Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

jerry/corpus christi texas — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:15:49 GMT

Her electability? Duh, everybody has questioned that for some time! The stories coming out in the papers and TV are showing more and more that the democrats are going to have to fight in the mud if Hillary is going to lead them in the general election.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

bb — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:17:20 GMT

More BS from the conservative run media. Hillary will be our next president and the repubs cannot stand another Clinton getting in. Too bad boys and girls.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Bobby V., Prinston, N.J. — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:24:29 GMT

Just go to ..hillaryclinton.com for further information. It's free and fun !

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

jerry/corpus christi texas — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:29:52 GMT

Gotta love them democrats, yes I donated the money to charity. Oh yeah, forgot to mention that my daughter got a little something on the side. OOOPS! I figured it would be Hillary or Edwards that got nailed at the LOGO debate, the last person I figured was Richardson. Some good advice for you liberals, if you don't know enough about the subject, don't go to the debate. Of course, why this is becoming an issue, I don't know and could care less about. Chris Dodd, Chasing the ball down the sewer hole will get you no where in life my friend, better just take your ball and go home.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Dave, Tn — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:34:19 GMT

It would almost be worth it (almost) to see Obama elected, and watch how far the bitter evil Clinton's would go to do their worst to undermine him. Bet the foreign speaking tours would double. I'm sure it would pale in comparison to what the Clintons will do if a Republican wins. If Obama wins the Clintons wouldn't have all the democrats helping. Yeah would be interesting to watch, but still not worth the risk in my opinion :-)

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

UniversalLove — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:43:35 GMT

Why is the MSM suddenly starting to report the correct facts about Mrs. Clinton? Interesting.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Peter Zellford, Elizabeth NJ — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:52:11 GMT

Clinton and Obama have ZERO chance of winning next fall. A Karl Rove/Rush Limbaugh ticket could run on the Republican side, and beat these bozos in a landslide. Why are the Democrats putting up such a weak field of candidates?

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Ricardo in California — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:54:54 GMT

Jerry you're boring! YAWN!

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Nik, Denver, CO — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:59:10 GMT

Not only are internal polls showing how much a problem her favorability ratings are, but early primary states, the only states that really matter at this time of year, are showing her struggling to stay on top. Her chance of being elected is much shakier than most people realize.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

H P Boston — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 14:07:27 GMT

Jerry you are the new TURD BLOSSOM.....

Any stupid idiot that voted for Bush can just shut up now. It is evident you know nothing, so do not attempt to critique any candidate. EVER!
7000 Iraq refugees on their Way to CORPUS CHRISTIE.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

jerry/corpus christi texas — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 14:07:43 GMT

Would be nice for Hillary to build on her national security resume. Considering she is in the basement when it comes to national security, there is no other way to go but up!

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

MK,MO — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 14:07:47 GMT

to the people that can't or refuse to distiguish the difference between a bribe (money from lobbyist)like all the candidates except edwards take, or pay (money you recieve for goods or services rendered)which is the money edwards recieved on the book deal that has edwards opponets stirred up, I hope you all get the candidate you deserve

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

PYRRHIC — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 14:09:42 GMT

Nik you know this to be true because????

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Nancy Bush, Washington, D.C. — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 14:20:05 GMT

Yes, I've been to Hillary's web sit and it is fun and exciting. hillaryclinton.com

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 14:41:43 GMT

I wonder how all the Democratic candidates for president who currently serve in the Senate voted when that law Biden discussed - the one about us targeting bin Laden in Pakistan - came up on the Senate floor?

Domenico, that would be an interesting thing to uncover and post here.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Democrat — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 14:45:13 GMT

According to a pollster this weekend on CSpan, the key states for Clinton in the general are going to be Arkansas & Florida (no mention of Ohio). She's leading in Florida. He more or less implied that if she wins these states, she's our next President.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 14:48:47 GMT

http://bobgeiger.blogspot.com/2007/03/kerry-dodd-and-biden-pressure-pakistan.html

This story is interesting in that it includes a common approach by a former presidential candidate and two current presidential candidates for addressing safe havens in Pakistan.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Aaron — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 14:51:29 GMT

Obama is really the only person I would consider voting for. Its amazing that everyone wants to be down on him for offering hope. Keep your hopeless world view with just business as usual, and let the rest of us move on to something better.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Steven P., Phoenix, AZ. — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 14:51:57 GMT

No more Clintons or Bushies please!! Here’s a thought, it is time for someone who actually has the American People’s interest at heart to be elected into the highest office in the land. It is time for someone with a brain to implement a new foreign policy that uses common sense and is not subservient to corporate interests.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

vanreuter, NY NY — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 14:54:18 GMT

Jerry-
"In several national polls and in Iowa, the first caucus state, she is the Democrat who most likely primary voters say is the "strongest leader," a term generally seen as encompassing defense know-how. And a New York Times/CBS News poll of Republicans as well as Democrats last month found that 58 percent of respondents thought it was somewhat or very likely that she would be an effective commander in chief."

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/08/12/tough_talk_drives_clinton_effort/

"When asked to choose among the leading Presidential candidates, 28% of American adults said that they would trust New York Senator Hillary Clinton the most on national security issues. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 20% named former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani."

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/who_s_best_on_national_security_28_say_clinton_20_giuliani

You don't know what you're talking about at all.

Van

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Judy, Tucson, Arizona — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 15:01:16 GMT

I am dissappointed if it is true that there are Democrat-rats who are not getting behind Hillary. This is not the time for Dems to split their strength.

Hillary has the experience, relationships and toughness to get something done. In the end, people will vote for the most effective candidate because popularity is an adjective.

She is more than 20 points ahead of everyone. She has come up from behind in Iowa in a short period of time. Everywhere she goes, things turn in her favor quickly.

A person has to be looney-toons not to see that!

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

jerry/corpus christi texas — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 15:10:39 GMT

I hope thay are on their way, our economy is booming so fast and so furious, we don't have enough housebuilders and shopping center builders in this town, we could 7000 more workers. H P, Hillary Clinton is being sold in the liberal press as the female George Bush. Nice to know you are backing Hillary if she is following the George Bush plan. Keep pushing her girlfriend!

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Susan, Miami — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 15:16:11 GMT

Jerry likes to rant over and over, the same old crap about the Clintons. Thats how much the extreme right wing is so afraid of her. What a hoot! Can't wait til any dem gets in. Jerry will burst into flames!

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

jerry/corpus christi texas — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 15:29:32 GMT

Nice that a woman like Hillary Clinton who has no experience when it comes to national security is so trusted by Americans. Must have been taken in new York State only.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 15:29:48 GMT

Van, why do your posts go so wide? It seems to be the links, but when other people post long links, they wrap around the normal column size.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Steve, San Diego — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 15:42:27 GMT

I just learned that Karl Rove has been using 'Jerry in Corpus Christi' to post here all of the time. :-)

When I saw this story yesterday about HRC being a negative for congressional races throughout our country, it really made me want to go out and bolster Senator Obama. Like most DEMs, I will vote for her if she is nominated but I prefer the 'audacity of hope' by Obama. I want more than what she gives. I want hope again. I want to be invigorated. I want my country's good name back. I don't see any GOP candidate capable of these, and I believe Senator Obama delivers on all counts.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Flat-earther, Georgia — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 15:47:53 GMT

Steven in AZ,
yes it is time. But do you think the MSM and rich and powerful will allow a shift of power to the working class? It will be business as usual. Not many of the two dozen or so candidates seem very "populist".

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Michael, Ames, Iowa — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 15:54:19 GMT

How sweet of the media to start going renegade on the Clintons. I bet someone forgot to pay their monthly dues. I always said that the media can side with the Clintons all they want and the pollsters can go on picking their samples from people who definitely support her, she's not going to be President and her internal polling data reveals it.

But let me make this clear:

If HILLARY CLINTON STEALS THIS NOMINATION, I WILL VOTE REPUBLICAN. I hope the Republicans are clever enough to nominate a uniting, non-polarizing candidate like Huckabee. If they nominate someone like Romney, well then I'll stay at home.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

jerry/corpus christi texas — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 15:54:54 GMT

LOL, the newspapers must get out of the northeast a bit and check out what the rest of the country already knows about Hillary Clinton.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Jennie Denver,CO — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 15:57:58 GMT

Oh Van there you go digging up polls in favor of Hillary. Can I remind you again that none of these polls really matter yet, its far to early to declare victory especially when her unfavoriability rating is so high. If she really cared about the Democratic party, she wouldn't even be running. She's going to cause us to lose seats all over the country and good luck getting an independent or moderate republican to vote for her in the general election. If we run her as our candidate, we will lose. Again. Because the old gaurd dems like to play it safe. its time we stopped doing that and started pushing for the change we're always saying we want.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Sarah Jane — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 16:00:27 GMT

Hillary at the top of the Dem ticket will energise and unite the Republican party, leading to massive voter turnout in the GOP's advantage, because of the anti-Clinton sentiment and the anti-Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton sentiment.

This country is full of opportunities and smart people. It will be a shame that America cannot find a man who's smart and tough enough, or a woman who's not a Clinton to lead it. We must be really desperate to send another Clinton (who happens to be a woman) to the White House.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

S. Smith — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 16:02:31 GMT

Dems would be more comfortable if Hillary settled for VP. If not, I believe we're going to lose again.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Independent Minded — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 16:09:01 GMT

If Hillary runs and wins...you will probably see a very tough Hillary meeting the challenges thrown at her administration. The world's Islamofacists will challenge her. She will have to respond, and post 9/11 a weak response is no response at all

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Susan, Miami — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 16:10:52 GMT

Don't even put Bush and Clinton together in the same sentence, the former is extreme right wing and the latter is left of center. Repubs like to lump everyone together when they get into trouble, "all politicians are the same" blah blah.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Joe Justice — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 16:20:18 GMT

I've said it before, and I'll say it again:

you guys need to look up the word hypocrisy.

Lame.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Judy, Tucson, Arizona — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 16:28:53 GMT

I am really tired of these nasty stories about Hillary. All this is doing is making her more simpathetic. People are also not stupid. They can see through planted stories like this.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

sonya, atlanta, ga — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 16:28:53 GMT

Obama for president, or I'm as a lifer democrat will be sitting this election cycle out.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Gail, Dallas,Tx. — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 16:33:01 GMT

How is it that these are the key states for Clinton is Arkansas & Florida, and if she's leading in Florida who decides what the key states are and for why are they key states. Isn`t Florida where the Bushes rigged the voting process and won both times?
How can you people as Americans sit by and watch this happen again. We all as Americans need to step up and say NO to states that riggs the voting.
Hillary should not be the our next President. She has lied too mant times to the public however that never gets published, but let Obama lie ( Thats if you can find any lies )and it is plastered all over the news.

She voted for the war in Irag, her health insurance mismanagment, and she is playing with the minorities life as if she owns them, and bribe money from lobbyist all out there for you to see.
She is a con artist and you all know it.

If another Clinton is in the White House we are DOMMED. YEAH & AMEN TO NO MORE BUSHES ARE CLINTONS!!!

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Timothy, Rochester, NY — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 17:31:01 GMT

I'll say it again, Any person who comes from a state that supports Bush, Gonzo and Delay, has no business in any reasonable discussion. I think we all know who I'm talking about.

Anyway, over 50% of the people are registered democrats. whoever wins the nomination in the democratic party will win the election. If democrats don't vote for the democrat nominee because they don't like every single thing about the candidate, then you're idiots. All you will be doing is helping a republican get into office. Stop falling into the right wing trap of trying to divide democrats and their candidates. Believe me, if Obama or Edwards were the front runner, the Right wing would be saying they have huge negatives and they won't win. Stop worrying about negatives. I find it funny that Hillary's poll numbers keep rising and yet the media keeps saying she has no chance to win. The media will find something negative to report on any front runner regardless of party.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Mark in Burlington — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 17:53:52 GMT

Hillary Clinton's ad campaign starts in Iowa today with a clip of ex-Gov. Tom Vilseck who endorsed her after he dropped out of the race. I am still waiting to see the MSM report that her supporters paying of Vilseck's campaign debts for about $90,000 were not counted in either her fundraising nor her campaign expenditures reports. When will the media start to report responsibly and inform the public of the corruption built into our campaign finance system?

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Mon, 13 Aug 2007 18:45:20 GMT

to you 'DEMOCRATS'...

you have to realize there are some people like me,
who have always voted democrat, but do not think of themselves as a strict democrat, and have little loyalty to "the party".

if you nominate Hillary, you will alienate us.

I WILL NEVER EVER VOTE FOR HILLARY.
Never.

She's no better than any republican running.
same old, same old...

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Sara, Cedar Rapids, Iowa — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 18:51:04 GMT

Van,

What you don't know about the polls in Iowa is that they are completely meaningless for too many reasons to list. The latest "Iowa caucus poll" from Washington Post-ABC is invalid on its face. The poll sample itself prevents the poll from being valid. If I were to poll 500 people on the state of education in Iowa, and 400 of those polled had never lived in Iowa, visited Iowa, had family in Iowa, and had not studied education in Iowa, and then presented the poll results as representative of Iowans view of education in the state, people would agree the poll was a joke. All polling (except the candidates internal polling close to the caucus) fail at the outset, because like my education poll example, they start with a inappropriate polling sample. All polling companies, whether Gallop, Rasmussen etc conduct their polls using voter registration lists to obtain their sample of "random democrats". Voter registration lists, and election records are public documents that can be purchased by the state at reasonable rates. The caucuses are put on by the two political parties, the list of who attended the last caucus (and prior to 04) is kept by the political parties. The Democrat party charges 100,000 for a copy of this list. The candidates have no choice but to purchase the lists, but no polling company is going to pay 100,000 in order to obtain access to the proper polling sample data. Instead they merely poll random registered Democrats and pass the poll off as representative of caucus voters. However, if the polling sample is not exclusively, or almost exclusively, made up of verified prior caucus attendee's, the overwhelming number of "random Democrats" polled will be people who have never attended a caucus, and won't attend this January. The result are nothing more than a name recognition poll of registered democrats. 1988 followed by 2004 had the largest caucus turn outs, attendance didn't exceed 20% of registered Democrats in either record year. The 06 Democrat primary included a hotly contested race for governor. Turn out was considered high, and yet only 25% of registered Democrats managed to find the time to vote at the polls, or vote early by mail. Given 25% Democrat voter turn out is considered high primary turn out (04 primary turn out was 16%), and no caucus has ever had more than 20% of registered democrats attend a caucus, in a random sample of registered democrats close to 80% will not attend the caucus.

I don't doubt Edwards is currently leading Iowa followed in some order by and Obama and Clinton however the level of support among Iowans who will actually attend their caucus is much lower than in the Post-ABC poll. Currently most Iowans who will actually attend their caucus are undecided. However in the Post-ABC poll only 4% said they were undecided, and 2% responded "none of these". In 04 over 40% of those who attended the caucus decided who to support with the week before the caucus, and only 30% had determined who to support a month or more prior to the caucus. The low number of undecided/"none of these" alone should have concerned the pollsters, but when that number is compared with the 9% who answered they were unhappy with the choice of candidates, the pollster should have realized the polls internal inconsistency. How can the number dissatisfied with the choice of candidates be over 4 times larger than the number in the poll who responded to "none of these"?

What the most recent Iowa poll told us is what most people already know Edwards, Obama, and Clinton have the greatest name recognition in the state. Big deal!

In 04 the pundits and pollsters were embarrassed, because the polls and pundits had determined the race was between Dean and Gephardt (they came in a distant 3rd and 4th at the caucus)In August of 03 Lieberman was polling in the double digits in the Des Moines Register's Iowa poll (considered the most accurate caucus poll)despite the fact that no one was showing up for his events. Lieberman's Iowa poll number's were even higher in polls conducted by groups outside the state. However, Lieberman's internal polling numbers alerted him to the reality that he had no hope in Iowa, by September he pulled out of Iowa. In November two months after pulling out of Iowa Lieberman was tied in 4th place with Edwards at 5% in the Register's poll, he continued to poll even higher in polls conducted by outside groups. At the caucus Lieberman tied for last, behind uncommitted and Wesley Clark (at .1% Clark had also pulled out of Iowa) and Kucinich (at 1.3%). It is highly unlikely Edwards, Obama and Clinton will all come in the top three, and it is possible neither of them will win Iowa.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Darrius, Arkansas — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 19:03:42 GMT

Timothy negatives are very real. They motivate you opposition, and they simultaneously depress your voter turnout.

Obama, will get the nomination because he is the most electable. Obama is more electable even after you take away a few points to account for racist people who won't vote for a black person no matter what. Besides, anybody who wouldn't vote for a black person regardless of policy or position, is mostly likely a southern Republican anyway so Hillary isn't going to get their vote either. But in addition to those people Hillary is going to turn off still more people who would vote for any democrat, other than Hillary, who runs this year

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 19:05:34 GMT

Timothy - Democrats don't account for over 50 percent of registered voters - they account for about 32 percent of registered voters. Just read that the other day. Its down to its lowest in years. Republicans are down, too, to something like 30.5 percent, if memory serves me. Google it if you want exact numbers.

The important thing to note is how large a group independents are - and the point of the story was to note that they had now grown to plurality status.

This is the Democrats race to lose, because of Bush fatigue and the Iraq war. They can lose it, though, and nominating Clinton would be the easiest way.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 19:11:56 GMT

Sara - Interesting post. Given your experience with Iowa politics, what would you say is the biggest indicators of strength for this point of the caucus cycle? Local organization, attendance at campaign events?

Or is it too early to have any meaningful indicators?

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Mark P, Cedar Rapids, IA — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 19:14:19 GMT

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Charles Kushner, Chicago — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 19:42:35 GMT

you're all sheep. It really doesn't matter who you vote for. At least half of the country is going to have their precious little feelings hurt. No one in this country has the ability to see both sides of an arguement so even if we got a president like Obama he wouldn't be able to change the fact that at it's core America is filled with a bunch of selfish morons.
Yeah that's right, you're all a bunch of idiots. No, no though please continue having the same pointless discussions about what needs to be done in the world. It won't change the fact that the reason so many countries are upset with us is because of the last 60 years of American foriegn policy. Their countries are in Economic ruins because our companies came in after WWII and sucked the resources out of everywhere they could exploit. We had our CIA start revolutions in countries where elected leaders tried to get more of a fair deal with American firms. We installed ruthless dictators, in the middle east, south america, central america, don't even get me started on Africa. How many millions of people died because of our selfishness?
Not that anyone will listen to this, because like a said before you're all a bunch of idiots. And you don't care. You claim to have this great respect for human life, but then you feel that the life of an American is worth so much more than the life of a third world individual.
Blame America first? No, but it would be nice if we could show a little integrity once in a while and take blame where we know it's due.
So go ahead, vote for hillary or vote for whatever nimble minded fool gets the republican nod and support the corporastocracy that owns you.

required reading:
John Perkins, "Confessions of an Economic Hitman"
Howard Zinn, "A People's History of the United States"
Lester Brown, "Plan B 2.0"

Those books should give you a better understanding of foriegn policies and domestic economic and environmental policies as well.

Note: You'll need to be able to read past the level of a fifth grader. I know that not many of you can.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Darrius, Arkansas — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 20:16:13 GMT

Paul, I know you didn't ask me, but I am going to guess simple name recognition, people knowing who you are, people being able to remember your name without having it told to them in a multiple choice question.

Now I don't think that is real strength. But I do think that is the most important component in getting good poll numbers at this point in the caucus.

P.S.

There are more people like "j" than we can count. For the benefit of the entire country Dems had best to listen to them.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Pappy Van Winkle (freedom writer in disguise) — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 20:24:15 GMT

Just checked in to see what Jerry thinks about anything. Turns out he has charming thoughts about everything. Just like the last time I checked.

Turns out a lot of people take his bait. Dumb and really dumb.

Did read some good stuff here, but it is just wilted lettuce in a punk sandwich.

Besides myself, I think the only people who read these comments are people who love to read their words online. You could all save yourself (and me as well) the trouble by writing yourself a letter and sending it special delivery.

Me? I am crazy as hell for even wasting my keyboard writing here. Yet, it is so much fun to read my own stuff, I just can't stop. I feel your pain lonely posters.

I should probably just go away. So I will. On the other hand... When I go to a restaurant and find a fly pooping in the soup, I sometimes alert the authorities. Sometimes I don't.

I have learned the hard way that some people apparently like fly poop soup. They even order seconds. None of my business. Heartfelt apologies for complaining.

This is a free country and you are free to eat any kind of soup you like. Just please stop dribbling.

Rock on, the bus is leaving.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 20:40:16 GMT

Darrius - no problem. Its an open messageboard obviously and you're opinion is as good as mine.

I probably wasn't clear (again) with my post. I know sometimes I'm hard to read. I was trying to ask what can we look at now that might actually indicate who has things going there way for the Caucus vote.

Name awareness probably is less a factor in Iowa than in other settings. The Caucus tends to draw a small number of people who have been inundated with presidential candidates for months - New Hampshire is sort of the same, but with an open primary format.

I'd like to hear from people in Iowa (even Carrie), but is there anything now that we can look at in terms of who might have Caucus strength? I'm guessing the answer is, "no, too early."

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Steven, KDH, N.C. — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 22:16:27 GMT

Sara from Cedar Rapids,
Awesome post! Very informative.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

me — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 22:33:10 GMT

van, What cara said ! right on Go obama

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

ki houston — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 22:41:03 GMT

charles you a fool wit it .keep preachin

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Sara, Cedar Rapids, Iowa — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 22:51:37 GMT

Local organization is very important, but it is one of many factors. But in 04 the two campaigns who had the best local organizations came in 3rd and 4th, although both Kerry and Edwards had good local organization. Size at events can be very misleading. Obviously if a candidate comes into a town with a population base in excess of 50,000 and has an event at a reasonable time of day, and less than 10 people show up it is a sign of trouble. Hillary had large crowds over the fourth of July but an overwhelming number of them (at least in Cedar Rapids) came to see Bill Clinton. Obama has had huge crowds, and he's been willing to go to events with a relatively small guest list. It is anyone's guess how many people who have (or will) attend an Obama event will go to their caucus. Senator Kerry never had any where near the crowd size of Dean. Dean's 03/04 record setting crowds have been shattered by Sen. Obama.

Most Iowans place electability as a top priority in choosing a candidate. Dean was viewed by a large percent of Iowan's as unelectable. Many people agreed 100% with what he said, and felt he would make a great President, but there was real concern by an overwhelming number of Iowa Democrats that he was unelectable. The polls never picked up on this concern until just prior to the caucus. Pundits incorrectly attributed this concern to negative campaigning by Gephardt. However the electability concern was present long prior to Gephardts ads, or push polling in late December. Some people had silly reasons such as Dean's lack of height. They didn't personally care about his height, but historically W is the first, or one of the first candidates to win a general election who was shorter than the opponent. A large number felt that Rove etc. would kill Dean on his support of universal health coverage. The country has come a long way in 4 years on this issue, but the concern in 03/04 was that the public would fear "socialized medicine" (oh the evils....)

It was the most interesting caucus I have ever attended. I felt sorry for Dean's supporters, because they were ostracized from the supporters of all the other candidates. Kerry and Edwards supporters got along, the common bond among the non-Dean supporters was "anyone but Dean." The caucus viability process is strange, if your candidate doesn't have enough support to be viable (a mathematical formula) you join another candidate, start a new group (such as uncommitted)or give up and leave (few do that). Only one supporter of a non-viable candidate at our caucus (Gephardt, Clark, and Kucinich were all non-viable) joined Dean (if you guessed a Kucinich supporter you were right) After all the non-viable supporters joined a new group (or left, like one Gephardt supporter)according to the formula Dean needed one more supporter to get another preference vote. If one of Edwards supporters joined Dean's group Kerry would lose a preference vote, Edwards preference total would remain the same, and Dean would gain a preference vote. There was not one out of the approximately 60-75 Edwards supporters that would join Dean. From a tactical stand point it was in Edwards interest to have one supporter join Dean's group (in order for Edwards number to increase by one they needed 3-5 Dean supporters). Edwards supporters fully understood the tactical advantage, but they were clear they would all rather go to Kerry before they would help Dean. They let Dean's supporters know if they wanted to decrease Kerry's support they should send the 3-5 Dean supporters to them, knowingly full well that wasn't going to happen. I had never seen anything like this before.

Pundits like to compare Obama to Dean due to his fund raising ability and massive crowds. I don't know whether Obama can pull it off in Iowa, he is very well liked (even loved) and respected, but there is a concern. However, you don't hear or feel the type, or degree of animosity, and real "anyone but Dean" talk about Obama that was present from mid summer of 03 that surrounded Dean. From my prospective Hillary appears to be this years Dean. There is a real fear that Hillary can not win the White House, and if she is our nominee the next President will be a Republican. I have never heard so many Democrats state that they have been praying that Hillary is not the nominee, and it is not a figure of speech, they are very serious. Like in 03/04 the common bond between people who do not support Hillary is that she is unelectable. If Dean's electability problem was a 5 out of 10 on caucus night in 04, Hillary's electability problem is already at a 9, maybe a ten. I really don't see how the concern could grow more than it is presently. There are people that are literally mad that Clinton doesn't understand/accept that she can't win. Whether Hillary can overcome the electability concern enough to come in first or second at the caucus won't be known until very early January. If I were to bet on it I would bet no. No matter how many national polls indicate that Hillary can win nationally people don't believe it, just as they didn't think Dean could beat Bush. I do think that many people view Hillary unfairly. I personally like Hillary. In my hallway hangs a 8-10 photo I took of Hillary holding my then 2 year old daughter the night before the 1996 election, when President Clinton stopped in Cedar Rapids for a election eve rally for Sen. Harkin. I had Sen. Clinton autograph the photo in 02 when I attended a fund raiser at her home in DC. Most Iowa Democrats that are concerned nominating Hillary will ensure a GOP President don't hate, or even mildly dislike Hillary, many (but by no means all)would like to see her President (some because of Hillary, others "to get Bill back in the White House") but the fear is she can't win the general.

On the ground I don't see a high level of support for Hillary. There are people who are deeply devoted to her, many of the same people who support her now were supporters of Dean in 04. They are idealist, but pragmatist greatly out number idealist at the caucus. Hillary is spending a lot of money in Iowa (she has a lot of paid staff), but she doesn't appear to be increasing the level of support (probably why she's going to start running ads). On July 30th her campaign released the names of 105 Iowa women who have agreed to encourage their friends to support Hillary. This is on her website (under states choose Iowa), her press release spun this as an accomplishment. I couldn't believe they'd even bother releasing this. My initial reaction was 100? There are 99 counties in Iowa that is only 6 more women willing to campaign for her than Iowa counties. Ignoring the fact she is the first serious Democrat women running for President, I would think anything less than 1,000 names would be embarrassing (especially since you must sign in to get into a Hillary event, the campaign was able to obtain several thousand names just from the July 4th event in CR in which to find people willing to agree to be on her list). My shock at the low number was before I saw that in May John Edwards released a list of over 1,500 Iowa women committed to his campaign. When I read Hillary's list of "Women, most with credentials in politics" I laughed. In order to make the women appear to be movers and shakers, women who had never been employed outside the home were listed as "local activist" "community activist" "activist" "community volunteer", or one is listed as "Girl Scout Troop Leader" Almost half of the women listed are given the activist/volunteer title. I don't think the campaign is ashamed that these women don't work outside the home, but merely wanted it to appear that these 105 women were all prominent.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Smoke Father — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 02:59:25 GMT

...but all politicians are the same. We would have a better government if the positions were decided by a random nationwide lottery. VENTURA 4 PRESIDENT!!!

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Jeff Morgan, Austin, TX — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 06:05:04 GMT

Judy from Tuscon, AZ: "Everywhere she goes, things turn in her favor quickly."

I would imagine that's a tough claim to support, considering the time she's spent in Iowa, NH, and SC and her resulting poll numbers compared to Obama. Also focus groups and before-and-after polls on debates. I am a biased Obama supporter, but I would make that statement about him for the reasons just stated.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 12:52:09 GMT

Again a very interesting read, Sara. Thanks for the insider's view.

Oh-eight (D): Obama gets more profiles

Eddie in Wytheville, VA — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 14:10:50 GMT

I am generally a Clinton fan, having been to the Clinton homeplace in Hope, AK and the Clinton Libary in Little Rock. I believe Bill CLinton is one of the most gifted politicians of our time. Having said that, it's important to remember that many of the things a Clinton Aministration brought us did not work so well. NAFTA has been a disaster. Hillary's Health Care Reform attempt was a major failure. Don't Ask, Don't Tell was a spineless compromise that has allowed over 10,000 hnorable gays to be booted from the military. Clinton pardoned his own brother and a few hundred others on the way out. Perhaps Hillary learned from some of these mistakes. She's running a nearly flawless campaign but I don't see much change in corporate influence under another Clinton Administration. The latest poll showing Hillary with a 49% unfavorable rating nationlly does not bode well for Democrats.

Hillary is handling her campaign like a seasoned pro. Perhaps she can reverse her negatives. As for me, I prefer to just turn the page. As someone said "Enough of the Bushes & Clintons."

For Edwards to make poverty his central theme and be stupid enough not to recognize that running a poverty center while getting $400 haircuts creates an awful impression, shows he's out of touch and at the least...creates bad perceptions.

From what I've seen, Obama offers the best hope for change although I have concerns about some of his public foreign policy statements.

Perhaps we should all take a deep breath. Campaigns have a way of revealing things whether deliberately or by circumstance. Any of them can still screw up royally. The bottom line is we need a candidate that can beat the GOP. We should never assume the GOP cannot win again. All eyes should be on the general election as we nominate a Democratic candidate.

Oh...let's not forget there are other Democratic candidates too and they all deserve to be heard out.