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



Last night's debate

Posted: Friday, February 01, 2008 9:06 AM by Domenico Montanaro

How sunny were the two candidates? So sunny that the New York Times used a picture of the two with the biggest smiles either one has ever shown on the trail. “Gone were the sharp and sometimes personal attacks that have characterized a year’s worth of debates, particularly a combative session last week in South Carolina, which both sides conceded had tarnished their images. Still, the candidates were at pains to lay out their differences on issues like national health care, the Iraq war and experience in their last appearance together before voters in more than 20 states weigh in Tuesday on the presidential nominating fight.”

The Los Angeles Times’ lead: "The Iraq war reemerged Thursday as a dividing line between the two major Democrats remaining in the presidential contest, as Barack Obama used a Los Angeles debate to argue he has the judgment to lead the nation out of war and Hillary Rodham Clinton asserted that she has the gravitas to do the same… The gravest distinction came on the war, which loomed large as an issue as the presidential race began but has gradually diminished in the Democratic contests. With the war again the focus, the race reverted to the campaign's purest distillation: Clinton's experience against Obama's judgment." 
 
USA Today: "The debate was more civil in tone than the combative exchanges between the two at last week's debate in South Carolina, when he derided her role on the Wal-Mart board and she hurled back the name of his controversial fundraiser now under indictment. But it was no less tough in substance. Each sharply promoted his or her own credentials for the Oval Office -- and prospects for managing to get there -- over the other."

“But no rules or referees were needed in this kindest and calmest of forums,” the Boston Globe writes. “When Barack Obama started the night by declaring his eternal friendship with Hillary Clinton - and pointing out, accurately, that 95 percent of their policy notions are identical - it didn't exactly set the stage for conflict. What followed was a quiet, detailed discussion of policy issues, focused at times on minute differences, peppered with occasional bouts of mutual admiration.”

The New York Daily News: “And the Oscar for the most cordial, polite, downright friendly performance after a month of ripping each other on the primary trail goes to: Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama for their debate Thursday night.”

Politico's Roger Simon: "Except for the war -- and it was a big exception -- Clinton had a good evening, however. Debates emphasize issues, and Clinton loves to talk about issues, sometimes to Obama’s frustration." More from Roger: "Hillary Clinton thought she had driven a stake through it, but it turns out to be the issue that will not die: She voted to authorize the Iraq war, she refuses to say it was a mistake and she refuses to apologize for it.  And Barack Obama continues to whack her for it."

When Variety decides they should do a story on a debate, then it must mean Hollywood and the Democratic Party have intertwined. "Sure, there was a carnival atmosphere outside the Kodak Theater on Hollywood Boulevard, where the usual assortment of costumed superheroes and characters wore campaign buttons, and some in the audience were decked in gowns and high heels, as if it were Oscar night. In the audience were Stevie Wonder, Steven Spielberg, Pierce Brosnan, Diane Keaton, Rob Reiner, Leonardo DiCaprio, Garry Shandling, Bradley Whitford and Sherry Lansing, among others.”

Per NBC’s Lauren Appelbaum, here are timings from the debate:
Clinton: 41:15 -- 20 questions
Obama: 37:09 -- 18 questions

NBC/NJ’s Athena Jones has a few tidbits from the spin room after the debate. With multiple mentions of Edwards’ name during the debate, it was no surprise to hear Clinton strategist Mark Penn talk about coveted Edwards voters. "I think a lot of those voters are out there deciding," he said. "I think they haven't decided yet."

When asked about trying to win over Edwards supporters, Penn talked about how Clinton could appeal to them. "I think she has a lot of things that appeal to the voters. If you notice her health-care plan is a universal health-care plan like Sen. Edwards'. I think the kind of compassion that she's had for people, the kind of work that she has done since the Children's Defense Fund on issues like poverty, I think play very importantly," he said.

In the space of merely a week, Bill Clinton has gone from quarrelsome to bland to downright syrupy about the Democratic race for the White House, NBC/NJ’s Carrie Dann notes. Speaking to a crowd of about 2,500 at the University of Arizona, Clinton declared his wife's performance at last night’s debate "magnificent," but -- without missing a beat -- added that "Senator Obama was also very good."

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

I must remind my fellow Democrats that before long it will be time to try and pull this thing back together and win a general election.  In order to do that some of us are going to have to let go of one cherished dream in favor of another, perhaps one we don’t fully appreciate.  The transition will be much easier if we treat each other with respect during the heat of battle.  

For a great many of us who came of age during the 60s, part of our dream has always been a more tolerant nation, willing to assess a person’s ability without regard to race or gender or the myriad other ways of being different.   On the plus side, if we can manage to get either of our candidates elected this cycle we take a giant step.  On the down side, many of us now face a painful and unexpected choice that threatens to fragment the coalition we need to build over the next nine months to avoid another giant step backward.  

I’ve seen a number of posts blaming Barack for inflicting this painful choice on us by not waiting his turn.  You folks must be thinking of the other party.  Republicans like to wait in line, a wonderful system which can turn out such scintillating candidates as Bob Dole.  That sort of behavior has not been characteristic of the Democratic Party in recent times.  Of course you can argue that we’ve had some spectacular flameouts as a result, but I still wouldn’t have it any other way.

Many posts call for a candidate experienced in fighting the right wing attack machine, in vengeful anticipation of setting right all the grievances of decades past.  Still others want to know what all this change talk is about and what does that really mean anyway?   Well, generations younger than mine have a somewhat different dream.  The symbolic significance of electing a woman or person of color is largely lost on them.  Why?  Because most of them already live in a more tolerant culture which pays much less attention to all the ways of being different.

Their dream involves a nation that finds a way to move beyond the constant political warfare and gridlock to address looming problems that they will continue to face long after we are gone.  Do we have the right to insist that our dream must come first, even if it means stepping on theirs?  If I vote for the woman candidate simply because she is a woman can I really say that I have achieved my goal of assessing ability without regard to gender difference?  

For me the choice is pretty easy.  The old dream must always yield to the new.  The new dream is really an improvement on the old one after all.  The enthusiasm for Obama among young people will not be transferable to Hillary in November.  It is just not reasonable to expect them to share our excitement just because the candidate is a woman or person of color.  Obama is speaking eloquently to their vision of the future, the place we have really been trying to reach all along.  We will need to join with young people in this and future elections if we intend to have any influence on the direction we take as a nation.  I submit that while they may not be able to go back in time to fully appreciate our dream, we can certainly work with younger generations to realize theirs.
Again i will last nights debate was a COUP for the democratic party. They were both polished, articulate, and informed. BOTH of them. I remain a Clinton Supporter, but for the first time I think both sides have to see the history that is being made, Just the two of them up there.  I can see a Clinton/Obama ticket with him taking the helm  in 2016.  They get Edwards and Gore on board in the administration and they will be unstoppable. The biggest loser of the night was George Bush and the GOP... McCAin should be very very afraid...
Barack there is no way that Hillary can be an Effective Leader and Have any Creditability to Be an Authority Figure in the world , with these Kinds of Ties that will suggest there is an Element of Favoritism with Foreign Affairs , conflicts of bias in writing effective trade and foreign policies  , and we not look like a Dictatorship . This will arm the Republicans with everything they need to Challenge Hillary Clinton and win the Whitehouse and The Senate and House , because the Rage over er these Conflicts of Interest will be Brought out into the light , if she is the Nominee . There is no way the Clintons will be able to shield their Conflicts , even what is Locked up in the Records at the Clinton Library will be Unsealed , our the Country will come unglued over the Cover up of the Conflicts of Being able to Lead the USA without being Biased towards Conflicts like this , and how it lends to a fascism that's monumental in how Power corrupts if it is allowed to Morph , like is the case here with Clinton and Private Enterprise being Influenced to move a Deal Beyond the Competitive forces of Free Enterprise , into a more Collective fascist state of affairs .
This is not Justice to the Sense of Democracy and the free Enterprise system , and is why Barrack Obama has to make the call to duty a top priority in his run for the Whitehouse , and call down the Thunder of What is the Right thing to do , so the Peoples Voices are heard .
Hillary says that she will bring the Voices to Washington , but this Voice of Bills Buddies that want to dominate Resources in the world and donate to Bill Clintons Foundations , might have some form of Influence over Hillary in the Whitehouse , as she drafts up some more unfair Trade Policies that these Conflicts of Interest can take advantage of .

This is the fascism that is causing all the problems with Free Enterprise not being Free of Influence , so that Competition can bring about real quality and demand a price that's driven by Quality as the focus of origin of product demand . What we have here by this type of practice in Material Origination , is a Conflict of why the material is being originated into a market , and this is pure Fascism , and the Clintons are eyeball deep in Corporate favortism , which is fascism 101 . Look it up and tell me that a Government Official and a Independent Enterpriser working together is not a form of pure fascism . And we wonder why our markets won't stabilize . The time for Real Change is here , Barack Obama is that Change .
Thanks and have a Great day in the Free Enterprising USA .  

An ex-president, a mining deal and a big donor

Huge Kazakh deal follows financier’s trip with Clinton, precedes donation       http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22926743
Late on Sept. 6, 2005, a private plane carrying the Canadian mining financier Frank Giustra touched down in Almaty, a ruggedly picturesque city in southeast Kazakhstan. Several hundred miles to the west a fortune awaited: highly coveted deposits of uranium that could fuel nuclear reactors around the world. And Mr. Giustra was in hot pursuit of an exclusive deal to tap them.

Unlike more established competitors, Mr. Giustra was a newcomer to uranium mining in Kazakhstan, a former Soviet republic. But what his fledgling company lacked in experience, it made up for in connections. Accompanying Mr. Giustra on his luxuriously appointed MD-87 jet that day was a former president of the United States, Bill Clinton.

Upon landing on the first stop of a three-country philanthropic tour, the two men were whisked off to share a sumptuous midnight banquet with Kazakhstan’s president, Nursultan A. Nazarbayev, whose 19-year stranglehold on the country has all but quashed political dissent.

Mr. Nazarbayev walked away from the table with a propaganda coup, after Mr. Clinton expressed enthusiastic support for the Kazakh leader’s bid to head an international organization that monitors elections and supports democracy. Mr. Clinton’s public declaration undercut both American foreign policy and sharp criticism of Kazakhstan’s poor human rights record by, among others, Mr. Clinton’s wife, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.

Within two days, corporate records show that Mr. Giustra also came up a winner when his company signed preliminary agreements giving it the right to buy into three uranium projects controlled by Kazakhstan’s state-owned uranium agency, Kazatomprom.

Deal stunned the mining industry
The monster deal stunned the mining industry, turning an unknown shell company into one of the world’s largest uranium producers in a transaction ultimately worth tens of millions of dollars to Mr. Giustra, analysts said.

Just months after the Kazakh pact was finalized, Mr. Clinton’s charitable foundation received its own windfall: a $31.3 million donation from Mr. Giustra that had remained a secret until he acknowledged it last month. The gift, combined with Mr. Giustra’s more recent and public pledge to give the William J. Clinton Foundation an additional $100 million, secured Mr. Giustra a place in Mr. Clinton’s inner circle, an exclusive club of wealthy entrepreneurs in which friendship with the former president has its privileges.

Mr. Giustra was invited to accompany the former president to Almaty just as the financier was trying to seal a deal he had been negotiating for months.

In separate written responses, both men said Mr. Giustra traveled with Mr. Clinton to Kazakhstan, India and China to see first-hand the philanthropic work done by his foundation.

A spokesman for Mr. Clinton said the former president knew that Mr. Giustra had mining interests in Kazakhstan but was unaware of “any particular efforts” and did nothing to help. Mr. Giustra said he was there as an “observer only” and there was “no discussion” of the deal with Mr. Nazarbayev or Mr. Clinton.

But Moukhtar Dzhakishev, president of Kazatomprom, said in an interview that Mr. Giustra did discuss it, directly with the Kazakh president, and that his friendship with Mr. Clinton “of course made an impression.” Mr. Dzhakishev added that Kazatomprom chose to form a partnership with Mr. Giustra’s company based solely on the merits of its offer.

After The Times told Mr. Giustra that others said he had discussed the deal with Mr. Nazarbayev, Mr. Giustra responded that he “may well have mentioned my general interest in the Kazakhstan mining business to him, but I did not discuss the ongoing” efforts.

Chuck Todd, Chris Matthews, and Joe Scarborough are on the Obama payroll.  Chuck are you forgetting that the number one issue is the economy and not Iraq.  
In respect to dreams and hopes, I will quote Congresswoman, Maxine Waters:

People in my district have a lot of hope. They go to bed hungry, they have trouble heating their homes but they have a lot of hope that things will get better. They don't need more hope, they need help.
Both candidates were VERY impressive. Compare it to the McCain Romney squabble the night before. Wow!!!
Hillary is the most seasoned and experienced.  The war issue will help her in the General Election.
It will prove that she is strong on National Security.
She has taken the position that she would not have voted for it if she had known then how it would turn out, so be it, her not apologizing helps her in the General against McCain or Romney.
She was great in the Debate as she usually is.
Nice going Senator Clinton!
I think that Hilary Clinton should be our next President.
Obama and Clinton each put in their best debate performances thus far.

Obama: A+, Clinton A-.
Senator Obama proved that he is not just a "speechmaker", but a policy maker as well. He is truly the total package, and I was very proud of his performance last night.

Senator Clinton also had an excellent debate. I think the problem I continue to have with "the Clintons" is how easily they can morph from elegant statespeople into political hacks. When they are in their best form, they have no equal. Sadly, the same can be said when they are at their worst, as we learned in Nevada and New Hampshire.
Clinton was on task last nite. her facts are at her finger tips, there is not hunting for words, she thinks on her feet and she sees that everything is not black and white - there are 2 sides to issues and often a decision is based on information from sources you should trust - such as the president, cia, dept of defense, etc. Based on all input Clinton  made and informed(so she thought) decision - a hard decision - but on for the safety of the nation. She Made a decision. Obama was not in the senate, he had no cis information available to him and made a black and white decision of no or yes . easy when you are not in the senate - but a bystander. Now that he is in the senate - he has voted to keep funding the war. I do not hold this against him but i feel he has to let this go. we are at war, we do have to get out, there are many sides to consider and plans to be made. I really think Clinton is the one to do this. Now about Obama - last night was the first nite i have seen him in a positive light. I think he lacks the experience to run the country YET. I would like the dems to think with their brain, put Clinton in the POTUS seat and follow up with Obama  after her terms. He would be a world player at that point and we would get 16 years in the White House. That puts a smile on my face.  16 years of prosperity - 16 years to lift up the poor and middle class - 16 years to get the drug companies in line and keep them there. Lets talk about a Democrat Dynasty.  
Check the exit polls.  Obama is not winning within the Democratic party, but with Independents and some Republicans.  I am such a voter.  I always register as Independent.  I changed to Democrat specifically to caucus for Obama.  Afterwards, I will change back to Independent.

Being nice will not help Clinton now.  Too many people like me have already seen her true personality, or which ever one shows up for the day.

If Obama losses the nomination, I estimate about 40%-60% of his votes go straight to McCain.

The only person I would vote for Clinton over would be Romney, but I would probably not even vote in that case.

Something many of you reporters and party establishment people don't seem to get yet; this generation (Gen X/Y), which is my generation, does not hold true to old alliances of the ruling parties.  We do not vote Democrat or Republican just because of blue and red.  While this subset of voters has always existed, I beleive they are now the majority over both parties.
Jaycee,

I applaud your articulate and well-written comment.  Like you I became of age in the 60's.  I have been a Registered Independent voter since coming of age.  

I have not decided who I will vote for.  However I feel pretty certain that I DO NOT want to return to the Clinton years.  I remember only too well all the negativity of their administration and I do not want a repeat performance.

Hillary may say that she is the candidate but I see it as a third term for Bill.  He, in my opinion, is running for President under the guise of a Hillary presidency.  

I am in my senior years now, however I join the young people in looking to the future.  It is time to move forward not look back
Wow, Jaycee from Ventura. That was insightful and beautifully said. Where do we read more of your thoughts? I like the way you describe and contrast the two dreams-- that's the best articulation of the Obama voters' dream I've seen thus far. I'm not sure how many Clinton voters would agree with your characterization of their dream-- in part because I think she appeals more to pragmatists than dreamers-- but certainly you've captured the view of some portion of her support bloc. One final thought-- I wonder why some people so clearly see Obama as embodying the dream you describe ("a nation that finds a way to move beyond the constant political warfare and gridlock to address looming problems that they will continue to face long after we are gone") and others seem really baffled about why people think he can accomplish it. Thoughts anyone?
For dreams to become  a reality they need a person with experience to accomplish them. Nice speeches  about hope and the future are great but we also must deal with today as well. The umemployed person can not wait years for hope to come into reality, they need help today. Today's problems need an experienced person who knows Washington and what it takes to get things done. Hillary is that person. Last night at the debate, her knowledge came through very clearly. Her responses about Iraq indicate to anyone who has watched the war closely  that there are no easy answers. It is easy to say that you are against the war TODAY but the vote on Iraq was several years ago at a time when information indicated that some sort of action was needed. Mr Bush made the Iraq war into the problem that it is today. It is time to stop dreaming and wake up and smell the coffee. Nice speeches do not get things done and sometimes they lead to false hope.
I think the debate was very good thank god there werent four or i may be saying something else..Any how i think Clinton new what she was doing when she voted for the Irag war...No i see the slum lord contributed to her.  Bill now has his problems with the 31 million contribution..Now im really leary of the clintons..Looks like big money and lobyist will be running the white house...Independents wake up at least vote........McCain is just as bad, watched the debate and he looked like he was very smirky and wanted the lime light by shutting off ron paul, but he still didnt anser question only comment was how many endorsements he had...By the way my firend you will never get mine...
Jaycee, that was an extremely insightful post. I am also a product of the 60's. We voted for Kennedy much for the same reasons that young people today are flocking to Obama. The message of change and hope always resonates with the young. We've had our political hero in John and Bobby Kennedy and it has made us wiser, let the enthusiam of the young trickle up amd maybe just maybe we can recapture some of that innocence and dream just a little, let the experience that joy. If they decide that political hero is Obama lets embrace there choice and maybe we can realize dreams lost. One of Kennedy's many quotes that I still find inspring and is as relevant today as it was in the 60's

"[People] who strike out against injustice show the highest form of courage. Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centers of energy and daring, those ripples build up a current that can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance."

I agree that both candidates did the Democrats - and the country! - proud last night.  I commend them both, and, under normal circumstances, I would readily and happily vote for either of them (as I would have for Edwards, Richardson, Dodd, or Biden).

BUT ........   The thing I want most to avoid, whoever is elected, is a continuation of the Bush way of doing things: divisivness, lack of candor, an attitude that the public is stupid and will ultimately accept anything said with certainty and repitition, flurries of words to obscure truths, and vicious, vicious attacks on or freezing out anyone who disagrees.  Sen. Clinton has so many strengths and attractive attributes, but the way that she has run this campaign is, in my eyes, inexcusable and points to a lack of core integrity and respect for both her opponent and the voters.  

The Rovian techniques didn't work, thanks in large part to Obama's skill in dealing with them, but even if she's put them away and stays nice for the rest of the campaign, how do I set aside the fact that she was willing to take that route, intentionally did so?  It's a matter of character.  I so very much wish someone would ask her to defend or explain the Soc Sec and pro-choice mailers she sent out a day or two before each of the first few primaries? or the deliberate distortion of Obama's statements about Reagan (she showed last night that she is quite bright enough to have understood what he was saying)?  Or any of a number of other deliberate choices she made that, in my view, put herself and her success ahead of anything: the party, the country, or simple, common decency.  If she could explain, in straightforward terms, why those actions were justified and acceptable, then I might reconsider my decision never to vote for her again.  Even an "I made a mistake" would perhaps help but (another similarity with Bush) I don't think she finds it ever easy, or even possible, to admit a mistake.

Ggood behavior now and "let's just forget about that early stuff - I'm behaving now, aren't I?" simply isn't going to cut it, I'm afraid, at least not when there is someone as strong as Obama, who is straight-forward and has NOT resorted to underhanded tricks that play on the fear and gullibility of the voters, as an alternative.
I totally agree with jaycee. When this race first started, I could not wait to vote for Hillary Clinton. And while I still have great respect for her, and believe she is an extremely important Democratic figure, I support Barack Obama as the next President. He is the future, my college age children want him as President. Barack Obama has done the most amazing thing: convinced young voters that their voices matter and that politics matter. He has shown them the the leadership of our country matters. He has brought them into the political discussion, in my opinion, a huge positive for the nation.
To: Brian, Colorado Springs, CO (Sent Friday, February 01, 2008 10:01 AM)

What are you a mind reader? Wait and see then stay home.  
The only reason no one likes the Clintons is because they have hoad over $ 80,000,000 dollars spent to make them look like the incarnate's of sataan...you don't think the republicans won't do that to obama...oh and btw obama doesn't ahve a balck problem with the electorate...he has a muslim problem....sad but true...
 All in all we saw a great debate last evening; the party stuck to its roots and displayed the differences needed to return our country to the hands of those whom make it a country to start with.  

 The time of war will soon come to pass, the U.S. has clouded it place in our world making this the saddest chapter in our history.  

 The most powerful statement the Democratic Party can make today for change, is to “Change” the rules of the game, to make a statement not only to the young of our country but to world that we will be taking the helm of our future.

 Mr Obama and Mrs Clinton; Please just join forces now; announce to the Republicans that the two of you will be seeking the White House together.  We don’t need debates, we don’t need delegates, what we need are definitive results.  Put John McCain on notice; tell him to pick his running mate, because we already have.

 Barrack bring us the young and poor, Hillary bring us the old and middle class, together you two can unit this county like no other two individuals in history.

We don’t care who the V.P. is, only you two have the “Audacity” to carry forward the vision of “Hope” and the “Strength” we as a country need “To Be Ready On Day One”
The Clinton News network debates are always kinder to Hillary Clinton.  When she gets out there and has to start answering some of the tougher questions; Like her fundraising schemes and her record keeping in Little Rock and her giving earmarks to billionaires and her vote for the Iraq war from people who are not going to want to play softball, then we will see the real Hillary Clinton.
the best thing about last nights vote is Anderson Cooper wasnt the moderator...I Still Havent heard and opology to Ron Paul and Huckabee...would be nice next time if your going to embarrass them dont invite them...
If Senator Clinton gets the nomination, I doubt that Senator Obama would be her running mate.  She needs him - but he doesn't need her.  Being Hillary's VP would dim the chances of having his own presidency if she should become president.  If Clinton wins the presidency, Obama would be weakened if a Clinton administration is not successful after one term, but also weakened if a Clinton administration is successful after two terms (ie, see Al Gore).

If Senator Obama wins the nomination, I doubt that he would even offer the VP slot to Senator Clinton.  And I doubt that she would accept even if it was offered to her.  In many ways, Clinton was a second vice-president, or even co-president, with her husband.  Been there, done that.

The "dream ticket" doesn't match the political reality.
Hillary Clintons main problem? She's a Muslim.
Here's the real issue at hand. If you are an independent (me) and certainly a democrat, then you're probably fed up with mess Bush and 8 years of the GOP have created. Therefore, we need a change and someone to make that happen. I believe both Clinton and Obama are FAR superior to McCain or any other choice, but I support Obama because he has a MUCH better chance to win the general election. He appeals to a much wider audience than Clinton, and I know of many people around the country who would consider McCain over Clinton because there is a mis-trust with her. To win the general election you have to sieze the middle. Obama/McCain - the middle 20% goes to Obama, Clinton/McCain - the middle 20% goes to McCain. Obama gives "change" the best chance to win, that's why he had my vote last weekend.  
fallout of the obama-kennedy-kerry hook-up continues and wide speculation continues as to wether edwards will back clinton....both decko/levenson and cartiers polls show clinton with leads well over 20 points in Cal, NY, NJ,  and leads of 18 & 19 respectively for Mass and CT  and these polls are post edwards removal decision....edwards is expected to back clinton some time this weekend and it is widely speculated that it will happen on sunday prior to the super bowl with the large captive audience...stay tuned for this one!!!!
John
Please explain what you mean by "he has a muslim problem"
I am SO curious
They both did a good job with the debate by playing it safe, but will that undermine Clinton's lead umong Edward supporters?  The true test is February 5, we will have a clear front runner, God willing, so we can unit the party.  These two candidates, Obama and Hillary will make a great ticket!
Renee, Dade City,

This is what makes politics so much fun, I don't think my dreams have to be subordinated to my chilrens. I think they can co-exist and  both dreams can flourish.  Some of us in the older generation feel we are on the brink of seeing a part of our dreams finally come to pass.  Think about it, we have had nothing but men serve as President, and while it would be historic to see a black person elected President of the United States, he is still a man, an inspiring one too, but in my view it would be even more historic to see a woman given the chance to guide this country and nourish the dreams of both generations.

By the way another interesting thing about politics, my college age children can't wait to see Hillary in office, and yes they are both girls.
Obama?  yeah you are right, he is gettign a lot of support from Republican, you know why? because they one someone they can beat in November.  of course, it is a good strategy.
Lets face it,  It is excited that an AA is running, but it doenst mean anything if the person is not prepared for that important job.  becareful, remember Bush?  preaching about change, new direction and yes, he gave us a new direction, look where we are today.  Obama is no ready, that is the fact, the clinton can be whatever teh republican can say, ( most of thoise who are talking about the clinton are not democrats they are republican who present themselve as democrat) but the fact is that Clinto has what it take to be a great president and we should be proud of her and stop that blaming game...
I am a latino and i dont see Obama doing anything for his own people (AA)what make you think he will do something as president?  the CLinton have been working for minority since before they were in the white house.
Yeah, I dont care if BIll help Hillary in the white house.  I am sure, he will be more helpful than Mrs. Obama.  Stop trying to minimize the value that the Clinton can offer to this country, specially to the economy.  
what was the big mistake that Bill Clinton commited when president?  why some are talkign like if he was a bad president?  that is stupid, ridiculous and insane, how many lets a group of white men in the media to portrait Bill CLinton as a evil person.
well, he is not perfect, who is? are you?  give me a brake...
jaycee, well said, however, Hillary seems to be many peoples new dream. She is winning now and will win in November. Obama just doesn't cut it right now. A Clinton/Obama ticket is awesome!!!!
I just loved the debate, they were both great!Obama is too young and inexperienced now. I'd LOVE to see a Clinton/Obama ticket. That is unbeatable!!
After reading many of the post from people this morning, I do believe one great thing came out of this debate.  I believe most supporters of Obama are now willing to vote for Hillary if she wins the nomination.  The ones who say they won't are not true democrats anyway.  I think the MSNBC and other media outlets like Ed Shultz radio show, have tried to make Hillary out to be so evil that some democrats were actually beginning to say she was just like Bush and that is so far from the truth.  I now now think of Ed Shultz as the new Left Rush Limbaugh.  He constantly bashes Hillary like Rush bashes McCain.  These guys are suppose to help their fellow party memebers but instead bash them to get their listeners to hate them and only like their candidate.  What they should be doing is rooting for anyone in their party and not trying to damage them before the general election.  Instead, they only care about their own egos and them making the news instead of reporting it.    

I definitely think MSNBC and Ed Shultz will suffer in the ratings from their constant Hillary bashing.  I don't know how they think they could bash Hillary when half of their audience likes Hillary.  Did they not realize that there will be a backlash?  You now have some of the Obama people realizing the bias is so over the top that they can even see it.  

I urge all Deomcrats to vote for whoever wins the nomination and don't watch MSNBC anymore.  I would suggest watching PBS and listening to NPR to get a fair coverage of the election.  
Clinton won the debate by explaining her plans so articulatly.Obama did not.Hope is just a soundbite that seems to enthrall most of you.I have been hoping for the past 7 years---sure didn't help any.Colon Powell and his performance in the U N,with all the doctored photos and vials of powders decided congress to go to war.Admit it we were fooled by someone that we respected.Where is Powell now?Used and discarded by Bush and the neocons.How many of you believed him and be honest?And how we hooped and hollered hooray when the bombs were dropped on any Iraqi in the way.we are all guilty in going into this war.Obama did not even vote on it but learned early a mistake had been made.Me too and I am not running for president.
Glancing through the posts here, it is odd that there is a major lack of reference to either Obama's or Clinton's stands on policies.

You would almost thing that policies and stands on issues mattered!

How odd.
This blog cites two articles with vastly different headlines:

Los Angeles Times:  "Clinton, Obama gently debate Iraq in Hollywood"

Politico:  "Obama beats Hillary over head with Iraq"

Has anyone pressed Senator Obama for having an identical Iraq voting record to Senator Clinton since he was elected in 2004 ?

Anyone ???

Fairy tale indeed !!!
If Obama is the nominee I fear we Democrats don't have as good a chance at winning and it will be for the same reason that Chuck Todd claims tipped this debate to Obama (I disagree with Chuck Todd). McCain, the guy who can defend our nation, vs. Obama who lacks the thing Hillary pointed out "gravitas". Trust me, all you young idealists who think you are making history, McCain and the Right will have Obama for lunch when they say that "Obama believes all those soldiers died in vain." Americans will not like that and it will resonate whether intellectually honest or not. People will not accept the idea of troops dying in vain...look how long we were in Vietnam despite that war's unpopularity.
I appreciate the tenor of this discussion. I am an Obama supporter, but I was pleased with the performance of both candidates last night. I have not changed my vote.

Hillary has one issue to which she should give a satisfactory answer if she wants my support and that of people like me. (And there are many of us.)

That is:
Why should this country re-elect members of the same family to the oval office?

I do not believe nepotism is ever justified, and yet both major political parties regularly select candidates not be opportunity based on merit and not because of marriage or birth, and not just for the office of president. (George W. Bush and Jeb Bush, Bob Casey, Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, Lincoln Chafee, the Kennedys) I realize that many of these candidates have merit and have been dedicated public sevants.
But when the same group of people to capitalize and consolodate power, it is referred to as an OLIGARCHY. Thus, I feel that it is an abuse of power and position, and it is wholly un-American.

What of the choice of the American people? We have been served up the same platter of unappetizing choices and force-fed for the last 30 years. I believe that Obama's support comes largely from a desire to break with this system. There are many qualified, intelligent, well-spoken citizens (teachers and professors, doctors and lawyers and journalists, businessmen and women, union workers and organizers, clergymen and women) in this country who could take on public service, and would if the system would allow it.

If you don't see a problem with the system, ask yourself this question:

Could my son or daughter become a president, congressmen, or senator?

There is a split within the Democratic Party.  It's between those who understand The Dream and those who cannot.  Obviously, Hillary never understood The Dream because those of us in the early '60's who did were not working for Barry Goldwater in 1964 as Hill was.  Just another example of her lack of good judgment.  One of the reasons that Democrats lose is that they have one campaign for the nomination trying to capture the liberal base and then attempt to swing to the middle in the general election.  Obama is showing us the way to victory is to start winning the hearts and minds of independents and thinking Repubs from the beginning.  That may offend some of the Hillary supporters who enjoy bashing the other side, but come November it will prove to be the way to not only capture the White House but to actually govern this country.
I feel it is time for a woman to have the chance at running our country. We have already tried men... I think it is great that in our life time we the people get the chance to change the way our government looks. But will it really change the way our government runs. So let's really change our government and give a woman a chance.
I agree with Brian above. I'm a registered independent and have been voting since the 70's, and am also a Barack supporter. I like his potential - the rare combination of Harvard Law smarts and straight-talk oratory. The color of his skin is a non-issue for me. But if he is not on the ballot, I'll vote for McCain before I vote for Hillary. Voted for Bush last time around, and generally lean Republican, but this Obama momentum has caught me up.
John...Please don't tell me that you fell for those lies  about Obama. Personally I would vote for a Muslim if he or she was the best candidate...However I've got my fingers crossed that you aren't believing the lies and reading those crazy "Hussein" emails. If you do believe that crap you probably voted for Bush feeling that he was going to make you safer. I'm so sick and tired of the spinning, rhetoric, and catch phrases the GOP and hate mongers get away with!
"If you notice her health-care plan is a universal health-care plan like Sen. Edwards'."

The word 'universal' is overhyped ... like calling something P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act--I'm sure there are better examples, but I can't think on the fly.  Bottom line, critics of Obama claim that his plan leaves 15 million uninsured, but why does nobody ask how Clinton's plan forces 15 million people to buy health insurance at rates they can't afford.

I will tell outright that the Democratic plans carry to guarantee of reducing healthcare costs, so I don't understand why everybody's so eager to jump aboard.  See: housing market.  There is certainly a chance they could be successful, but not a guarantee.  If people could afford healthcare today, they would, and if people can afford healthcare tomorrow, they will.  Obama’s plan makes more sense, because it doesn’t involve jumping in a random pit too dark to see if there is something soft or spikes at the bottom.  Think about it.

Clinton's plan gives the control to the insurance companies, could one imagine anything better for them than having everybody mandated to buy their product.  Damn!
In watching the debate last night I have to say they both behaved well and right for the Hollywood setting. The Democratic Party am sure is very happy with their performance.

BUT in all that ACTING seasoned citizens could filter and see through them. OBAMA was very statemanlike and came across as very confident and sharp on his feet with great bounce back's like the one on Romney not being able to manage his campaign right and his ROI is way out of whack.

CLINTON on the other hand is a seasoned debator and did well too and gave her best side..

It was not a fight won on a knock out or by a unanimous decision - it was a 12 round bout won on a split decision all for OBAMA.
Check your sources, John.  Obama is not a Muslim.  It is helpful to speak AFTER you know what you are talking about, it helps you not seem like an idiot.
I feel it is time for a woman to have the chance at running our country. We have already tried men... I think it is great that in our life time we the people get the chance to change the way our government looks. But will it really change the way our government runs. So let's really change our government and give a woman a chance.
I support Obama in this contest for the nomination, but will vote for either one of them in the general election. That being said, I just wish HRC would stop with this 35yrs experience stuff.Just because you are a passenger on a plane, doesn't make you a pilot. They are both great candidates, but I think Obama would be the best person to unite this country, to reach out across party lines, and to bring peace to the entire world. His story is truly inspirational.
The only thing Orack brags about is his vote for Iraq War but don't you think that "OBLIVIOUS" sometimes works?
As he said on one of the debate to his serogates that " Don't hand me any notes 2 minutes before his speech because he'll lose it...". So he must lost all the misleading reports from the Bush/CIA about Saddam Hussein Mass Destruction so therefore he voted NO??? It's safe to say NO first about any wars.


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=628317

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