First thoughts: The Wisconsin test case

Posted: Monday, February 18, 2008 9:26 AM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: First Thoughts

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, and Domenico Montanaro
*** The Wisconsin test case: The Democratic race tomorrow in Wisconsin is shaping up to be a momentum race heading into the March 4 contests. Does Obama win handily there and in Hawaii, making him 10-0 since February 5? Or does Clinton pull off the upset -- or at least make it close -- in a state where’s campaigned only since Saturday. Clearly, the Clinton campaign is using Wisconsin is being used as something of a test case of how effective negative attacks on Obama can be. There's been nothing overly nasty, just some tough pokes like the health care mailer and the debate TV ads. If Clinton gets close to Obama tomorrow, the campaign will likely conclude the negative attacks worked, and they'll escalate a bit more ahead of the March 4 primaries.

*** Process this: The Clinton camp is hitting Obama hard on a few process issues, including over debates and campaign finance issues. While the press gets this stuff rather easily, do voters? Still, it appears McCain's got a more effective hit on Obama over the idea of whether he would take public financing as the nominee. This is actually an odd backtrack by Obama since it would be hard for Obama to figure out how to spend $85 million in a mere 60 days after the Democratic convention. More importantly, as the nominee, the DNC could then raise the serious hard dollars that Obama would be backing off from. So strategically, it seems like an easy promise for Obama stick to. But Obama's campaign must be a little hesitant to follow through on this promise, because it may worry Clinton's campaign can use this decision to "disarm" as one of the reasons superdelegates should be convinced that Clinton and not Obama would be the stronger nominee for the party.

*** Just words? Whose words? The oppo drop du jour is a YouTube clip of Obama friend and supporter Deval Patrick -- in 2006 -- saying virtually the same thing Obama did on Saturday night in Milwaukee. "Don't tell me words don't matter!” Obama said. “‘I have a dream' -- just words? 'We hold these truths to be self evident that all me are created equal' -- just words? 'We have nothing to fear but fear itself' -- just words? Just speeches?" The suggestion here: that Obama borrowed/recycled/pilfered (take your pick) Patrick’s lines. The Obama campaign, however, maintains that Obama and Patrick share lines all the time, and Patrick says that he applauded Obama from using this one on Saturday night. But is this a story? Back in April 2007, the Boston Globe wrote a similar piece over these very words, after Obama said that line to the New Republic. So Obama has said this before, and the press has reported it before (although not necessarily as a gotcha piece). Of course, the difference is that Obama is now the front-runner. More importantly, what would the reaction be if Clinton were the candidate accused of borrowing lines from another politician -- even one who is a friend and who shares the same media consultant? Obama probably escapes major criticism over this unless there's another instance that doesn't involve Patrick.

*** On the up and up: Speaking of oppo, Bloomberg’s Tim Burger has a piece entitled “Obama Bought His Home With No Rezko ‘Discount,' Seller Affirms,” which basically concludes that everything was on the up and up regarding Obama’s purchase, even though he may have acted like he had something to hide. Anyway, the piece has new details and the first conversation with the original owner Obama brought from.

*** (Former) President’s Day: Today, in Houston at 10:30 am ET, McCain picks up the endorsement from former President George H.W. Bush. And it comes on the very day that the New York Times front-pages how McCain wants to utilize the current president, Bush 43. “Senator John McCain’s campaign advisers will ask the White House to deploy President Bush for major Republican fund-raising, but they do not want the president to appear too often at his side.” And that seems to make the most sense. McCain needs major fundraising help, and Bush 43 can certainly do this for him. Interestingly, McCain may have the luxury of using Bush on the campaign trail (at least with conservatives), since he's still not seen as a rank-and-file conservative by the press or party stalwarts. So this could give McCain more flexibility in using Bush than Gore had in using Clinton.

*** Veepstakes! With McCain now the presumptive GOP nominee, the veepstakes stories have arrived. Here is what appears to be the McCain short list, per recent articles: Haley Barbour (southern economic conservative with Katrina cred), Charlie Crist (the guy who DELIVERED the GOP nod to McCain, period; but can he get married before Labor Day?), Mike Huckabee (see below), Kay Bailey Hutchison (can McCain pick a pro-choice Republican?), Tim Pawlenty (the early front-runner?), Condi Rice (too much Iraq on one ticket?), and Mark Sanford (the other early front-runner?). Question, though: Does Huckabee’s Cayman Islands speech eliminate him from the conversation?

*** On the trail: Clinton spends her entire day in Wisconsin, stumping in De Pere, Wausau, and Madison; Huckabee is also in the Badger State, hitting Hudson, Eau Claire, and Appleton; McCain campaigns in Wisconsin after picking up his endorsement from Bush 41 in Texas; and Obama holds a rally in Youngstown, OH and then heads back to Wisconsin for an evening rally in Beloit.

Countdown to Wisconsin and Hawaii: 1 day
Countdown to the MSNBC debate in Ohio: 8
Countdown to Ohio and Texas: 15 days
Countdown to Election Day 2008: 260 days
Countdown to Inauguration Day 2009: 337 days

Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639 to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

The Change Candidate Needs to Change His Tone Towards Women
Posted February 17, 2008 | 07:07 PM (EST)
The first time Hillary Clinton ran a television ad complaining about Barack Obama's unwillingess to debate in Wisconsin, he fired back with an ad of his own about the 18 debates he's already participated in and the two more that are scheduled.
She wouldn't let it go; her subsequent ad speculated on whether he was reluctant because his health insurance care plan wasn't as good as hers.
At a televised campaign stop, someone asked him how he felt about the ad campaign. Obama, grave-faced and sympathetic in tone, opined that when Senator Clinton was 'feeling down,' she went on the attack to make herself feel better; that is, she committed an error in judgment because she was in a bad mood. That was the moment when I, and other women of a certain age, all over the country, winced.
The change candidate had embraced one of the oldest clichés in the book -- that women are held hostage by emotion, that we can't be trusted with the big decisions because, depending on our age, we're either on the rag or having a hot flash. The overtly sexist position used to be that you didn't want to entrust the red phone to a woman because women are unpredictable and irrational; a fit of hormonal pique and kaboom, we all glow in the radioactive dark. The ones who aren't instantly vaporized, that is.
The kinder, gentler version? A soft-spoken observation about what a female candidate does when she's "feeling down," the implication being that Hillary's distress over the delegate count had impaired her judgment, and that someone who loses her way like that is not strong enough to withstand the rigors of the presidency. If you think that I and the indignant gal friends I've polled are overreacting, try the acid test: Imagine any major candidate making that kind of subtle put-down about a man's psychological fortitude. In 1972, Thomas Eagleton had to have shock treatment to get us to raise a national eyebrow about his mental health, ending his brief tenure as George McGovern's running mate. Short of that, we tend to assume that the boys are steady enough to handle the job.
The interesting question is where the inspiration for the dig came from. If it was truly an off-the-cuff remark, then it's just gender-role business as usual, and the French, sadly, are right: The more things change, the more they remain the same. This might help to explain why women stick to Hillary; any woman who grew up in the transitional generation between Betty Crocker moms and Betty Friedan daughters has a special antenna for this kind of slight. We've heard it before, we know we're going to hear it again, and we'd just as soon hang with a smart girl who gets it, for all her flaws. As for the more highly educated women who poll for Obama, let's see how they feel when they find out he would think better of them if they were guys.
If it wasn't a spontaneous comment -- if someone in Senator Obama's camp thinks it's wise to use code to address and exploit our primitive fears about whether women can cope -- then whoever came up with it ought to be ashamed of himself, and the man who uttered it needs to rethink the strength of his opponent and her supporters. Beat her on better ideas, or oratory, beat her with passion and energy, but beat her fair and square, if you can. Don't talk about change and then quote from a 1950s playbook on the battle between the sexes.

Former Dem, California (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 9:40 AM)

I see that Hillary’s new campaign theme boils down to something like “talk is cheap.” Bleh. I have to chuckle when I see all the disparaging comments about Barack’s speechwriters and complaints about how all he does is talk pretty. Some of us seem to have developed some peculiar ideas during the course of this campaign about which qualities distinguish successful presidents. If total command of policy detail and micromanagement of all things executive were the hallmark of great presidents, then Jimmy Carter would be right up there at the top of the list. Jimmy would tower over your run of the mill Lincolns, Roosevelts, and Kennedys.

Problem is, that isn’t what makes a great president. A great president inspires, unifies, and calls the country to sacrifice in time of national need. The most potent tool a president wields is the bully pulpit, the ability to command national media attention just for the asking. That is how you get things done; by building such a groundswell of public support that any sane politician will think twice before obstructing the will of the people. The great speechwriters and soaring rhetoric, the ability to convey to the people that they are part of something bigger and that we are all in this mess together, that is what makes a truly great president. How long has it been since you felt that way about your country?

jaycee, Ventura, California (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 9:40 AM)

Clearly, the Clinton campaign is using Wisconsin is being used as something of a test case of how effective negative attacks on Obama can be.

Hasn't worked too well lately....
It's Hillary that is more on the defensive then Obama...

Clinton's campaign can use this decision to "disarm" as one of the reasons superdelegates should be convinced that Clinton and not Obama would be the stronger nominee for the party.

The way this campaign is going, The Clinton's must think people are so inspired by them, they will vote for them. Again, that hasn't happened a lot lately...

More importantly, what would the reaction be if Clinton were the candidate accused of borrowing lines from another politician -- even one who is a friend and who shares the same media consultant?

Since Hillary has been following the writings of her Guru from college, this is one argument she had better sidestep, or Obama will make light of her words as well....

Speaking of oppo, Bloomberg’s Tim Burger has a piece entitled “Obama Bought His Home With No Rezko ‘Discount,' Seller Affirms,” which basically concludes that everything was on the up and up regarding Obama’s purchase, even though he may have acted like he had something to hide.

If The Clinton's want to bring it up, we can always ask about the job he had at INFOUSA, you know, the company The Clinton's worked for where they were selling lists of Alzheimer's patients and having their bank accounts cleaned out.....

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 9:41 AM)

Each time Obama's opponents think they have something rotten on him, it turns out to be a paper tiger. The Rezko thing...if Obama seemed uncomfortable, he was just being wise. Rezko has been charged with criminal activity. Obama is running for president. Their names were connected. Wouldn't that make you a little uncomfortable? But as this new piece of info from the seller comes to light, people are realizing it was all hype.

The Deval Williams thing...ridiculous. The only people who care about this are scavengers.

If you haven't noticed, there are a plethora of evil things that Obama 'could' say about Hillary. We know all the stories. Knowing them doesn't make them any less scandalous. Yet Obama's campaign has avoided dragging Hillary through the mud again.

And as for Wisconsin being a "test state," haven't we had a few of those already? And didn't Obama win in those states? But wait, those states don't matter now, because now WISCONSIN is the test state. Come on people. If you think the public isn't onto this tactic of moving the goal posts, you're deluding yourself.

Megan, Madison, WI (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 9:47 AM)

Hillary competes in Wisconsin by relying on negative campaigning? Maybe she should've spent more time in Wisconsin instead. I don't believe that good people of Wisconsin will buy this.

Enrique, Chicago (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 9:48 AM)

Patrick borrowed his theme for his gov. run from Obama. They are friends and have David Axelrod in common. I don't see the big deal if this is something they do to help out each other. Friends help out friends.
As for the campaign thing. I don't get why Hillary is concerning herself with this as it has nothing to do with her. This is about the general.
Does she concede the race to Obama? Afterall, this would only be an issue for Obama if he's the nominee.
As for Wisconsin. I think it is an unknown. It's an open primary and a very independent state. I live by the border in Illinois, south of Madison and have family there. The state is progressive and independent.

diane (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 9:50 AM)

Are you kidding me?

"The Clinton camp is hitting Obama hard on a few process issues, including over debates and campaign finance issues. While the press gets this stuff rather easily, do voters?"

After you guys have been running the Clinton's ads for free here? You have the nerve to wonder if voters get it? Do you not read the comments you approve? 90% of the people who respond are complete morons. They have no idea about political processes. Think about it like this: You have people here who say, "But what does he stand for?" Those are the people too stupid to pay attention to speeches and clearly too stupid too to actually visit a website and oh, I don't know...learn something. These are people who think that because they saw it in the TV or the internet that it's true. They don't pay attention or understand the role you play in this. You're part of the game. You're biases.

Do the voters get it? That's a steaming load right. It's dishonest. It's elitist. And once again, you've removed yourself from this process, as if you had nothing to do with it. The media's the reason we got to learn all about Lewinsky and no one cared. The media's the reason, the was no investigation into claims from the current administration and we're saddled with an illegal war. The media is the reason the dumb people run around saying "Al Gore said he invented the Internet", when he did no such thing, it was just another "truth" the media created and still use.

faboo mama (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 9:51 AM)

Hillary Clinton stated at the beginning of this race that she would not sink low enough to use negative campaigning. I guess that was just another one of the CLinton Lies! Of course she will go negative because that is all she CAN do. Her campaign has been failing since coming in THIRD in Iowa. It's funny how she continues to dismiss every state in this union EXCEPT those FEW that she has won. Apparently only THOSE states are important. Way to alienate the rest of the country Hillary. I have become more and more disgusted with the behavior of the Clinton's and their campaign. Playing dirty is only showing more of their true colors and the people of the UNITED STATES are realizing this day by day. Keep it coming Hillary. You are only hurting yourself.

Iowa (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 9:54 AM)

YES WE CAN AND YES WE WILL ! hillaryclinton.com .

Brad Hill,Madison, Wisconsin (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 9:58 AM)

If a woman with Obama's credentials were running for president, the press would laugh her off the stage.

Sean (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 9:59 AM)

Once again, the Clinton campaign doesn't get it. Firstly, any plan with a "mandate" will crash and burn in the Congress. It's like waving a "red flag" in front of a bull.

Secondly, Bill's behavior in Ohio yesterday, first with the heckler and then with the abortion foe, lends credence to Maureen Dowd's column in the "NY Times" yesterday about not being worried about Hillary on Day 1, but Bill on Day 2 and beyond. No, there should't be heckling and most of us feel that abortion should be a personal choice. Still, it demeans the role of former President to react in the manner Bill Clinton did yesterday.

I want a change in course as much as anyone, but the continuing antics of both Clintons are making it harder and harder to support them now and in November, should she be the nominee. I've had enough of the 90's Clinton soap opera and so has the country.

Joe Mathews, Manchester, Vt (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:01 AM)

Just Words. Everyone is copying from Obama because he has been consistent with his message and it has been working for him. It is ludicrous to criticize Barack for his eloquence and ability to effectively communicate with everyone. The illustration by Barack of how "words" matter was right on, especially after Senator Clinton referred to his speeches and "words" as cheap. This weekend, I had dinner with my brother-in-law, a stauch Republican from Orange County, California, and he says he will vote for Barack against McCain, but would vote for McCain over Clinton. Words obviously do matter; people are listening from right to left, and down the middle.

Jeff, Santa Barbara, CA (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:03 AM)

So what about when Clinton steals phrases from Obama...like change, and fired up/ready to go, and yes we can....

Can we call her out on plaigarizing too please?

or would you get an angry phone call from her camp?

Betsy, Kansas City, MO (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:04 AM)

It should be clear by now that Obama is a phoney who only ran for the U.S. Senate so he could use it as a springboard to the White House.
It was never about serving the people of Illinois, as it should have been.
If it was, he would have finished out his term and ran in 2012 or 2016.
It's also clear that he plagiarizes his speeches from political allies, and from previous office holders.
"Yes we can," for instance, comes from a speech Bill Clinton delivered in 1992 when he was running for President.
The fact of the matter is that Obama doesn't have an original thought or idea in his head. The evidence of this is the fact that none of his supporters can tell you what qualifies him to be President, or what he stands for.
If you ask them, they say "go to the website." That's not an answer, that's a cop-out.
Hillary is out there talking about her ideas to strengthen the economy, and her vision for what the international role of The U.S. should/would/will-be in the post 911, post Bush years to come.
She has a plan to deal with everything from health insurance, to home forclosures, to post war Iraq.
If you don't hear Obama talking about these things, it's because he doesn't have a clue, beyond "change, hope, and yes we can."
Words and talk....versus PLANS and ACTION.
Thats the basic difference between Barrack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

Hillary Clinton for President 2008!
PLANS & ACTION, not catch phrases and buzz words.

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:05 AM)

America IS ready for a Woman President...JUST NOT this one!

Nancy Pelosi...YES!

Hillary Clinton....NO!

Sarah (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:05 AM)

There is nothing that the Clinton campaign can say or do to make me change my support for Senator Obama! I really believe in his message and I know in my heart that he will include us the people and be honest with us about important issues that effect us! He spoke out against the war in Iraq when I was protesting in the streets and I honor him for that with my vote on super-tuesday and again on election night Nov 08! Thank you Mr. Obama!

Lisa, Minnesota (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:07 AM)

If the fact that Obama has a speechwriter, and borrows some good phrases from friends who whole-heartedly support him, is really the ONLY negative "dirt" that the Clintons can drag up on Obama... then what on EARTH makes people think the Republicans are going to do any better?!

He has a speechwriter! Ohhh myyyy god! How scandalous! Guess what? So does Hillary... and every other politician. That's why their judgment is absolutely important. Hillary's judgment is continually flawed (she failed miserably when she tried health care in 93/94, she failed on Iraq, she's failing on Iran with the Kyl-Lieberman war-hawk vote). Obama seems to get it right -all- the time.

And the Rezko thing? The Clintons want to act like that's a big deal? They can't even find any legislation supported by Barack that helped Rezko for cryin' out loud! I'm glad this piece finally came out that there was no massive "discount" on the property. But the Clintons, they want to ignore Norman Hsu, Peter Paul, cattle trading futures, etc etc, THEIR list is hundreds of pages long. And all they can come up with against Obama is "speechwriters!"??

If it's mudslinging Republicans we're afraid of in November, then the Clintons are making it quite clear that Obama is the right choice. If all they try to scream is "B. Hussein has speechwriters and got a good deal on some land to expand his back yard!", then Obama's got November in the bag 60% to 40%.

Ron, TX (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:07 AM)

Sick and Tired what are you talking about? Just because a candidate is a woman or black that hard questions or a harsh critique should not be done. Hillary can take care of herself and so can Obama. Are we ready for a female candidate? Most people would say we are, but not Hillary Clinton. The truth hurts so get over it.

Gus Acosta, Edgewood, Kentucky (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:07 AM)

"...If a woman with Obama's credentials were running for president, the press would laugh her off the stage. ..."
Sean (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 9:59 AM)

Exactly, Sean. Couldn't have put it better myself, you hit the nail right on the head!

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:07 AM)

If a woman with Obama's credentials were running for president, the press would laugh her off the stage.
Sean (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 9:59 AM)

And a man with HRC credentials wouldn't have made it to Iowa.

James G., Oak Park, MI (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:09 AM)

I hope Obama wins the nomination.

I'm pretty certain, the college students like myself that Obama has attracted to his campaign will not show up for Hillary. Her message of remember the 90s does not resonate with young males or females

Kate (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:10 AM)

sick and tired rants / 'So the gang rape of the female candidate is over...so now we see some of the perpetrators hand her a blanket and apologize. Many of the men in country should truely be ashamed of themselves. Ready for a female candidate in the US? I think NOT.'

many of the women in this country should be 'truly ashamed' for backing a candidate just because of their gender with complete disregard of any meaningful issues, this country is more than ready to elect a women president, if one that is worthy of the office decides to run, hillary ain't it, and the constant whimpering of you sexist females is growing painfully tiresome and silly

MK,MO (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:11 AM)

It appears that this network does not miss a chance to say negative this about Hillary or Bill Clintonbut when it is revealed that Obama steals other peoples speeches they give him a pass. I did not see the media give Joe Biden a pass when he used a speech by a british labor canidate. He was forced out of the race and has never lived it down.

It now appears that the thrill that Chris Matthews felt up his leg was not from Obama but rather from Devall Patrick. Yes words do matter especially if you steal them from someone else. Media coverage matters too especially when it is so blinded by love that it fails to do its job and be somewhat impartial.

As for me and my view of MSNBC is in the words of B.B King "the thrill is gone." Noticed I gave B.B King credit more than I can say for Obama the magnificent.
Maybe today he will deliver the Gettysburg address and you guys can swoon and say what a great speaker he is.

russell, willamson,WV (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:13 AM)

"...So the gang rape of the female candidate is over...so now we see some of the perpetrators hand her a blanket and apologize. Many of the men in country should truely be ashamed of themselves. Ready for a female candidate in the US? I think NOT. ..."
sick and tired (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 9:40 AM)

Truer words were never spoken. The media has been extremely unfair to Hillary, while giving Obama a pass on everything.
Imagine, the seller of the house declaring that Obama is innocent. What did you expect the man to say...he's got Barrack's money in his pocket. We all know Rezko was knee deep in that deal, and something STILL stinks!
I'm quite surprised that they even posted your message here.
Because, three of the MEDIA-PERPS who took part in the yellow journalistic gang rape that we watched these last three months are the three HARLETS who run this board.
First Read and MSNBC ought to be ashamed of themselves.

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:15 AM)

I have to agree with "former dem" from California post -

"Beat her on better ideas, or oratory, beat her with passion and energy, but beat her fair and square, if you can. Don't talk about change and then quote from a 1950s playbook on the battle between the sexes."

I'd like to see focus on real issues not personalities. I'd like to see who wrote and sponsored more bills in the Senate. I'd like to know who has better foresight, who has better command and understanding of the issues. I'd like to see who really rolls up his/her sleeve and get to work.

Every politician can shout change. Particularly against the Bush administration. We all want change. The question is who can truly deliver us out of this mess. It's not about gender or race, it's about capabilities, job knowledge, experience.

I'd like to note that Hilary's 'attacks' are at least focused on issues. Because Obama truly should be scrutinized at this point. Someone has got to do it.

I'm hoping MSNBC give this post a chance.

Dan, Ohio (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:15 AM)

Please come visit, hillaryclinton.com .

Yes We Will (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:15 AM)

Can we stop all the bashing? Yes, Clinton is less then honest, but that's the nature of politics in this country. They all spin webs of deceit to further "the cause". I will vote for the democratic nominee in November, but I don't buy that Obama's hands are so clean...he is a polititan remember. I also remember 2000 when Bush ran on changing Washington. I'm a uniter not a divider.

Naomi, Dayton, OH (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:16 AM)

Obama should be ashamed of using someone else's "catch-phrase" and not crediting it to the person who developed the pitch. He has finally given credit to the lady in South Carolina who came up with his ra-ra line at the end of his stump speech. But with all his soaring rhetoric, can't he pay someone to write for him something original? Is he running out of ideas? He seems to be a big "borrower" - which makes you wonder what else he will choose to plagarize? My point - wasn't Joe Biden forced to give up his bid for President his first outing because he "borrowed" words from someone else? Why does Obama get away with this and other factual indiscretions and inprecisions time and time again - has the press changed the rules or have they gone to sleep at the wheel?

J of Ark (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:16 AM)

Plan & Actions - Are you a schill for the Hillary campaign? Please give me a break! Clinton ran for senator with the intention to do what? Do good for the people of New York... Yea, right! The solutions that Hillary professes will bankrupt the US and the cut and run solution for Iraq will only make bolder the terrorist. Sorry my freind, we need Hillary Clinton like you need another hole in your head.

Give Me A Break (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:17 AM)

To Former Dem from California -

By "Down", Barack meant in the Polls not emotionally. Maybe you are the one trapping yourself in a cliche?

Chris, Denver, CO (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:19 AM)

Obama has proven himself to be a habitual plagiarizer and waffler. He copied HRC's solutions for the country and adopted them as his own and then he continuously quotes or invokes the names of JFK, and MLK. I am not impressed and I am getting very tired of this Obama hot air balloon ride.

air sick (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:19 AM)

Campaigns are about making speeches. Mcain is making them so is Clinton 1 and 2 (two candidates - every election day we watch one victory speech and one defeat speech from the Rebublicans and three from the Democrats on CNN).

I have seen posts and read articles regarding both candidates true accomplishments and solutions and failures (hillary with the very bad plan of mandating health insurance and Obama with the graduallly weak and eventual not yet signed nuclear bill). Without nasty can supporter of each show their actual solutions. Its easy for one side to say they are about solutions and the other is not.

(Note I have seen figures such as this "152 bills in year 1 in senate for Obama and 820 bills in legislature and 20 bills became law for Hillary but no figure on total bills" - more details needed).

Grimsby, NY (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:22 AM)

We enthusiastically support Hillary Clinton for President! She is clearly the most qualified, most electable candidate in the race of any party.

For example, Ohio LOVES Hillary, Hillary beats Obama in Ohio and more importantly, Hillary polls well against McCain in Ohio, while Obama loses to Obama in Ohio. As Ohio goes, so goes the nation. No one can win the Presidency without winning Ohio. It's that simple.

Hillary Clintin can win big in the big states that are must wins for the Dems in November. This clearly makes Hillary the strongest, most electable candidate the Dems could nominate. We trust that the good people of Wisconsin will realize how important their vote is tomorrow and how important it is to vote for Hillary Clinton.

Let's not squander our best chance for victory in November. VOTE SMART! VOTE HILLARY CLINTON!!

Ask yourselves why the corporate owned media has a 24/7 hit job out on Hillary Clinton (MSNBC has been blatantly shameless in attacking Hillary nonstop, just this morning ole Joey Scarebrough was attacking the Clintons, AGAIN and yesterday, Chrissy Matthews who hates Hillary was using his show to Clinton bash AGAIN) They promote Obama because they want a President McCain! WAKE UP VOTERS, don't get fooled again by the media!

NBC reached yet another low by digging up ole Bob Novak from under a dirty rock and allowing him back on the air to Clinton bash (CNN FIRED NOVAK). ENough already!

John & Liz (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:24 AM)

Clinton HAS to go negative! As widely reported just recently, the press has given Obama a free pass and allowed him to go from state to state making grand speeches with no plans to back them up. Hillary is beaten up by the press at every turn, Obama gets to do as he pleased. The Clinton's are now forced to do the job of the media and highlight Obama's flaws before it's too late and Democrats nominmate a man no where near ready for the job of President just because he is a great public speaker. GOOD LUCK HILLARY!

Ryan, Central, CT (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:27 AM)

Barack Obama has made himself too perfect. Any reality checks will move him nowhere else, but down.
Make him a human, who promises public financing but acts differently, who uses scripts to sound like God_sent savior to US's problems.

carlyn chen (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:28 AM)

We caucused for Barack Obama in Kansas. Proudly! If Hillary Clinton ends up being the nominee, John McCain will have the vote of these 70 and 73 year old voters. We would vote for George W again before we would help put the Clintons back in the White House. Morally what Bill Clinton did for the children of this country was reprehensible!!!

Bonnie Pagenkopf, Lenexa, KS (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:29 AM)

"It should be clear by now that Obama is a phoney who only ran for the U.S. Senate so he could use it as a springboard to the White House." Sean says.

Wow! Hillary sets up camp in New York for what purpose? Hillary joins "conservative" committees in the Senate for what purpose? hmmmm....You can't tell me, Sean, that she wasn't trying to springboard herself. She checks the wind every morning before she makes any decision and she can't even run a presidential campaign without Bill. Obama is a thinker and he is way more trustworthy than Hillary. I consider his (Barack's) lack of experience in congress as a lack of time to be corrupted. In my opinion, he has had excellent experience in the real world. Bill and Hillary are out of touch and corrupt now. Sad to say.....

Kathryn, Louisville, KY (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:29 AM)

Starting with NH and continuing thru today,Obama and the media have made this campaign about race. Gender is hardly ever mentioned and when it is mentioned, it its mentioned in relation to a race question. It was used to solidify the black vote prior to the South Carolina primary and you look at the results of every state and the black vote is going 80 to 90% to one candidate (this includes black women). Qualifications and experience makes do difference. Is this not a hell of a way to elect a President. I thought we did this once before, his name was Bush. Just wait until McCain and the republican party get after him, its not going to be a pretty sight.The republican party has almost no black support, so they can go as hard on him as as they want and not worry about losing any support.

gene britton (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:30 AM)

If a man used his wife's resume to run for President as Hillary is doing with Bill's presidency, he would be laughed off the stage

Jenny Chevy Chase MD (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:31 AM)

I am still concerned that Vince Foster committed suicide in the 90s while been investigated as Hilary's partner in the whitewater case. Obama does not even whisper of this and many other funny dealings including in countries as far spread as Ukraine. I am also concerned with the Tyra Banks interview that cast Bill's fphilandering as the one case with Lewinsky where Hillary claimed she was dissapointed and thought what was best to do for her (as if it were a one case rather than a twenty year event with Jones, Lesinsky, Willy, Flowers. I do not care much that Bill did those things and I supported him then - it is their personal business (although I wish they didnt). It is my responsibility to teach my children it is not ok.

M. Richter. (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:32 AM)

If Obama actually had a message, people might be able to believe in it. But so far, it's all just glorified speaches and rhetoric and leading all the sheep to the next barn for another glorious speach.

If you want real SOLUTIONS please visit www.hillaryclinton.com

GM, Wisconsin (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:36 AM)

"If Hillary walked on water, she would be criticized for not swimming," Lehane said. "And if Obama swam, he would be lauded for being able to do what Hillary could not do."

I do not like a lot of quotes and cut and paste style but this one goes to the heart of much of this hoopla.

Chaunda,Indianapolis (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:39 AM)

I don't oppose Hillary Clinton because she is a woman. I oppose her because of the following:

Turning $1,000 into $100,000. Nice trick, Hillary. Please show me how you did that. On second thought, don't. I am just a private citizen. If I do that, I will go to prison.

The Lincoln bedroom. Other presidents from both parties had the proper respect for the most hallowed room in the White House. Not the sleazy Clintons.

Sandy Berger. Are those classified documents in your pants, or are you just glad to see me?

Travel office firings. I am Hillary Rodham Clinton. I will fire whomever I want to fire. Your laws don't apply to me.

Norman Hsu. This guy makes Tony Rezko look like a saint.

Peter Paul. Uh oh, Hillary supporters. You might want to Google this guy. Skip over the Peter, Paul, and Mary links. Peter Paul could be another thorn in Hillary's hallowed personna real soon.

Tax returns. Still haven't released them, Queen Hillary? That's OK. I am sure you are not hiding anything. Move along. Nothing to see here.

DNC rules. I agree that Florida delegates won't count. Oh wait, I won Florida, so they should count. I also agree that Michigan delegates won't count. Oh wait, I won there, so they should also count.

Bubba. It amazes me how many people take this guy seriously, when he talks about women's rights. This is a guy who thinks women were put on this planet for his own amusement.

Rose Law Firm billing records. I can't find them. They are gone forever. Oh wait, here they are.

I could go on, but you get the idea.

Barack Obama seems to be a person of good character. Believe it or not, that counts for something. The Clintons had 8 years in the White House, and they shamed this country repeatedly with their scandals. Now they want another term?

I'll pass.

Obama in 2008!

Sick of corruption (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:40 AM)

barack will be crusified by mccain!!
i hope the democrats nominate him.

dimitri T. california (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:41 AM)

IF she keeps Wisconsin close? On Feb. 5th she had a double digit LEAD. This is a state she should win. Bill won it twice by large margins. He has been all over the state for her as has Chelsea. She has been there for years. So if it is close, It is more a question of how did Obama win a state that HRC should have owned?

As far as the words don't matter issue, what I find more interesting is why is HRC stealing Republican attacks that were waged against Gov. Patrick and using them as her own? Seems she is using a Republican playbook. Much ado about nothing I would think. Perhaps you could explain why HRC's speeches steal Obama's themes now, use his Yes We Can chant, why McCain uses "Fired Up and Ready to Go." Patrick and Obama are friends and have been close during both of their campaigns. If this is the BIG issue, I say people are missing the boat.

janice (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:43 AM)

In response to Obama's quote, "when Senator Clinton was 'feeling down,' she went on the attack to make herself feel better; that is, she committed an error in judgment because she was in a bad mood."
former DEM wrote, "That was the moment when I, and other women of a certain age, all over the country, winced."
--
WHY?? The statement you quoted had NOTHING to do with being a man or a woman. This says way more about you than anyone else.

PEOPLE have a tendency to attack when the feel "down." The fact that Hillary is a woman has NOTHING to do with it. If anything, it says more about her campaign. Anyone who reads into those words is probably dealing with issues of his or her own. You should be ashamed of yourself for spreading this nonsensical drivel.

Eric, Michigan (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:45 AM)

I'm not bothered by the Clintons going negative at all. From her perspective it's about the only option she has left. I look forward to it as just another opportunity for Obama to shine.

Interesting clips this morning of Bill Clinton, once again losing his temper over the weekend. Quite a contrast to the dignity, calm and control that Obama always seems to have no matter how tough things get.

These next few states are going to be tougher, because Bill and Hillary have dug in their heels and decided this is their last stand. I don't want to have to see them go down in flames but I hope that the people left to vote will make it decisive in Obama's favor.

We need a president with vision, moral clarity, good judgement and a steady hand. Hillary's choices in her past votes, and in this campaign have been questionable at best. I have seen nothing that convinces me she would be a better president than Obama.

AP from IL (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:46 AM)

The Clinton's have ZERO credibility with the American people.They can't go negative and point there finger at anyone for any thing , because they have four fingers pointing right back at them.

Clinton's just don't "get it" .........the people are so sick of there kind of politics. Every time Bill gets out there and opens his mouth , it takes people right back to that place in time when he looked the American people in the eye and said....( I didn't have sex with that woman ).

Yes America is ready for a woman President "BUT NOT THIS WOMAN"..........she gives women A BAD NAME.

Turn the page
YES WE CAN

James , Oregon (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:47 AM)

how can any clinton supporter say anything about obama stealing other peoples material when clinton herself has stolen more material than all the other candidates combined, you're not fooling anyone, now she has the gall to steal edwards populist message damn near verbatim, all the while wallowing in the millions corporate america gave her, you do remember who signed nafta into law don't you, clinton intends to carry on the quest for a true 2 class america, she will help no one other than her elitists buds

MK,MO (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:48 AM)

Obama is a loser. I will never vote for this phony! My vote goes to Hillary Clinton, someone who doesn't have to steal others lines and someone who has worked hard for were she is at and isn't lazy like Obama. Only losers vote for Obama! By the way Obama worshippers, your negative attacks on Hillary is backfiring. You will need Hillary Clinton supporters to win the White House you complete idiots. I can tell you, we will never forget how you Obama supporters tried to trash Hillary. So to hell with you and your guy Obama!!!! Be smart, vote Hillary in 08!

lionred (Sent Monday, February 18, 2008 10:49 AM)

Next >>

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

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

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=676739