand, but how much is Edwards hurting Obama in these closing days?

*** Huck’s big test: Has Huckabee waited too long to respond? He appears to have let Romney get under his skin and he seems to be complaining very publicly about the attacks in a much less humorous way than he has in the past. Example: He tells the Politico that Romney owes him an apology. Will this style change cost him? Will voters look at the complaints at face value, or see him as weak for taking too long to respond? It's a major presidential leadership test for him.

*** Forget ringing in the New Year with a ball drop: While campaigns are spending New Year’s here in the Hawkeye State, they will all hold off on any champagne until the hit refresh on their Web browsers waiting for the final Des Moines Register poll to be posted late tonight. The poll is set to appear in tomorrow's editions of the paper, meaning the poll will begin circulating late tonight. The poll, the most respected of any when it comes to Iowa, will have an effect on how the chattering class sets up the final days of the campaign.

*** Enter Bloomberg? So Bloomberg -- as today’s New York Times suggests -- is closer to running, right? Well, remember he has to if he's even 20% thinking he'll run. The process for getting on ballots starts early, and he has to start the grunt work. What we don't know if whether there are any indie voters or voters in either primary who will use the Bloomberg threat to vote for the most electable candidate. The other thing to keep in mind is that while Bloomberg fascinates the Amtrak East Coast corridor, does the idea play in the rest of America?

*** Pulling a Dean? Did Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland (D), a key Clinton endorser and surrogate, pull a Howard Dean? “Beginning the presidential nominating process in Iowa, as will occur this week, ‘makes no sense,’ says Gov. Ted Strickland, who recently campaigned there for Sen. Hillary Clinton,” the Columbus Dispatch writes. “‘I'd like to see both parties say, “We're going to bring this to an end,”’ he said.” Well, remember the firestorm that engulfed Dean in January 2004, when NBC reported on unflattering statements he had made about the Iowa caucuses and the caucus system? Of course, there is a big difference of having a candidate (a la Dean) say something like this and a surrogate (like Strickland). But the Ohio governor has become one of Bill Clinton’s standard stump mentions. Does that continue?

*** On the trail: Iowa remains the place to be this New Year’s Eve… Biden visits Fort Dodge, Ames, and Newton; Clinton travels to Keokuk, Fort Madison, Muscatine, Waterloo, and Des Moines (the last three events billed as New Year’s celebrations); Dodd visits the Niman ranch in Thornton; Edwards is in Storm Lake, Spence, Emmetsburg, Algona, and Mason City (for his New Year’s Eve party); Huckabee spends his entire day in Des Moines, which includes a jog, haircut, and news conference; Obama goes to Perry, Jefferson, Boone, Iowa Falls, and Ames; Richardson campaigns in Ames, Perry, Winterset, Knoxville, and winds up in Des Moines for his NYE party; Romney stumps in Clinton, Bellevue, Dubuque, Manchester, Independence, and Waterloo; and Bill Clinton attends his own NYE parties in Missouri Valley and Ottumwa before joining his wife in Des Moines. Elsewhere, Giuliani is down, and Kucinich and McCain are in New Hampshire.

Countdown to Iowa: 3 days
Countdown to New Hampshire: 8 days
Countdown to Michigan: 15 days
Countdown to Nevada and SC GOP primary: 19 days
Countdown to SC Dem primary: 26 days
Countdown to Florida: 29 days
Countdown to Tsunami Tuesday: 36 days
Countdown to Election Day 2008: 309 days
Countdown to Inauguration Day 2009: 386 days

Click here to sign up for First Read emails.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

Hillary Clinton will win Iowa and will be the Democratic nominee. Come see why ...hillaryclinton.com
H I L L A R Y C L I N T O N . C O M , take a looksie.
In 72 hrs. it will be all over, hillaryclinton.com
Check the latest poll from Iowa just released this morning that has McCain and Edwards moving up, and Huckabee-Romney still locked in a complete toss-up: http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2007/12/last-stretch-in-iowa-zogby-updates-his.html
Huck wants an apology, gee, he is thin skinned. Turn the other cheek Mike or start swinging, can't just make jokes and seem above it all.
Perhaps there is no miricle here, just wishful thinking, had enough of that for the last few years, don't need no more 'hope' jargon. Realists not royalists!
Huckabee didn't really count as a candidate until a month ago. There was no way, given the baggage he carries, he could ever remain the happy go lucky Huck Finn character.

Looking at Huckabee and Obama on Meet the Press. I thought Huckabee showed some growth. He was thrown into the blast furnace. He's not unscathed. But he has used the month to become more of a national, real candidate for President. It's clear he knows very little about foreign policy, but it's also clear he knows how to craft political answers and solutions. Clearly, there is a ways to go. But he can hope. Maybe the vote gets split a few times, and he has a little time to regroup. Does the GOP go back to tossing the Evangelicals the 'bones' of the court and Gay marriage.

Why can't Huck make a better case against homosexuality? Isn't it pretty elitist, something kids at fancy schools do? Isn't there an element of one person being dominant? Aren't there elements of the sadistic and the masochistic? Who has decided it's something basically good? How does homosexuality relate to blue collar kids, today, in America? If Huck can't make a better case than what he did on MTP, the Right should just toss the issue. They've lost.

Obama always leaves me wanting. He just doesn't seem to acquire more stature with the passing weeks. He is clearly riding a wave of change, but he comes off as a surfer dude of politics. All the stuff the East Coast pundits have written about Obama, saying he has the broad world view to recast American policy abroad, still doesn't connect to the actual guy. He just doesn't seem strong enough to pull that off.
After Hillary Clinton said: 'Now the fun part starts'


We saw Obama smeared with the Muslim rumors
We saw Obama smeared with the Madrassa rumors

After Hillary Clinton said: 'Now the fun part starts'


We saw Obama smeared by Bill Shaheen
We saw Mark Penn mention cocaine twice on national TV
We saw Bob Kerry smear Obama
We saw Clinton's campaign forwarding smear e-mails

Do we want the Democratic party to return to the
'politics of personal destruction' ?

It wasn't just he Republicans smearing opponents, it
was the Clintons using smear tactics, too
It was Bill Clinton and James Carville

Now it's Mark Penn and Howard Wolfson and Bill Sheehan and Bob Kerry and Andrew Young
.......... and Hillary Clinton

Do we need sleazy Hillary Clinton ?

All politicians lie, but Bill and Hillary are two of
the sleaziest low lifes around

It's time for some decency,
It's time for some integrity

Obama/Edwards '08


Does Edwards ever say how he is going to combat corporate greed.  Is planning big tax hikes or encouraging unions to go on strike? To me his rhetoric is firey but empty of substance.  Also not that long ago he took much more realistic positions on corporations and lobbyists being at the table when helathcare and other programs are developed. Finally, considering how his public financing limits his ability to compete nationally and go the distance, Edwards is just tipping the election to Hillary. Intersting how few attacks she has made against him.
Opps, you goofed  First read, Obama's the canidate of caving to the republicans and insurance companies.
The only change he'll make is going from wealthy to super wealthy.
First Read, rather than attacking some supporter of Clintons in your usual negative, underhanded  "Carrie Damn..oops...typo...Dann" way, why not really do journalism investigation??  Are you just lazy or what?

Clinton has been lied about, vetted, Ken Starr $70 million investigtion with NO and I repeat NO legal charges.  

Since you are so in love with Barack Obama, why not actually help him if he is to be the actual Dem nominee for President.

You can help him by vetting him now before the vile Republicans go after him with sharp knives.

Dig into his background NOW.  What about his investments into a company that was wanting to make big bucks off of bird flu shots and then when he got to the Senate, tried to make shots mandatory?  IS there anything there?   Vet that now so it will be old stuff when the Rep go after it.

Check out the "facts" in his books.  If there are not actual truths, vet it now before the Rep make it a HUGE scandal.

What about Obama's relationship with indicted slumlord Tony Rezko and his real estate deal.  Vet it  now...it will be a HUGE scandel by Rep later.


First Read, you are not doing Obama any favors by not investigating him now.  The REP vicious machine is getting geared up.  Later this stuff will be introduced as scandals.

INTITUTION...not experience.

George Bush and Barack Obama...too much reliance on just intitution

Both too scary to be president
From the Nation:

'...What Hillary Hasn't Done in Foreign Policy
Jon Wiener

During the eight years Hillary was First Lady, she
didn't deal with terrorism, Osama bin Laden, or Al
Qaeda.

She wasn't a decision-maker on any of the other big
foreign policy issues of her husband's presidency:
whether to send troops to Bosnia or Kosovo, whether to bomb terrorist bases in Afghanistan or suspected
terrorist sites in the Sudan.

She didn't deal with the problems in the CIA and other intelligence agencies. She didn't work on nuclear proliferation. She did not deal with genocide in Rwanda.

When Bill Clinton brought Israelis and Palestinians to negotiations at Camp David in 2000, Hillary wasn't
there.

These are the conclusions reached by New York Times
reporter Patrik Healy, who reported on Dec. 26 on his
conversations with 35 Clinton administration officials and his interview with Hillary herself.

"Mrs. Clinton did not hold a security clearance,"
Healy wrote. "She did not attend National Security
Council meetings. She was not given a copy of the
president's daily intelligence briefing. She did not
assert herself on the crises in Somalia, Haiti and
Rwanda."

Most important: Hillary did not do "the hard part of
foreign policy" - "making tough decisions, responding
to crises." That's what Susan Rice told the New York
Times - she was a National Security Council senior
aide and a State Department official during the
Clinton administration. She's now supporting Obama.

Readers may recall that Hillary has claimed to be the
most experienced Democratic candidate not just on
domestic issues, but also on international, because of her eight years in the White House. She often says she visited 79 countries as first lady. She often talks about meeting with the president of Uzbekistan and the prime minister of Czechoslovakia.

But when the New York Times reporter asked her to name three major foreign policy decisions in which she played a decisive role as first lady, she "responded in generalities" rather than specifics.

When the Times asked her to cite a significant foreign policy lesson she learned from the 1990s, she replied "There are a lot of them," and went on to talk about "the whole unfortunate experience we've had with the Bush administration."

What did she do on those trips to 79 countries? These
were mostly "good-will endeavors" where she supported
nonprofit work. She acted as "a spokeswoman for
American interests." She often spoke out for women's
rights -- especially at the 1995 UN conference on
women in Beijing. She brought Catholic and Protestant
women together at a meeting in Northern Ireland. And,
Healy reported, she often advocated "the expanded use
of microcredits, tiny loans to help individuals in
poor countries start small businesses."...'

What a stellar record !!

'...But when the New York Times reporter asked her to
name three major foreign policy decisions in which she played a decisive role as first lady, she "responded in generalities" rather than specifics....'

In other words Hillary she played NO ROLE in foreign
policy decisions.....

'....important: Hillary did not do "the hard part of
foreign policy" - "making tough decisions, responding
to crises." That's what Susan Rice told the New York
Times - she was a National Security Council senior
aide and a State Department official during the
Clinton administration....'

What did she do ?  NOTHING
Whyat did she learn ? NOTHING
What kind of 'experience' does she have ? NONE
Experience is just another of Hillary's lies
'Was he a change agent or a populist? Well, after listening to him use a variation of the word "fight" more than "change" (39 times versus 10 at one stop yesterday, per NBC/NJ’s Tricia Miller), it's fair to say we know what he is: He's playing the role of crusader. Which message will ultimately work?'

edwards doesn't need you to 'classify' him as anything, instead of counting how many times he said a certain word maybe you should have listened to the message, lobbyists will not part with their complete controll of congress without a 'fight', they will have to be told what they can and can't do, negosiating from a point of weakness like obama plans on doing will prove futile and meangless, it will take a man like edwards that will stand his ground for the american people to bring about any meaningful change, or you can nominate hillary who thinks that lobbyists controlling the country is how it should be, long as her and her buddies get theirs, edwards will have a tough row to hoe trying to reform a system completly entrenched in a corrupt 'sell me your vote' congress but I intend to give him the oppurtunity to take his best shot, because the other candidates offer nothing but business as usual nonsense
Lack of judgement

Lack of excperience

Egotistical    

Brags about governing on the basis of his ""INTUTITION"

Given a free pass by the press with NO investigation of his past

Stubborn liar

Green and not ready to lead

Must rely on a strong experienced vice president who has his own agenda




GEORGE BUSH?????????????????????????????????


Nope....BARACK OBAMA
Senator Clinton has a huge lead nationally; I don't see how she's going to lose the nomination, regardless of what the outcome is in Iowa and New Hampshire.

I think it would be a huge upset if she were to lose it at this point.
THE NICEST THING ABOUT ENTERING INTO 2008 IS THAT  WE ONLY HAVE ONE MORE YEAR LEFT OF HEARING AND SEEING GEORGE BUSH AS AN AMERICAN PRESIDENT...YIPPPEEEE
"tsunami tuesday"?.... I would drop that moniker.
Does'nt the MSM realize that the American voter is more tuned in this time around? 1st read is saying their observation, shows Clinton to be the steady hand.What is it that You reporter's for 1st read, have'nt noticed that she has changed her message repeatedly in the last month or so? If anyone has been the Steady hand, it's been Barack since he started campaigning 10 months ago.His message has Not wavered!!!! As a matter of Fact, most, if not All the other campaign's have tryed to mimick him with the message of Change.The Only thing none of the other candidates has'nt said yet is, " I AGREE WITH BARACK".Barack's message of Change has resonated with the voter's Nationwide as evidenced by Hillary's shrinking lead's.

" DELUSIONAL THINKING BY COMMON SENSE AMERICAN'S IS OVER"
Lack of judgement

Lack of excperience

Egotistical    

Brags about governing on the basis of his ""INTUTITION"

Given a free pass by the press with NO investigation of his past

Stubborn liar

Green and not ready to lead

Must rely on a strong experienced vice president who has his own agenda




GEORGE BUSH?????????????????????????????????


Nope....BARACK OBAMA

Lester Crowley TX

__________

Darn, I got it wrong. I thought you were talking about Hillary.
Is John Edwards scheduled for his $300.00 haircut yet ? I got to go get my 4 buck haircut today !
"Edwards is the crusader." "Well, after listening to him use a variation of the word "fight" more than "change""
--I mentioned it before that Edwards' campaign seems to tend negative, as in pessimistic.  Fight, to me, is a negative word, and he keeps talking about broken systems and 'Two Americas'.  Without a sense of optimism instilled, it seems more difficult to drag oneself to the polls, and all the pessimism builds upon itself making it appear too much to fix--so why try?  Not to insinuate anything at all, really, but maybe the tactic is like a cult.  Knock the people down and build them up how you want.  As for fighting, it seems like we have enough fighting and partisanship in Washington as is (and it's not working), it would surprise me if voters would latch onto that argument during a change election.  I don't mean this as a slight against Mr. Edwards as it appears to be working, but if that message would carry him, it would be the only real surprise of this race for me.  I guess we'll find out on January 3rd, how exciting.
A Game, A game ...

I like playing games, though they rarely resemble Yatzee!  But with the Iowa Caucus approaching, I thought it would be interesting to step back from the shilling and mudslinging.  People talk about how it is the issues that are important to how they vote, so I'm wondering what those are on a personal level.  What are the general issues, policies and factors that drive your vote?

RULES:
1) No mentioning of any candidates' names.
2) Make a separate post from the shilling and slinging.
3) Be cordial, be respectful, especially if responding to somebody else.
4) Be honest: explain the issues as they are important to you (not a candidate, not the country).
5) Have fun!
A Game, A game ...
My example,

The Iraq War is a big issue for me.  I'd like to get out of it.  The cost/benefit analysis of the situation does not seem worth it to me.

Science:  I like science, science is our future, and Washington needs to both fund and not dictate science.  Stem cell research is one issue that drives my vote.  It seems silly to me to ask if the candidates believe in evolution, but it is also an important question because it demonstrates, to me, the candidate's commitment to science.  (A side note: I do see evolution on a daily basis, not monkeys to humans, but in a different context).  Natural selection is alive and well in our markets, advertisements, relationships with people ...)

The budget is another issue.  Spending money the way we do is not sustainable.  Nobody would tell the individual that they should live beyond their means and pass the debt to their children, so why is that okay in government?  Then you've got some morons paying off their housing loans with credit cards ...  I remember when President G.W. Bush was running, either Gore or Kerry said they would have the debt paid off in 12 years, and the Republicans countered with 8 years.  Well, 8 years later, and my trust in GOP monetary policy has dwindled--not that I believed the 8 year boast.

So, a fair amount of my key issues seem to be pushing me to vote Democrat next year.

For me, many issues drive my vote, and I recognize that I am not infallible and am from time to time, wrong, however infrequent that may be.  : )  That is why I also look at other subjective factors like transparency, honesty and intelligence.  Because I may be wrong or not know, but I want those smarter than me to know and point out when our country is headed in the wrong direction.
Why does female voters think that they should vote for Hillary because of gender issue? Is American politic turning from democracy to dynasty? Father to Son and now Husband to Wife?
Well, it's one thing if your 'intuition' takes you on the warpath into a country that did nothing and gets you stuck there.

It's another if your intuition is CONSTANTLY PROVEN RIGHT:

Obama in '02, on Iraq: "I'm not opposed to all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war."

CAN ANYONE ELSE CLAIM THEY HAD THIS KIND OF INTUITION? NO!

Bill Clinton lied and said he was opposed to Iraq from the start. Hillary has tried to claim she was hoodwinked. John Edwards has apologized for voting for the war. Biden and Dodd just don't mention it.

Only Obama had the guts and the intuition to stand up and say that the war was STUPID. Do you want a president that can be hoodwinked by someone as dumb as Dubya? Do you want a president who will screw up royally and apologize for it four years later? Do you want a President who will pretend their mistakes never happened?

If nothing else, though, I'd like a president that isn't currently pandering to the religious right, so please, everyone, vote Democrat in '08, no matter WHO the nominee is.
Oh goodness, health care and health insurance too!  I recognize that people are not satisfied with our current system.  The system that I want, well, I don't see it as politically feasible, which won't stop me from arguing for it.  Still, I can see the direction of our health care and insurance is moving towards the socialist end of the spectrum in a broad sense, and if it is doing so, I'd like to see it the most palatable and feasible for the most people.  This is one of this issues that I might be wrong on, so I try to keep an open mind.






































              Hillary Clinton 2008!





















The year in review; The many exits of Mark Thieme, Watchers 1-34, Sunyata, Ia Atty, no last name, and God knows how many other screen names...

"Elizabeth, Mark and Zuma: I have been posting here several times a week for the past few months. Having read a lot of blogs of one stripe or another, I was never before interested in entering the conversation because of the tone or the general lack of thoughtful observation. The worst cases for me were the liberal blogs. When I found First Read, I read a whole range of opinion with people who seemed free from lockstep reactions. More often than not, after reading your posts and then reading through the discussions, I felt I had been better informed than anything I had encountered in the Mainline Media. First Read was not perfect, nor would it have been interesting if it were. And I am aware that it does not exist for my taste alone. Nonetheless, it was an intelligent blog with a few rules which kept conversations honest and clean. A few days ago, I was shocked at what I saw. There seemed to have been an invasion of aliens to the site. The tone had changed drastically for the worse and the quality of discourse had practically disappeared. The few beleaguered regulars left posting tried to have conversations around the loud newcomers who seemed all over the blog. One in particular. These folks seemed to have nothing special to say, but either were so egocentric as to believe that their wisdom had not been posted before better, or they were truly engaged in a "hijacking" as does occur on other sites from time to time, right around the time of some significant political or geopolitical event. Huma came onto the discussion board yesterday in a mild police action which was past due. I do not know what you can do about the deterioration of the quality and civility of your blog discussions. My own reaction was at first to ignore it. When I saw you were letting it go, possibly for the purpose of hyping the site, I joined in the brawl. It turned into a blog bar fight. I have never liked bullies, never liked loud-mouths and have found it almost impossible to stay in a room with fair-weather patriots, mouthy chickenhawks, who have no clue how foolish they appear to others, but nonetheless dominate the conversation with their "opinions." This is all to say that the blog has lost its appeal for me and at least one other free-thinking and intelligent friend. We are just weary of the harassment and the prevailing arrogance and ignorance (including some of our own reactionary posts) of the recent past few days. You are about to lose something of value (not just us in particular) and something many have appreciated: a forum for those with ideas, concerns, and expressions which may not fall directly into some ideological category. A blog for reasoned and even lighthearted exchange of opinion. A blog for free-thinkers, right left, and center. One final word before signing off for awhile: The predictable knee-jerk reaction (which has seldom been in such evidence here) to anyone who takes his ball and goes home is often about "sour grapes" or invites a childish diatribe about "free speech." We had free speech here. That was the joy of it. There is no law against bullying on the blogs and Americans still have the freedom of expression as a right. There is no law against passing gas either, but one doesn't have to stay in the room with those who pass it egregiously. There are other rooms. This was a good one. I hope you'll regain some control. My one regret is that I got drawn into some rather tacky exchanges with people who seemed gleeful in trashing the site. Cheers to all!
Mark Thieme (Sent Friday, January 12, 2007 11:50 AM)"

4) Be Honest.


Van
RE: NSMsnbc's post:

I think one of the most important, yet overlooked, issues this election is education, an area in which we are falling more and more behind the rest of the world every year.

I would also like to stop hearing about troops dying in Iraq, but I also don't want to hear about a civil war breaking out there after we leave.

I'd like to see America's image in the world restored to what it once was, or ideally better than that.

I'd like to see alternative energy developed, along with plug-in hybrids (NOT ethanol OR hydrogen, both of which are total pipe dreams that don't even make sense in the real world). Ideally this would mean developing power generation from nuclear fusion ASAP.

As a student, I'd like to see a concerted effort to bring down the costs of higher education for everybody, especially those who are stuck in dead-end jobs trying to support their families.

I'd like to see the government invest in America's infrastructure (rebuild those BRIDGES, high-speed internet, the power grids, etc.)

If possible, I'd like to see an end to the partisan bickering and pork-barrel moneywasting era in Washington.

I'd like to see a liberal majority on the Supreme Court restored, because overturning Roe v. Wade is tantamount to the wholesale murder of thousands of young women with unwanted pregnancies who will turn to the black market and die from complications.

I'd like to see health care improved, with emphasis on preventive care, covering those with rare and expensive-to-treat illnesses, rewriting the rules to stop HMOs from cheating people of needed coverage, cutting wasteful medical practices like unnecessary and expensive test procedures, SIGNIFICANTLY more government oversight of Big Pharma (FDA do your friggin job), and use of the power of government to improve the dietary options available to Americans (stop the obesity epidemic--fat people are GROSS).

I'd like to see the end of ridiculous tax loopholes and subsidies to companies that deserve to pay their fair share of money to the government. I'd also like to see Congress man up and tax the oil companies like they deserve to be taxed. If that means higher prices at the pump, so be it--they already pay a ton more over in Europe, and their cars are a ton more efficient than ours.

I'd like to never hear about a bill getting killed by the THREAT of filibuster EVER AGAIN. If someone doesn't want a bill to pass, they should get out the dictionary and START READING. Would America have tolerated a filibuster on funding for the troops because it was tied to withdrawal deadlines? NO! But did the Dems let the bill die anyway because they don't have any political courage? Of course.

Can't think of anything else at the moment; those are the main issues for me.
There are so many issues that are important to me domestically. But one that I seem to think about most often is wanting our next president to put a great deal of effort into our inner cities, particularly the crime and education system. The public schools are failing these children all across the country. Getting a diploma doesn't appear to be a priority to these kids at all. They are experiencing so much crime in their cities. It is so sad.

This is America. This should be not happening to our children. They need hope and they need a system that cares about them. They deserve a future.

During the depression, Eleanor Roosevelt said that it was important to her and FDR that the citizens in this country feel as if the Roosevelts were their friend.

To me, that's the message our next President should be sending out all across our country. To both the working poor and the middle class.
I'm looking for someone who gives some indications they can look at the totality of a problem and pull in the best elements from all directions for a solution.  For example private health insurance has a lot of positives but it's obviously in a death spiral, failing tens of millions of people, more every year.  Our health care solution is probably going to end up with some form of basic care from the government with supplemental private insurance.  The war in Iraq is a disaster, but we can't just tell all the troops to get on a truck and drive to the nearest port or air base.  We need to make it clear to all we WILL leave, it WILL be some time soon, but do it in an operationally viable, fashion.  Done right our withdrawal should actually reduce the violence as the "occupying power" becomes less an issue for the population there.  Global warming is real.  We can make money off the solution or we can buy solutions from places that are more forward-thinking.  Where is that person?
Oh, let me RUN to Hillary's website!  What's today's flavor: experience, change, or likeability?   And what's with the likeability tour, anyhow?  Don't TELL me you're likeable, just BE likeable.  She's not even a person - she's the output of Mark Penn's poll-machine.
Steve in Hartford -- good for you and hope there are many others like you among your generational peers.

In general --

Intelligent, analytical, experienced, seeking knowledge, diplomatic, effective in cross party work and in bringing people together: Joe Biden. I'm not all that pleased with his economic policy statements but the rest is there. He is a person whose work shows effectiveness and who personifies dignity and should inspire respect by those who approach this process with more thought than emotion. Where are they all? Not in the media who are propagating the feeding frenzy of the emotional percentage of he population which seems to be being courted by pretty much all of the other candidates. A sad condition into which our great country seems to find itself lowering.
My state of Ohio will look like Iowa does now in the fall of 08. Hillary is the candidate who is the most ready to lead on day one. Loose nukes while charming Obama learns the ropes. YIKES scary
Education, the economy, three branches of government again working together, a better world view in general, the religious right back in the shadows again, help for the down trodden, health care that works, fixing the housing problem for americans not for investors, free markets with regulation that goes after greedy cheaters, tax cuts for middle class, truth, alternative energy, environmental truths over ideological clap-trap, truth, truth, and more truth from our leader in the White House. These are the issues I want our leaders to work on.
Boy Georgie is almost gone, he will have his whirlwind world tour and slowly fade into the sunset, just like in all the cowboy stories. I also say Yipppeeeee to this.
Happy New Year to all!
An HRC Precinct Captain?!  What an outrage!  Enough is enough.  Anyone but her and her slime:

In Cherokee, one Clinton precinct captain who asked that her name not be used questioned his prospects: “We’ve got to keep an eye on electability,” she said. “Is America ready for a black president?”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1207/7633.html
Kudos to Tim Russert for this past Sunday's Meet the Press.  Mike Huckabee came across more like Huckleberry Finn than presidential.  Barack Obama's "Audacity of Hope" is simply based on an angelic wing and a prayer.  For those that missed Sunday's program, please check download the video or read the transcript.  Thank you Tim Russert!
As a Freethinker whose moral code is drawn from the Humanist Manifesto, I take pause when the scientific theory of evolution is treated as an untested hypothesis by some in this society, and I will stand by the words of John Adams, our second President and a founding father, when he stated in Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli that he signed in 1797..."The government of the United States is in no sense founded on the Christian religion."I,for one,will continue to monitor and confront this new cycle of Anti-Rationalism in order to protect all the freedoms granted to this pluralistic society by the founding fathers. I will vote for Joe Biden and then I will fight him all the way when he attempts to repeal the Bush/Cheney Tax Cuts which are the only thing that those two bastards got right in their entire admionistration.
The chattering class? lol

LOVE THAT!
We need to amend the Constitution so that our protector and savour, George Bush, can run again. He is the only one smart and experienced enough to save us from these horrible terrorists who are sneaking in our country every day. Then we can continue to spend $500,000,000 a day defending Iraq instead of spending in the USA were we will just waste it on roads, education, health, infastructure...
Why are all of the hysterical Clinton nuts here? I cannot fathom why there are so many suicidal people running loose in this country. Anyone taking a look at her policies ought to know better. Part of her "experience" was to travel to India and China, promoting outsourcing and guest workers, especially H1-B guest workers, from which she and Bill have made so much money. I figured the falling dollar, 40 million jobs outsourced, almost 5 million engneering and programmers loosing their jobs here to H1-B workers, would be enough to cause any rational person to jetison Clinton. Add to this all of those lingering questions about corruption, the new ones where foreign campaign donations are laundered through minimum wage Chinese dishwashers and Indian shop keepers, the questions about her sexual proclivities, and on and on. Clinton cannot possibly win the general election. I'm a Democrat and I certainly wont vote for her; I'd vote for *any* Republican over her. Edwards is clearly the candidate most favored by voters across the country. Obama is good, but McCain beats him by nearly the same margin as he does Clinton. Heck, Huckabee is gaining ground on the two of them. Edwards-Biden is the best ticket we have, the best leaders, and the right people as leaders.
People need to take a closer look at Richardson.

C'mon people.  Let's not make the same mistake we did four years ago by nominating an unelectable Democrat (i.e., Clinton).

Instead, the crossover potential belongs to:

barackobama.com
Amy Dugan: Obama has worked hard in the Senate to ensure nuclear nonproliferation and considers it one of his highest priorities. Please get the facts straight.

Home / Stories / RSS

Reallocated Numbers Based on Second Preferences Gives Edwards A Solid Lead

InsiderAdvantage/Majority Opinion Poll: Clinton and Edwards in Virtual Tie in Iowa
Compiled from InsiderAdvantage and Southern Political Report staff reports

December 31, 2007 — Using the same polling methodology that successfully predicted the outcome of the 2004 Democratic Caucus in Iowa, InsiderAdvantage/Majority Opinion Research has been conducting a daily tracking poll among likely voters in the Jan. 3 Iowa Democratic Caucus, and it shows a statistical tie between Hillary Clinton and John Edwards, with Barack Obama starting to lag.  

Clinton has 30%, Edwards 29%, Obama 22%, with 14% committed to other candidates and 5% undecided.
The survey was conducted Jan. 28-29 among 788 likely Democratic voters in Iowa. The poll has been weighted for gender and age. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.4%.  

Critically, Edwards was the second choice of 62% of those who supported other candidates that did not receive the required 15% of the vote. Clinton was the second choice of 21% and Obama of 17%.
Using the reallocation methodology InsiderAdvantage used in 2004 – which correctly indicated a fairly comfortable win for John Kerry – our new poll reveals that, if the caucuses were held today, the reallocated final outcome would be:

Edwards: 41%
Clinton: 34%
Obama: 25%




http://www.southernpoliticalreport.com/storylink_1231_103.aspx


Van
I would like to know why Chris Matthews had a vendetta against the Clintons??  I'm a Hillary supporter and have been for many years.  The wife of the former President of France, Mrs. Chirac Said" Not everyone is Hillary Clinton.  She's an intellectual machine like I've rarely met".  I believe that she could start being President from day one!!   And for the people that say that this is going to be a dynasty forget that when we take our husband's name does not mean that we become them or their property.  She is a Rodham, only a Clinton by name!  I have been married for 56 years and I use my husband's name because it's easier for society but I am not a blood relative of my husband.
I am basically a Democrat but I will never vote for Hillary Clinton.  There are hundreds of thousands like me out there, so how is she going to get elected?  If it's not Obama I'm voting for the Libertarian candidate, Ron Paul or John McCain.

Nominating Hillary would be a major mistake.
The moderator of this forum **censors** anything remotely critical of Clinton and allows through some of the most outrageous nonsense supporting her imaginable. It's rather difficult to hold a free election when the press whores for a candidate. Note to MSNBC, *FIRE* this "reporter".


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=540011

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