http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07u6uffKvpA

Hillary's angry response to Edwards... Her response is exactly why she is not fit for leading change.

FOCUS GROUP VIDEO

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Apv5KWHgXTE

Please help us if we would have to listen to four years of Obama!  If he wins, I am moving to Europe. All of the candidates I feel know that this country needs change......too many made an inappropriate decision four years ago and now we are sinking into an abyss caused by this administration.

How long was Hillary's tantrum?

Breaking News: Hillary Clinton exposed (Another Dirty Tactic)

January 5, 2008,  11:39 pm
New Hampshire and Those Labor Ads
By Kate Phillips

MANCHESTER, N.H. — As we’ve been driving around New Hampshire this week, we can’t help but hear the radio ads playing repeatedly. We’ve heard Ron Paul ads, John McCain ads and then ads that just stopped us — those for Hillary Rodham Clinton and against Senator Barack Obama.
We had to listen hard (and not veer off the road) to hear AFSCME as the sponsor at the end of one of the messages. And while we’ve been paying attention tonight to the debates, Mark Halperin’s item over at The Page caught our eye, and we thought we should share it with you.
As Mr. Halperin reported, several members of the International Executive Board protested loudly in a letter to AFSCME president Gerald McEntee that an independent expenditure unit run by two people had been using funds solely to attack Senator Obama (and no other Democratic candidate). Keep reading this letter, posted on The Page, and keep in mind that it comes at a time when Senator Obama has emerged victorious out of Iowa and is in a very tight race here in New Hampshire.
We are writing to protest in the strongest terms the negative campaign that AFSCME is conducting against Barack Obama. We do not believe that such a wholesale assault on one of the great friends of our union was ever contemplated when the International Executive Board (IEB) made its decision to endorse Hillary Clinton.
In fact, when the vote to make a primary endorsement was taken by the IEB, there appeared to be widespread agreement that we had a strong field of Democratic candidates all of whom had made a very positive impression on the IEB Screening Committee. The argument for endorsing Hillary Clinton was not that her positions were better than those of the other candidates or that she would be the better president for working families, but rather that she was the clear frontrunner, the most likely primary victor, and the strongest general election candidate.
……
We were therefore shocked and appalled to learn that our union-through “independent expenditures”–is squandering precious resources to wage a costly and deceptive campaign to oppose Barack Obama. As Barack’s standing in the polls has soared, according to numerous press reports AFSCME has spent untold dollars in Iowa and New Hampshire to send out mailings and run radio ads whose sole purpose is to undercut his candidacy. And now AFSCME has even registered a website with the explicit purpose of “opposing Barack Obama.”
It is also worth noting that the campaign that AFSCME is waging against Senator Obama is fundamentally dishonest and inconsistent with past positions of our union, i.e. attacking him for not forcing individuals to purchase health care even when they can’t afford it. The ads are misleading in attempting to give the impression that they are associated with John Edwards rather than Hillary Clinton and in their claims that Sen. Obama’s health care plan will exclude 15 million people when in fact every person will have the opportunity to participate. This dishonesty is giving our union a “black eye” among many in the media and the progressive community.
Earlier this week, The Concord Monitor reported that voters had received emails criticizing Mr. Obama’s health care plan as “a Band-aid solution” that would leave “15 million Americans uninsured.” (We are pretty sure Mrs. Clinton has used the same term — Band-aid solution — to refer to plans that weren’t hers.) These mails included comments by John Edwards that criticized the Obama plan, The Monitor said, which residents could have inferred meant they were backed by Mr. Edwards and his supporters.
But, no, they were financed by an AFCSCME committee. The Monitor reported that AFSCME had spent nearly $80,000 on such mailings recently. And it had paid for radio ads, as we mentioned earlier.
The issue of primary endorsements has been loudly debated among labor unions. And in fact, some unions or their umbrella organizations decided not to endorse in the primaries — sometimes citing the fact that the field was fairly strong. Others, remembering how they were stung by supporting a candidate who lost in previous cycles, were still skittish this time around.
If you read the entire letter by members of the board, you can sense their concerns about such a scenario. It’s pretty palpable.

I saw both debates and quite frankly, though I am a democrat, I'm also into competetive sports and generally have a feel for who puts out the better team on the playing field. That, having been said, what planet are the Republican candidates from? Though I have my preference among the four democrats, any of them would be superior to what the Republicans are offering up. The Dems are like watching real theatre, the Republicans are the equivalent of "entertainment tonight."

More face time for Clinton is not good for her.

Just watched the Hillary break down again, and I dont understand the Hillary supporters saying she had to stick up for herself, she started it by jabbing at Obama, and he responded in a very calm and rational manner. Edwards called her out for it and she seriously lost it about how much change she has already accomplished, but how much rang true - she has taken on drug companies? Not very successful Iwould say, She has taken on oil companies - not very successful either. How does she have 35 years of experience? does not seem feasible

Well, Edwards made the most of this short time.  He hammered Clinton hard and looked great in tonight's debate.  It'll be a close fight for second in NH.  Don't write off John Edwards yet...

And yet, even with less time, I think Edwards did the best.  Sometimes brevity is a good thing.  It is obvious that the MSM would like this to be Clinton v. Obama, but I think New Hampshire is going to be saying something different on Tuesday.

The Media has not been fair to the better candidate’s democrat or republican. Edwards is the better candidate of the democrats, especially when it comes to honesty but he’s getting robbed. Romney is getting coverage but they try to paint him with mud which he doesn’t deserve! He’s the best candidate on the republican side.  

Hillary won...way to go Hillary! She set the record straight. Numerous times she hit above the belt...Obama and Edwards responded as if she went for the family jewels! That's the kind of president I want. Tough, strong and a true leader.

Since when are there only four Democrats in this race?  Biden and Dodd may have dropped out but Dennis Kucinich is still in this race!  Kucinich is the only one who can turn this country around after 8 years of Bush.  He placed first in polls of Progressive Democrats of America, Democracy for America, Virginia Democrats and Washington Democrats, and finished just barely behind Edwards in the MySpace primary, yet he is excluded.  ABC has denied the American people a true choice in this election!

As a 40 year old African-American man I'm on sitting on the edge of my seat about this years election.  It really is amazing, as a "Gen X'er", I can see my generation taking it place in the forefront history in this year's election.  If Mr. Obama wins in NH change will really come about for the USA.  I can't believe I wanted to watch the Dem. debates over the NFL playoffs Decison 2008 is AWESOME!!!  Go Barack Obama

Richardson will gain becasue more people will know who is is. Edward's passion will come across. Clinton looked good. Obama was OK, but the other's gains will come at his expense. Tomorrow's polls will be Clinton over Obama, with Richardson closing the gap on Edwards.

Like this means anything at all?

Recap of the Democratic Presidential Debate
We have the strongest 4 potential presidential that I have seen in a very long time.  Although they differ on many of the issues the fundamentalism is still there.  Any one of these candidates would do a good job.  They all have passion to do the right thing.  The gap between them is that a few of the candidates have plenty of passion but want to promise to cure all our problems in four years.  Their preaching comes from the right place, but which one of the candidates has the most realistic action plans to get some things done?  I believe they all did very well tonight, but a few stood out to me.  Hillary Clinton stood out as the strongest leader tonight.  She is tough, realistic and made this evitable when she brought down Edwards and Obama from the cloud they were on…when she gave her “reality check” speech.  That showed how in check she is to what is really going on and how the others are all over the place.  Richardson is very intelligent and showed that tonight.  He is subtle in his arguments, but powerful in his thought.  He could be a real contender going forward.  Richardson also stands out from the others on his experience with balancing budgets, energy reform and foreign debate.  I give much credit to Obama’s passion to want to make changes to the whole system, called Washington. I was shocked to learn that his campaign chair is a lobbyist for the healthcare company (I believe is what was brought up tonight…anyway it was a big turn off, especially since he had been preaching such conviction against the lobbyists.  This gives me the impression he says what is the most popular at the time.  Not a whole lot of substance behind his proposed promises.  Electing Obama is like hiring someone for the most important job in the world, but have an average resume.  Nice guy and I think he is good for Washington, but I think he has some more growing to do. Edwards is someone I really like because his heart is in the right place and he has a lot of integrity.  I’m just concerned that he wants to boil the ocean with all the problems our nation faces.  He wants to fix too many things all at once and he wants major reform done.  That passion can hurt our country if he does not make some viable plans to attack the top 3 issues that face our country.  His plan to get us out of IRAQ really scares me.  He wants to pull out from Iraq in waves.  Many more soldiers could be lost, due to leaving fewer soldiers behind until the next wave comes to get them.  I think you do this quickly not in waves.   Very scary!!  We all need to be sure the next president we elect will not be based on juvenile agendas such as being a Republican or Democrat or if your black, white, hispanic or a woman.  
The next president will need to be the strongest candidate that is out there because the next four years will be the toughest and most challenging yet and our country will need a leader that will take it on with strength, dignity, experience and leadership.   VOTE WISELY!!!

I am very Glad that Edward's had less Time if i have to hear that ( I was born A sharecroppers Son Speech Again I May join the RNC)


Go Hill!!!!

I think Hillary won the debate.
I like the passion in her voice when ganged up on by Edwards and Obama, she has every right to defend herself I would have thought she was weak had she not responded so strongly.

She has my vote !!!!!!
I just hope you Obama lovers know what's on the line.
look what happened when you voted G.W.Bush in office.
Think real hard!!!!!!!!!!

   Clearly, another Republican conspiracy to steal and keep the Presidency. We've had Clinton and Obama shoved down our throats by the right wing media for over a year now. The only one left in the running who looks remotely "presidential" is John Edwards. I would
love to have seen a Biden - Edwards ticket. The American people will not elect either Clinton or Obama, and anyone with any real political knowledge is aware that the only chance the Republicans have is to run agaist one or the two.

John Edwards can't win! Even when he's ahead, he doesn't get more time! Why was Richardson even there? He was such of waste of time and space!

One would think that more focus would be on Obama since he is now the front runner.

THE WINNER IN IOWA..................DEMOCRATS DO NOT WIN IN GENERAL ELECTION.I THINK DEMOCRATS WINNER IN IOWA IS S JINX.

Obama was terrible when it came to healthcare. ABC's moderators were clearly biased and gave less time to Edwards and Richardson.  The local reporter attacked Richardson in a way that was completely ignored.  This is not balanced media, these people are shoving Obama and Clinton on us.  Personally, Clinton and Richardson did the best.  

Bill Bradley endorses Obama in New Hampshire on Sunday.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle endorses Obama
 January 05, 2008

I was disappointed that the Democrats weren't asked the same questions as the Republicans.  At least the same topics should have been covered in BOTH debates.  What are ALL the candidates' positions on illegal immigration, health care, energy, etc.

There is no doubt now! Hillary was sensational, her experience, her approach, convictions realy came out
at this debate. She was powerful and truly was strong.
Wow, I was not sure, I am possitive now!!!, Hillary was incredible!! the true winner of the debate!
Edwards really showed desperation with his negatives and also needs to hop off Obama's coatails it was so obvious and hypocritical his tag team actions were really very much unappreicated. Too Angry for me!!!
Great Team! Hillary Prez/Obama VP !!!

you're fired!....what is there to discuss?

New Hampshire Democratic Debate Winner

Who won the ABC Democratic Debate in New Hampshire?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1451

-------------------------------------------------------------

New Hampshire Republican Debate Winner

Who won the ABC Republican Debate in New Hampshire?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1450

.

Do not confuse experience with living in Washington.  Thats what you Hillary folks do not understand.  Obama has been in elected office longer than Hillary.  The fact of the matter is that the change we are talking about is bigger than mere policy differences.  Its the "hope" that the citizens of this country can once again believe in their government again.  Can be proud of (or at least respect) the president regardless of their party identification.  Do you seriously believe if Hillary becomes president the country will rally behind her?  For the sake of the country she should remain in the Senate.  
Do you seriously believe a person who lived in the White House for 8 years represents change? For one moment, please think about the two Bush presidencies.  Albeit the relationship is different, Dubya shunned most of the advice and advisors of his father but kept those who his father shunned especially concerning Iraq.  I do not need to mention names... Pres. Hillary's sole purpose would be to live up to Pres. Bill's presidency.  Their "camps" can't even get along during the campaign for heaven's sake.  Dubya, rightly (won reelection) or wrongly (Iraq) distanced himself from his father but they did not share a bed every night.

America, when you think about change remember that the status quo in Washington is constant bickering, corruption, and indifference.  Hillary's experience will all but guarantee that the next 4+ years will be more of the same.

I am sorry to disagree, I felt Obama seemed weak in his explanations on foreign policy. He did not realy say very much on how or what he has done. Mrs. Clinton  was incredible. She was personable, she was passionate, She came out really showing that she has the experience. Pretty look, pretty talk and trying to pretend experience really does not show leadership and this is what Mr. Obama portrayed. Lets stop wishing, let's face the reality that Mr. Obama does not have it yet to be President!
Edwards was just plain angry and seemed to have spoken previous and maliciously with Obama to defend each other as a tag team. This is not showing true leadership or presidential. With this debate I know a vote for Obama would be trusting him to have Our Contry in his hands and with no real presidential experience the Republican would eat Mr. Obama alive and we still would be in the same circustances we find ourselves now. He may make a good VP, but president Never! not this time around..Our country faces many challenges in which Mr. Obama just does not have the experience. Mrs. Clinto really was the winner!!!!!!

Clinton's campaign cracks me up. She is essentially saying everything she did from the age of 25 counts as "experience." For heaven's sake, why doesn't anyone point out that Obama has held elected office longer than she has? Fair enough, she has FOUR more years when it comes to the US Senate. The rest of her experience came as a PRIVATE CITIZEN who was married to a governor and then to a president. Her experience will not lead to change because it is precisely her experience in the White House that will be the source of acrimony, gridlock, and continue to perpetuate the status quo. You've had your turn, give the new generation and new breed of politics a chance.

Most politicians have a hard time not talking.  I am surprised that they all didn't want more time.

I think Senator Obama was outstanding last night, he is everything that I try to instill in my daughters. The courage to stand up for what you believe, even if it not popular. To truly care for other people, to try and change the world for the better, and to work with others to accommpolish your goals and lastly to inspire others to reach their potential. When I listen to Obama I believe that he wants to unity and heal our country from the last 16 years of the Clinton VS Bush, Dems VS Repubs, and people VS government. Come on America vote Obama.

Hillary Clinton is clearly the most Presidential, the most concrete in plans, and the most electible.  Obama will be vulnerable on drug use - and the Republican attack ads will stop at literally nothing to defame him.  Already vetted by the Republicans, Clinton, as the first woman U.S. President, signals dramatic change.  Here is the bottom line:  If we do not elect Hillary Clinton, we do not deserve her.

I thought the moderator from NH was very pro Clinton, soft ball querstions

Any Democratic candidate denied participation in a televised debate is in effect denied freedom of speech.  Where was Dennis Kucinich?  He has handily won in many internet polls.  Who gave the media the authority to squelch his views?  In the realm of a Democracy, all views are equally deserving of being heard.  Seems to me that the media selects our presidential candidates by orchestrating the amount of exposure they get.  Shame on the media.

I'm an independent and watched the debates last night. I see people comparing Obarma to JFK and RFK, and although he is very charismatic, we must remember that the Kennedys grew up in politics from their grandfather on down.  Obarma just doesn't have the experience we need in a president.  As far as the Democrats go, I think Hilary is the only one qualified for the job. We have to keep in mind that she has Bill's experience in her corner.  Although a complete scondrel, he has a brillant mind.  

I personally like John McCain.  He truly is a person who has SERVED his country, and continues to do so.  He has character, morality, and honesty.  We need a strong leader with foregn policy experience.  This country is in turmoil. And this is a very difficult decision for people to make.  We need someone to restore morality to this country.  

The more I look at Obama the better I prefer Hillary Clinton.  Obama is the smooth, flashy talker who gets little or nothing done - everybody's favorite.
Clinton just works hard and walks the walk. Obama talks change but Clinton does the change.

Clinto votes yes or no while Obama votes "present" - some change that is!

Experience and change - Hillary Clinton.

I know the goods when I see them and Clinton is the goods.

I think it's amazing that in most debates, Edwards gets the third-most time despite the fact that he was in the top two in Iowa polls and actually ended up getting 2nd place in Iowa. The guy deserves equal time with Senator Clinton and Senator Obama. And quite frankly, he made the best use of his time, staying on message and appearing to grow a little bit. He reminded me in this debate a little of how he was in 2004 - while I don't think he changed his policies, his demeanor got a little less optimistic since then, and it seemed to be closer to where he needed to be in the debate yesterday.

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