First thoughts: Obama, the aggressive

Posted: Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:17 AM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: First Thoughts

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray and Domenico Montanaro
*** A more aggressive Obama: Yesterday, we asked how Obama would respond to his losses in Ohio and Texas. Well, he and his campaign came out swinging. Obama demanded to know what kind of commander-in-chief credentials Clinton actually has -- a question that might come up today when Clinton holds a press conference in DC with military officers. He also asked if Clinton is so fully vetted, why she hasn’t released her tax returns so voters know how the Clintons have made their money since Bill left the White House. And with Clinton arriving in Mississippi later tonight, the Obama campaign held a press conference to draw attention to some unflattering comments Clinton made about the state last fall while campaigning in Iowa. The Obama camp is showing some fight it didn’t always exhibit leading up to Junior Super Tuesday. The tightrope they have to walk is proving their mettle and drawing contrasts, but not doing so to the point where it makes Obama seem like every other politician. It isn’t an easy task. But there does seem to be a pattern in this primary season: When the negative spotlight is on one candidate, that candidate loses. The question is, when will a candidate WIN when the spotlight's on them?

*** Do-overs? So is Howard Dean deciding NOT to take a leadership role in this Michigan-Florida issue? It sure sounded like it this morning as he made the TV rounds. He punted the issue back to the states by not endorsing new contests. He chose not to use his bully pulpit and position to make any public suggestions. The DNC has said it is open to new contests, but that the ball is in Florida’s and Michigan’s court. Does this mean a Super-Duper-delegate may now have to step in since Dean won't? How about Al Gore calling for a new Florida election? Imagine what sway Gore would have on the Florida issue? Both the Michigan and Florida Dem leadership teams huddled last night to try and figure out their next step. FWIW, it appears Michigan seems a lot closer to agreeing to some sort of re-vote than Florida, which seems more content on going to the credentials committee. Perhaps Florida feels like it is better positioned since Obama's name was on the ballot there (unlike in Michigan). In Michigan, there's probably a lot of pressure being put on key Clinton-supporting Dems in the state by African-American leaders who aren't happy about having Michigan seated without Obama getting a chance to earn votes.

VIDEO: NBC Deputy Political Director Mark Murray offers his first read on the tight Democratic presidential race and talk of Michigan and Florida re-doing their primary contests.

*** Turmoil in Arlington: Despite what happened on Tuesday, don't forget that the Clinton inner circle hasn't been getting along. What does victory do to those disputes? The Washington Post runs yet another account of how Mark Penn isn’t making everyone happy inside the Arlington headquarters. We particularly enjoyed this line from the piece: "Clinton's advisers turned to their other goal: denying Mark Penn credit" for Ohio and Texas. Apparently, Penn still has the support of two very important people -- Bill and Hillary -- but outside of those two is there ANYONE else in Clinton land who even wants to tolerate Penn? This Post piece was some read; we're guessing getting the hating Mark Penn stuff back in the toothpaste tube is too late.

*** Previewing Pennsylvania: The big papers are out with their previews of Pennsylvania, a contest that is still a whopping seven weeks away. The state, as everyone points out, looks a lot like Ohio. Of course, we also though Ohio looked a lot like Wisconsin. One thing is for sure: Seven weeks is a long, long time away. In fact, the New York Daily News has dubbed the contest the “Seven-Week War.” The quick analysis from the analysis this morning: Obama's stronghold will be the Philly media market; Clinton's stronghold will be the "T" and possibly Pittsburgh. The question will be: Can Obama make some inroads in Pittsburgh? And can Hillary make some inroads in the Philly suburbs?

*** The delegate count: Obama leads Clinton 1,568-1,467. This includes the NBC News Hard Count of Obama 1,355, Clinton 1,213 in pledged delegates. The superdelegate count stands at Clinton 254, Obama 213. One thing to keep in mind is that 76 of the 795 superdelegates are still not known; they will be appointed at various state conventions beginning in April. Also, when we finally get the Texas caucus results, it likely that Clinton’s net delegate haul from the Junior Super Tuesday contests will be less than 10. There are still 46 overall unallocated pledged delegates, 33 of which are from Texas.

*** On the trail: Clinton attends a press conference in DC with military officers and then travels to Canton, MS to speak at the Jefferson-Jackson dinner there; McCain campaigns in Florida before heading to a finance event in Atlanta, GA; and Obama is down in Chicago. Also today, Bill Clinton stumps on his wife’s behalf in Wyoming.

Countdown to Wyoming: 2 days
Countdown to Mississippi: 5 days
Countdown to Pennsylvania: 47 days
Countdown to Election Day 2008: 243 days
Countdown to Inauguration Day 2009: 320 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

OK superdelegates, looks like you’re going to have to stand up and be counted. I mean right now. We’re heading for exactly the kind of scenario that was used to sell us on the whole idea of superdelegates in the first place. For those who are too young to remember; in 1968, 1972 and 1980 the Democrats went all the way through bitterly contested primaries and ultimately picked candidates in tumultuous convention battles. By that time the image of the eventual nominee and the party as a whole had been so badly damaged that it was impossible to win in November.

In 1980 Ted Kennedy and Jimmy Carter ripped each other to shreds in the primaries and battled over delegates at the convention while Ronald Reagan was running with his message of can-do optimism. We went down in an electoral disaster and lost the White House to the Republicans for twelve years, along with an entire generation of young voters. Are we going to repeat that sorry history? The circular firing squad has already assembled and the opening volley just found its mark. Are we really going to spend tens of millions of dollars driving away independents, young people, and newly energized voters? On purpose, no less?

The delegate math is perfectly clear. Neither candidate at this point can secure enough delegates in the remaining primaries to win outright. Since we now know without question that it’s going to come down to the superdelegates eventually anyway, it makes absolutely no sense to let this go on any longer. Barack is the best candidate I’ve seen in my years as a political junky, but if we’re really going to do something crazy like turn our backs on a movement that is already in full swing, then I would much rather we pick Hillary now. If we drag this negative campaigning out to the convention we all lose, because the rest of the country will want nothing to do with us by the time we’re through trashing each other. .

I have at least two members of my immediate family that are already so disgusted they’re convinced they can never vote for Hillary. It will take every day between now and November to try and turn them around. The only decent argument I have is the Supreme Court, because I honestly don’t think Hillary deserves to win either and I hate to reward bad behavior. It will take all the resources we can muster just to get her into the White House, and we can’t be investing those precious resources in tearing Barack down. That’s just lunacy. We need to choose Hillary right now if we’re going to do it. At least we can minimize the damage and allow ourselves more time to try and salvage what we can.

We have two strong factions here that are emotionally attached to their candidates, and both sides are heading down the road to ruin. We’ve travelled this road before and we already know where it leads. It’s time for the wiser heads to prevail; just as we were assured they would the next time we landed in this situation. The superdelegates are supposed to look at the big picture and provide guidance and balance for the party when candidates and voters get so caught up in the heat of battle that they lose sight of their own long-term best interest. The voters can’t hope to settle this now, and we only die by a thousand self-inflicted cuts in letting this exercise in futility play out to the bitter end.

Supers who continue to argue that the remaining voters should have their say are just hoping that somehow the process will work out in a way that will give them cover. This is no time for political cowardice. We need the superdelegates to justify their existence and lead the party through this particularly perilous moment. We need a rational, strategic vision that will carry our party beyond next November’s election. What we must avoid at all costs are months of internecine warfare followed by a media circus convention that will only turn off a new generation of voters.

jaycee, Ventura, California (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:29 AM)

Do we really want to risk abother Clinton Sex Scandal during a National Security Crisis again?

adam/Brooklyn New York City (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:29 AM)

I have been married for 23 years, and I always tell people the secret to our good marriage is that I don’t try to run her life & I don’t try to run mine. I have given up trying to figure out what makes people tick, and I have stopped trying to figure out why people support one candidate over another when clear analysis would indicate one is better. In this vein, I have given up trying to figure out why people support Hillary over Barack. I am at a loss.

These next several weeks prior to the Pennsylvania primary are going to be difficult. I can only hope things will be civil and not divisive. Maybe people from each candidate’s staffs read these posts. Maybe we can give them some good ideas instead of vitriol. I know everyone wants this to be over; as long as it’s their candidate that wins. All of us should recognize that one of these two will not be the nominee for the Democratic Party.

I know why I support Barack Obama. Why do you support Hillary? It’s your day in court; tell us what you honestly think. Don’t knock Obama, talk about her.

Chuck, NY (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:31 AM)

Barack Obama supporters, it's not over. He has done exceedingly well considering he's going up against Hillary AND Bill Clinton. Did you see how many votes he received in Texas? Unbelievable for someone we hardly knew 3 months ago.

It's high time Barack changed the tone of the campaign. He has to get down to the nuts & bolts of what's ailing people in this country.

I would have to think that although he's the "change" candidate, people will understand if he goes after Hillary big time. He has to. Otherwise, people will think he's got no backbone.

He needs a new stump speech. The one he has used all these months was great. It got him to where he is today. Which is in a damn good position.

Now it's time to take off the gloves.

If he does, he'll win this thing going away.

Obama/Webb 2008

Pat, Boston, MA (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:31 AM)

As a person who hasn't participated in politics for 15 years but who has been inspired by Obama to get involved again I'm bordering on being angry with him right now. Certainly I'm disappointed. In going tit for tat with Clinton, he is fast losing his aura of authenticity and looking like just any other politician that wants to get elected. The agent of change is reviving the old boring politics we all hate and I'm asking myself, 'how is he going to change anything like this?' If he does get the nomination and keeps on like this, McCain can easily co-opt his message of change just by being different enough from past Republican nominees and we'll all be scratching our heads wondering what it was about Obama that got us so excited. Obama has a chance to salvage me if he does the following:
1. Go positive - he didn't get this far by going tit for tat with his opponents. Part of what made his message of change convincing was that he was DIFFERENT from the rest in that he knew how to STAY ABOVE THE FRAY. Now when the heat is on he's just starting to demonstrate to me that that wasn't real.
2. Inspire action NOW. Obama has built himself up by inspiring us to higher ideals like Reagan and Kennedy did. It was totally predictable that inspiring rallies would get old UNLESS he had the vision to do something BOLD to take it to the next level. Where's his vision as the agent of change to REALLY change if he's going to squander all that fervor? Here's what those of us who are coming out of our closets to hope again want to see: ACTION. Translate your support into something real and then we will all believe you can change things. Have massive rallies Barack, but then don't just stop there. Ask people to take some kind of meaningful action - and not just 'work for my campaign'. If your slogan is about not just believing you can change America but that we need to believe that we ourselves can then enable us to do that. Start organizing us NOW to do what we want to do to make things better or we won't believe you can organize us after you become president. This is not about you but it's about us wanting to get involved and not knowing how so show us how. Show us how we can join the Peace Corps or clean up our neighborhoods or help police fight drugs and violence, live a greener lifestyle - take us to the next level by proving to us that change is POSSIBLE and put us down that road or we will be wandering with no place to go right now and some of us will wander to McCain.
3. Be BOLD and courageous about change. If you do #1 above and go positive and if you do #2 above and inspire us to action NOW, then you need to let out all stops. IF any real change is going to happen you have to create a MOVEMENT. Don't be afraid to do that. True leaders can handle a movement. Just lead it wisely and unselfishly. That's what we sensed coming on and that's what got us excited, but where did you go?
4. INSPIRE, INSPIRE, INSPIRE. If you get people to take sensible action you can inspire all day and it never gets old because it's tied to something real - ie. the more you inspire the more good things happen and consequently noone can gainsay your inspiration. Don't be fooled into thinking it's about your positions. Noone is so naive to think that your positions as is are going to become law. So don't try to inspire us about your candidacy. Inspire us to change the world and then we will look to you as the facilitator in governement we need to be able to do that. We know how it's going happen - we're all going to get together and step by step make things happen. Your inspiration is going to help us through the tough times to make it happen.

to summarize: Barack Obama has positioned himself as a revolutionary candidate of change. He's fast become lukewarm. If he's going to become president he needs to decisively return to his message and take us to the next level by being truly revolutionary and inspiring meaningful action now.

THANKS!!! Bless you. All you guys are doing a great job at NBC - far and above the best political coverage out there!

Craig Pettersen (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:31 AM)

"When the negative spotlight is on one candidate, that candidate loses. The question is, when will a candidate WIN when the spotlight's on them?"

I think this is a key point. Obama spent the weeks before Tuesday fighting off HRC, McCain, and Bush. And he DID try to take the high road to his credit. Of course he took some major hits.

I think his campaign will regroup and find away to have him look tougher and more willing to engage while still focusing on inspired leadership, hope, and issues.

I wonder how Ms. Clinton would have fared over the past couple of weeks if she were facing broad attacks from Bush, McCain, and Obama.

Obama 08

Lisa, New Britain, CT (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:32 AM)

The Delegate Mess in Florida [and perhaps Michigan too] is a product of Republican dirty election tricks. Especially in Florida, where it was a Republican controlled State Legislature with a Republican Governor who moved the state's primary to a date they KNEW violated DNC rules, and would result in the current turmoil in the democratic party. All of this, clearly to the advantage of the Repukes, and the Dems MUST wake up to this, and the DNC MUST therefore immediately announce that these states' delegates WILL be seated at the convention. OR, else the DNC should foot the bill of having a do-over primary in Florida if the state refuses to pay for it, and have Michigan pay for a do-over primary so that this mess ends and the Repukes don't get their way, which was to divide the Dem party at all levels.

Pat Huntington NY (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:33 AM)

howard Dean is deciding TO take a leadership role here;Fla and MI violated the rules, and now, like spoiled kids, they want to be forgiven and get their way anyway. Dean says no; as an honest broker (and a GOP gov of Fl who wants a beatable clinton to be nominated and a Clinont-supporting gov of MI are NOT hoest brokers!) Dean has decided that the punishments of the spoiled brats will stand. I say, what's wrong with that?!? It's the first honorable thing I've seen the guy do in a long while...

Class Warrior, D.C. (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:34 AM)

The biggest difference between PA and the other primaries is that it is closed to only registered Democrats. But will that stop Rush Limbaugh (and other radical right radio) listeners from changing their party affiliation so they can vote for Hillary? There is mounting evidence that Rush can take some credit for Hillary's margin of victory. Maybe it didn't change the ultimate outcome, but it really happened. This, and the meddling by the Canadian government should really give the media, voters and campaigns caution. The media needs to ferret out these meddlers and expose them!

TJK, Hunt Valley, MD (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:35 AM)

Mr Obama does not want these votes counted.As a MI voter that took the time to vote I resent this.If he is the nominee he will absolutely not get my vote.And if we have a redo I will vote the same way I did before ----for Hillary Clinton.

no to obama (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:35 AM)

Obama going negative?He is going to let his old politics show now you mean?He has been doing old politics from beginning.How he won S.Carolina and built his base. He cried race when it wasnt there to unite blacks.Funny after he did that in S.Carolina he doesnt mind when the polls give him states with large black population.And they say thats why those states are his. I beleive he underestimated the Blacks thinking for themselves. When it looked like he was a shoe in I could understand but now not so much.Good try Obama

Mox (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:37 AM)

Obama is not change, he's the same as other politicians.....he'll do what ever he has to, to get elected.

The republicans spent hundreds of millions of dollars of the tax payers money going after Hillary and Bill. They found nothing. Then when they found nothing, they were so mad they went after Bill for his private sex life.

So much for that....Obama needs to answer the questions about WHY he is a member for 20 years of a all black racist church.

Why he calls Rev. Wright ( Obama's black racist pastor) "my mentor"

Why Obama's church and pastor praises the racist Farrakhan, who hates whites and jews, and is the leader of Nation of Islam.

Why Obama is STILL friends with William Ayers the terrorist.

John Doe (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:38 AM)

John Doe (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:39 AM)

Ahhhhhhh the plan is working to perfection, just as the incredible Rush Limbaugh asked we American Loving Republicians, Are keeping the left wing anti Americans i Democrats in turmoil.. The Democrat party is at war and When Hitley Steals the nonmination we have u right where we want you. Even the left wingers at MSNBC are going to lose this one lmao.. BYE BYE Dumocrats

McCain Sweeps ALL States (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:39 AM)

always look to Chuck Todd for your opinion and Facts of the elections thank you

emmy (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:39 AM)

I think Dean is doing the right thing in reminding everyone that RULES are RULES. I believe that IS the right stance. Everyone advocating for some type of change does so with some political bias. That is why you don't change rules in the middle of the game (feel free to think up any number of sporting scenarios that speak to this).

Everyone speaking on this issue has some sort of stake...I think Dean is right to emphasize the rules.

I have been asking myself WHY Crist is now so insistent that the primary stand as it was in Jan.? Are we saying he's neutral. Don't think so.

Rules are rules...as any parent knows, you can't back down once you've told your child no candy at the supermarket. You are just inviting more tantrums and disruption and your credibility is shot.

I mean know ill will to individual FL and Mich voters, I can understand their frustrated, I hope they choose to hold the appropriate people accountable in their State.

Lisa, New Britain, CT (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:39 AM)

OBAMMA gave a "consession" speech the other night the TEXAS primary wasn't even over and he went out and gave a speech just to hear his voice .LIKE SEINFEILD it was a speach about nothing much like the rest of his campaign.Now onto philly and the racist comment from MSNBZZZ that its his stronhold is it because philly is black certainly not because the african american mayor is for hilliary and the Gov,who was the mayor of philly ran the dnc when clinton was prez or that he is a major supporter ,YEA philly looks good because it is african american but they love hilliary HOW ARE WE GOING TO TURN the AFICAN AMERICANS AGAINST HILLIARY LETS PLAY THE RACE CARD,Obamma did say he was going dirty JUST LIKE everyother shady pol.WELCOME to the real world .

kenn (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:41 AM)

Obama needs to focus on Clinton's right wing affiliation with McCain on the NAFTA gate issue. NAFTA gate's not over either.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/03/05/canada-obama.html

bc Indiana (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:46 AM)

No say it aint so OBAMA turning into every other HUMAN.Get a glimpes of how he works says I will run a campaign that is above the old politics until I send someone to talk to the canadians about NAFTA behind the voters back.He is going to throw the Kitchen sink now HOW LOW CAN HE GO ,WELCOME TO THE DARKSIDE LUKE>LOOKS like his robe is getting dirty and the angel is becoming the prince of darkness if hilliary thought he was dirty before wait and see what OBAMMA and his fans at MSNBZZZZZ have in store as MR BURNS SAID"EXCELLENT"WELCOME OBAMMAMAWANNABES TO THE DARKSIDE HILLIARY BEAT YOU SO NOW YOU MUST JOIN THE EVIL FORCES OF THE OLD WAY>

kenn (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:49 AM)

Why is this not being discussed?

From NBC's Lisa Myers and Jim Popkin
Sen. Hillary Clinton has declined to return $170,000 in campaign contributions from individuals at a company accused of widespread sexual harassment, and whose CEO is a disbarred lawyer with a criminal record, federal campaign records show.

The federal government has accused the Illinois management consulting firm, International Profit Associates, or IPA, of a brazen pattern of sexual harassment including "sexual assaults," "degrading anti-female language" and "obscene suggestions."

In a 2001 lawsuit full of lurid details, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission claims that 103 women employees at IPA were victimized for years. The civil case is ongoing, and IPA vigorously denies the allegations.

"This is by far, hands down, the worst case I've ever experienced," said Diane Smason, one of the EEOC lawyers handling the lawsuit. "Every woman there experienced sex harassment, they were part of a hostile work environment of sex harassment. And this occurred from the top down."

Sen. Clinton's spokesman, Howard Wolfson, told NBC News in a statement that the senator decided to keep the funds because the lawsuit is "ongoing" and because none of the sexual harassment allegations has been proven in court.

"With regard to the pending harassment suit, as a general matter, the campaign assesses findings of fact in deciding whether to return contributions," Wolfson said.

fortuna, Houston, TX (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:49 AM)

Well, I won't vote for Obama in the general election. I am not sure how many Hillary supporters will. ON the flip side, I don't know how many Obama supporters will vote for Hillary.

Obama is a pompus arrogant rat. He is not substance. He is just speeches. I don't trust him and his racist ties. And his wife's a racist. I will not allow that to infect our country.

Obama needs to go away and get some experience, muzzle his awful wife (or dump her) and move on.

Obama is just petty and evil.

Anti-Obama (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:49 AM)

Females is this what Hillary has in common with You.

Is it the fact that she called a 12 year old girl a SLUT, while she was representing the person that had Raped this 12 year old Slut?

Is it the fact that she accepted & still refuses to return $170,000 from a firm accussed of 103 incidences of Sexual harrassment in the workplace?

Just what is it that women think she has in Common with You, because her past, I'm sure is Nothing at all similar to your's?

Maybe it the Lies that Women are so intrigued by! Who Knows, but 1 thing's for sure, Hillary cares absolutely Nothing about You, Than Your vote.

Rick,ky (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:50 AM)

Has Hillary Clinton really been 'vetted' as she so often claims?
by Bob Johnson, Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 04:04:37 PM EST

Over and over, we have heard Hilary Clinton and her campaign surrogates claim that she has been "vetted for 15 years." Harold Ickes used those very words today.

The candidate, herself, has said:

"I've been tested. I've been vetted. I have been in the political arena in our country very intensely for 16 years. There are no surprises. There's not going to be anybody saying, `Well why didn't we think of that?' or `What, my goodness, what does that mean?'" she said. "I am going to be able to go up against any Republican who they nominate."

"No surprises?" You've been "vetted?"

Really?

I note that the Clinton camp has been calling for a "vetting" of Obama since before the Iowa caucus. The Clintonites have presented their "vetting" of Obama as almost a public service to the Democratic Party. Over and over we have heard that he needed to be "toughened up" because much harsher attacks were sure to come from the Republicans should Obama capture the nomination.

I diaried about this back before Iowa voters spoke:

Clinton backers: 'Obama needs to be vetted.' I say: 'Hillary, too!'
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/12/17/153334/35

What has been fascinating to watch is the Clinton camp's never-ending zeal quest to "vet" Obama. All in the interest of making sure we know everything about him we possibly can, of course.

But has Hillary really been "vetted," as she and her campaign have repeatedly claimed?

Have any of her Democratic opponents, including Obama, sought more detailed answers from her about stories such as:

Norman Hsu and his bundling of money for her campaign?

How "dishwashers, waiters and others" poured "$1,000 and $2,000 contributions into Clinton's campaign treasury?"

Bill's trip to Kazakhstan with Canadian magnate, Frank Giustra, that netted Giustra $3 billion and Bill's foundation a $131 million contribution from Giustra?

How powerful foreign donors to Bill's presidential library, such as the Saudis, may pose a serious conflict of interest to Hillary's foreign policy actions as president?

How Bill's tangled ties to an investment concern of Clinton friend, Ron Burkle, and it's dealings with Dubai may yet, again, threaten to compromise Hillary Clinton's execution of foreign policy as president?

The fact that with all of these questionable financial dealings, the Clintons have been unwilling to release their tax returns, especially in light of Hillary Clinton claiming that the $5 million she lent the campaign was "her own money?"

And, finally, though we, as Democrats, don't care who Bill schtupps (and, no, none of us believe he has kept his fly zipped the last seven years), you can be damn sure the Republicans will be digging hard (no pun intended) to see just what Bill has been up to since leaving office.

So has Hillary really been vetted? Shouldn't she be fully vetted on these stories and others for no other reason than as a public service to the Democratic Party? (The same logic Camp Clinton continually throws out for its "vetting" of Obama.)

Shouldn't the press be asking her about these stories and their potential impact on the race, should she garner the nomination? Shouldn't Democratic superdelegates take into account these items that may present themselves in "full bloom" during a race versus John McCain in the Fall?

Is $150,000 (since returned) from Tony Rezko more important than hundreds of millions of dollars in secret transactions?

I think for the sake of the Democratic Party, Hillary Clinton needs to be fully vetted.

I am sorry. I am not taking her or her surrogates at their word that there are "no surprises" and that she has been "fully vetted."

The facts are, she has not. Certainly not to the extent she will be on these stories -- and more -- in a general election versus John McCain.

Let the "vetting" begin.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/3/5/16437/77867

john j, texas (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:50 AM)

Right back at you my family said they could never vote for OBAMMA now.So lets all vote for MACAIN

kenn (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:51 AM)

The media needs to continue to get out the message that Hillary's "big" win on Tuesday is actually marginal, at best. Yes, she won Ohio handily, but they split Texas (and really Obama won it because he will end up with more delegates), and they split Rhode Island and Vermont. I know Clintonites are bitter because their candidate is so close but really has no legitimate argument for winning, but the rules are the rules and the math is the math. Obama just needs to stay positive, keep inspiring, take a few strategic and subtle digs at Hillary, and map out a solid srategy for the next seven weeks. Once he wins Wyoming and Mississippi, he'll have the momentum again. Sorry Hillary supporters. I understand your frustration, really. But she's put herself in a position where the only way she can win is to tear the party apart and to disillusion thousands and thousands of Democrats--including, I suspect, lots of African-Americans who are crucial to the Democratic base--from every caring or participating again.

Matt (Buffalo) (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:51 AM)

Clinton's maybe haven't released their tax records and legally (LAST I CHECKED) taxes aren't due until April 15th. If you really think that people that vote for Hillary care anything about the past your wrong, we don't care we know it, heard it all and what bothers you is she still is getting our votes. Why? because this country is worth it, Obama couldn't even attend the State of The Black Union in New Orleans recently (To busy campaigning),Funny Clinton was there.
Why hasn't he done any hearings OOPS! here we go again running a campaign can't leave it to something that important, especially when I am against the war. (RIGHT) Funny Clinton and McCain both have been able to attend their hearing on the Senate Arms Committee, and run a campaign.
Even the Black Agenda Report thinks this man is lacking.
Obama is a man who wears two faces and switchs them for what ever will suit him. You think you have done your research on this man I don't think any of his suppporters know anything about him.
You should look at all sides before jumping on this ship there is a lot for the republicans to hit him with.
And Florida should count nobody campaign there they all obeyed their own rules there, But Howard Dean is a whimp and Peolsi is hurting our party by not allowing the Florida Primary to count. REDO Michagan
with both their names on the ballot.

I WANT A PRESIDENT THAT ISN'T GOING TO PUSH THE WRONG BUTTON AND THEN SAY OOPS! WRONG ONE (OBAMA HAS DONE THIS 6 TIMES IN THE US SENATE AND OVER 100 TIMES PRESENT IN ILLINIOS SENATE), I THINK HE NEEDS A LITTLE HELP WITH MAKING UP HIS MIND.

Mel (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:52 AM)

So if Flordia and Michigan can have do-over votes, can other states do the same? Lots of things have changed since the primary voting started, and states like Iowa, New Hamshire, and South Carolina may want to take a second vote. I guess all the states should be able to re-vote until they feel they got it right, right?

Chris Wilkens, SC (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:54 AM)

Chuck from NY,
The answer to your question lies in the posts of John Doe and Kenn. Obama is the unknown quantity and Clinton supporters will take her, warts and all, because of fear and ignorance. Why do I always get the feeling that after every one of her "victory" speeches that she gets back in the car and turns to the person next to her and says, "Man, isn't it amazing how DUMB the electorate really seems to be, and isn't that GREAT news for us?"

Kaye, NC (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:55 AM)

the democratic party is in complete disarray, all mccain has to do is set back and watch the implosion, and claim the whitehouse. clinton won’t be president, and she is going to make damn sure no other democrat is either, this will go down as one of the biggest blunders in american politics, the selfishness of the clintons knows no bounds, they will be fine, and the American people will suffer

MK,MO (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:56 AM)

The Delegate Mess in Florida [and perhaps Michigan too] is a product of Republican dirty election tricks.
Pat Huntington NY (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:33 AM)

Considering that Howard Dean could just seat the delegates at the convention and refuses to do so shows how much the above comment means LOL. It's always the republicans that play the dirty games isn't it Pat? Howard Dean is the biggest moron liberal I have ever seen, a product of the kool aid drinking radical left wing of the democratic party. They would rather see the party go down in flames rather then get into bed with The Clinton's. I think a lot of people were right, if Obama would have ran in those two states and won, we would not be having this conversation. Hillary signed the pledge and then broke it by travelling to Florida (typical Clinton). Now she wants to change the rules of the game. of course, the democrats have no rules to begin with, so to suggest the republicans are behind this is just plain dumb. The democrats got themselves into this mess thanks to gutless and stupid leadership under Howard Dean, so they should have to foot the entire bill for a re-vote.

For the democrats to have the taxpayers pay for the re-vote shows why they are liberals, the care nothing about money earned by hard working Americans.

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:57 AM)

where are the papers from Resko deal.The one with his wifes dream house.Speaking of which .Did she recuse herself when the papers to devide the land come through her office.She sat on that board when it was done.I think his wife needs a lot more looking into.Did he also give his tax papers for those years involved with that house job??Resko's trial is going on now in Chicago.Will he tell more??

joe (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:57 AM)

Dear Anti-Obama, Please go home to the Republicans or try growing out of your racist attitude. Thank you! Best of luck with your issues!

Keith in Maryland (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:58 AM)

This is HUGE! Everyone on these blogs needs to read this and then think about how you want in the White House. Pass this on in other blogs and if the media has any sense of balance then they should run with this.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0308/Assurances_from_Clinton.html#comments

Mike, Presque Isle, Maine (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:59 AM)

Over the last couple of weeks, Hillary has relied almost entirely on negative campaigning. Since she could't convince voters that her health care plan is really not that different from Barack's and she couldn't explain how she could vote for the war in Iraq, she resorted to mudslinging.

It's time to fight fire with fire. The Clintons' tax forms is only the tip of the iceberg. The 90s were not too long ago. During the 90s, Bill and Hillary spent much of their time fighting Republicans over Whitewater and the impeachment of Bill Clinton.

I hope Barack doesn't have to stoop down to the level of Hillary. Hillary is desperate and she would rather destroy the Democratic party than give the Democrats a good shot at kicking the Republicans out of the White House.

Enrique, Chicago (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 10:00 AM)

You in the media better start reporting what's going on and quit helping Obama hide the skeletons in his closet. There is a report this morning about an Obama campaign staffer that is currently connected to Rezco. Is this not news?

Toby Hill (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 10:00 AM)

Change we can all believe in --

Obama/Webb 08

Amy Andersen (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 10:02 AM)

FYI, A large group of us here in Fla are signing paperwork for a class action law suit, so we can get out votes counted. Our republican led legislators pushed our state for a sooner primary and this crap occured. Us Floridians are being denied our votes to be counted. This must not and will not stand. We voted and it WILL be counted. Delegates must be divided evenly and fairly.

Yellowdog dem (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 10:02 AM)

Voters in Michigan and Florida...

Your state parties broke the rules. The DNC said if you move your primaries you won't have your delegates seated at the convention. The state parties ignored the warnings and the DNC rules committee voted to strip the delegates.

Save some of your angst over this issue for Clinton advisor Harold Ickes. You see, Ickes sits on the DNC rules committee and voted in favor of not seating the Michigan and Florida delegates. If you don't believe me, Google search Harold Ickes flip-flop.

Look, if Florida and Michigan want new primaries I say go for it...but you can't seat delegates right now based on the earlier vote because...

1) Nobody campaigned in Florida.
2) Obama wasn't on the ballot in Michigan.
3) How many voters in both states stayed home and didn't vote because they were told that the primary vote wouldn't count for any delegates?

Pete "Hussein" - Albany, NY (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 10:02 AM)

Chuck,
Apart from an obscure speech in 2002, Senator Obama has taken the PATH OF LEAST RESISTANCE. Politicians that follow this road are DO-NOTHING POLITICIANS because they are afraid to stand-up and be counted. Even you must agree that it would have been a far superior judgment if State Senator Obama had organized a movement in 2002 to oppose the war. The results of this movement would have been LIVES AND TREASURE SAVED. Is "laying your political career on the line" good enough for America?
If you compare the acomplishments of Senators Clinton and Obama, it is evident that Senator Obama does not have a lot to offer. When all you can do is give speeches, there is no time for serving America. Senator Obama can only serve himself.
Therefore, getting tough on HRC will only result in negativity that will be amplified and be reflected back in Senator Obama's face. Obama's "Smoke and Mirrors" are washing away.

Burt (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 10:03 AM)

Barrack Hussein Obama is not going to be the President if he is the nominee. I am not sure even if Hillary would be voted in but I do know this. If Barrack Hussein Obama was the only one running and someone stood over me with a gun to my head telling me to vote for him or die, I would tell them to go ahead and shoot me and put me out of my misery. Because if AMerica does screw up and elect this idiot, we will have nothing but misery for the next four years.

williamc, Memphis TN (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 10:04 AM)

Why isn't it being reported that the Clinton campaign connected the Canadian government and reassured them as well.
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/03/report_naftagate_leaker_said_h.php

Todd, Rochester, NY (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 10:04 AM)

I keep hearing pundits say that Obama can't close the sale. I disagree!

Obama has ALWAYS led in PLEDGED DELEGATES! From Iowa onward, Obama has maintained his lead in Pledged Delegates.

He started off in Iowa winning by 10 points over Hillary. In NH she won by only two - and wasn't able to "close the sale" by overtaking him in Pledged delegates.

On Super Tuesday, Hillary's margins in states like NY and NJ were not decisive enough to "close the sale." In fact in just about EVERY contest that SHE has won, she has not delivered that knock-out punch to win an overwhelming number of delegates - except Arkansas! Obama continued his lead in Pledged Delegates.

Fast forward to this past Tuesday. Again, Hillary did NOT "close the sale" by winning huge blow-out victories. Just a few weeks ago in various polls heavily touted in the media she led in both Ohio and Texas by 20 to 30 points! But - she let this decisive, blow-out lead dwindle to just 10 and 4 points, respectively! In fact, she netted ONLY about 10 delegates after three wins! She LOST major support over the past few weeks in Ohio and Texas - Obama GAINED! Hillary could not "close the sale" yet again!Obama continued his lead in Pledged Delegates.

She has NOT won any BLOW-OUT victories. That is why she is BEHIND - and has ALWAYS BEEN BEHIND - in PLEDGED DELEGATES!

Seems to me OBAMA HAS CLOSED THE SALE!! He is at the point now, after Hillary's eroding support in Ohio and Texas prevented her from delivering the knock-out blow necessary to overtake him in Pledged Delegates, that she CANNOT win the Pledged Delegate contest without winning EVERY REMAINING CONTEST by something like 60 to 70%!! UNLIKELY!

JB, North Carolina (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 10:05 AM)

Penn must have some great dirt on Billary if they still support him.

sonya, atlanta, ga (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 10:05 AM)

How are obammas insiders are they fighting about going negitive and getting thier butts handed to them after outspending her.hows that backrooms atmoshpere.

kenn (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 10:07 AM)

Is anyone running the Democratic party? First, Howard Dean strips Michigan and Florida of their delegates. It's confusing to unserstand why anyone even thinks he has that power. Now, Dean is MIA when these same states are talking about a re-vote. Is any of this legal? How many votes can a state take in a primary. One? Two? Ten? What if some politcal hack doesn't like the result of an election, and claims the power to have a re-vote? Can Texas revote now too? What about Wisconsin?

There are no rules in the Democratic party. Their so called rules are just like their political philosophy, "If it feels good do it!". And these are same people that are asking us to trust them to run the country?

Stan Lawrence, Middleton, NC (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 10:08 AM)

William from TN---Don't you think that's a little over dramatic.

Lewis, Cincinnati, Ohio (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 10:10 AM)

Please realize that as of last week, Hillary basically had absolutely nothing to lose as everyone was caling for her to step down. She then had the opportunity to take two states she was supposed to win and turn them into a perceived recovery of momentum. I believe her strategy is two fold....80% for the VP spot as she hinted to and 20% hoping something takes him down which is unlikely. The question is did what happen in Ohio/Texas have any effect on what the remaining states will do or was it just what was supposed to happen.

Jason, San Diego, CA (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 10:10 AM)

williamc, Memphis TN

I think the only idiot is obviously the author of your comments! You might as well begin writing your obituary, Obama as the nominee is just as good as done. It's just a matter of time before Hillary and her thick-headedness finally gets it. Have a good after life!

jodi from jerzee (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 10:11 AM)

Obama is a flywieght...he has even less experience than bush in 2000 and look what we got for picking him over the experienced politician...9/11 attacks...the anthrax attacks...a misguided and wrong war in Iraq...eyeballs not on osama bin forgotten...record deficits and two recessions with a double bubble in the middle...

I dont like hillary but she is far cry better than either another amateur like obama or neonut like mccain

Rick, NC (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 10:12 AM)

BEING QUALIFIED TO BE PRESIDENT INCLUDES STAYING ABOVE BOARD IN THOSE THINGS WHICH DISQULIFIES ONE FROM BEING PRESIDENT. IF OBAMA DOES NO ATTACK THE CLINTONS PAST FRAUDULENT BEHAVIOUR HE WILL LOOSE MY SUPPORT.

IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT THAT BOTH CAMPAIGNS ARE HELD TO HIGH STANDARDS, OBAMA SHOULD NOT BE DEMONISED FOR BEING NEIGHBOURS TO SOMEONE WHO HAS A FRAUDULENT RECORD YET THE CLINTONS ARE ALLOWED TO GET A FREE RIDE WHEN THEY THEMSELVES HAVE A CASE OF FRAUD TO ANSWER.

WHAT IS GOOD FOR THE GOOSE IS GOOD FOR THE GANDER. THOSE WHO LIVE IN GLASS HOUSE SHOULD NOT THROW STONES.

RAYMOND MICHEALS (Sent Thursday, March 06, 2008 10:12 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=736396