Oh-eight (D): Off and on the MI ballot

RAH — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:25:05 GMT

Real glad to hear no one was seriously hurt in the accident with Michelle Obama. I don't know how people can say the bloom is off Senator Obama, he still gets the biggest crowds at his events and people is now really starting to pay attention. The majority of the voters are still undecided and are now showing interest in the candidates.

Gosh, won't these naysayers be really surprised when Obama win the nomination. Don't just rely on the polls, look at the people who want to know him and are selecting him, even people who selected other candidates are switching their votes to him.

Oh-eight (D): Off and on the MI ballot

jerry/corpus christi texas — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:27:41 GMT

I am sure glad Hillary Clinton is really into the middle class and trying to help them, by the time she gets all her little worthless programs in, it will cost the middle class twice as much in taxes and new spending that her programs will be worthless to the average middle class family. If the middle class is having such a hard time right now, how are they going to scrape up $1000 when they supposedly cannot afford to pay the rent? Hillary, if you are going to show your hand, make sure it is a full house and not a pair of two's....

Even the liberal newspaper and other media have finally caught on to what the rest of us already knew; Hillary cannot back up what she says.

With all the problems plaguing Michigan right now, they are finding out what people in Florida are finding out as well; The democratic party does not care about their vote and they would rather have them vote republican then deal with them. Hillary will keep her name on the ballot, but not campaign there? Goes to show that Hillary doesn't give a dog about people losing their jobs. Hillary Clinton; the ultimate wolf in sheep's clothing.

Oh-eight (D): Off and on the MI ballot

karlos — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:30:13 GMT

i am with biden as to how the demos haven't bumped his numbers to top tier. i have consistently said that he had the most comprehensive and plausible plan for iraq and since this is supposed to be key issue to demos no rise in support? are we for candidates for position and platform of minority status? biden got over 70 votes on resolution would clinton or obamas position, as vague as they are, have achieved that?biden is the top demo for position and electability but yet he's second tier? anyone?

Oh-eight (D): Off and on the MI ballot

Shadow, Hamden, CT — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:39:05 GMT

Michigan has done this to themselves. Let's see if Florida does the same.

Oh-eight (D): Off and on the MI ballot

Edgar Bennett, Kalamazoo, MI — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:41:19 GMT

Democrats love to disenfranchise their voters. At least it helps with the coronation of Hillary, like you Dems really ever had a choice.

Oh-eight (D): Off and on the MI ballot

Dot, Illinois — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:10:03 GMT

Mrs. Clinton has solidified her image as the "inevitable" nominee.....

Reports such as this really annoy me. Reporters should avoid stating their OPINIONS as foregone conclusions or "inevitable." What you are basically saying is that those of us who live in states other than Iowa or New Hampshire woun't have any say about who the candidate of a party will be. If this is true why are we even bothering to hold a State Primary?

Perhaps a national primary election, with all states voting on the same day would stop this "me first" nonsense that is currently going on among the states and would give all of us an equal voice in choosing the parties' nominees.

Oh-eight (D): Off and on the MI ballot

Nicholas, Minneaps, MN — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:16:39 GMT

Sr. Biden: you bill was finally a positive step for Congress. Yet, in a presidential candidate, we, the American people, want our troops home. And THAT is why you are being ignored. Just be happy your name isn't Chris Dodd.

What rival campaign. If they cannot be open, don't post it. If they can be open, well, at least they have balls (maybe).

Oh-eight (D): Off and on the MI ballot

nuanced — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:36:47 GMT

Biden shouldn't be surprised; maybe he is feigning naivete'. Does he actually believe the Bushies want to stop the war and bloodshed?

Oh-eight (D): Off and on the MI ballot

HMT-MI — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:42:35 GMT

Support the troops---end the wars and do not bomb Iran,There is no inevitable winner yet.we are supposed to be listening to these great minds debate.Sick,huh?Soory there is no great hope candidate----you or I could do as well

Oh-eight (D): Off and on the MI ballot

Shadow, Hamden, CT — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:45:36 GMT

The idea that this hurts Democrats in a general election is a pipe dream. It hurts Hillary's path to sneaking out the Democratic primary by changing the rules in the middle of the game, but aside from that, the only Democrats who will suffer for this are in the State Legislatures of Michigan and Florida, who are responsible for this failed power grab. Most voters in Michigan and Florida don't like the idea of changing the rules in the middle of the game; they're no less fair minded than the rest of America.

Oh-eight (D): Off and on the MI ballot

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 15:56:27 GMT

Talk about sour grapes. MI breaks the rules, then has a tempter tantrum when 5 of the candidates punish them by not participating in their primary - because they broke the rules. MI rolled the dice and now it has to deal with the consequences.

As an Iowan, I am offended at the statement that IA and NH "blackmailed" the candidates into signing the pledge to not campaign in MI. I certainly didn't see any reports to that effect at the time the pledge was signed. In fact, if I remember correctly, wasn't it the DNC that asked the candidates to sign the pledge? I hardly think Iowa controls the DNC.

Oh-eight (D): Off and on the MI ballot

jl — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 15:58:43 GMT

Between Bush/Gore votes going to the Supreme Court to elect our President, messed up voting machines, the media playing election-God, and this primary mess, can anyone tell me what elections are really about today?

--Dot, Illinois-- Such an easy solution! Great minds think alike! Too bad you aren't running for president! At least someone with a Solution to Something.

Let's go Biden/Huckabee and be done with it! :)

Oh-eight (D): Off and on the MI ballot

Sara, Cedar Rapids, Iowa — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 17:11:06 GMT

Mark you ask "So how much does Iowa and New Hampshire care about whose name appears on what ballot? If they care more than we think, then maybe this does cost Clinton a bit, but something tells us this won't have the reverb that some think."

It hurts not because Iowans think they are special, or feel personally slighted. It hurts because Iowans respect the process. Iowans, even those supporting "big money" candidates believe the benefit of two small (size and population) states going first forces non-incumbents to engage in retail politics. (They don't have to be IA and NH, it could be two other inexpensive media market states, but changing the states in 07 is too late)Yes the present system benefits those Iowans who take the time to see the candidates (a very small percent in total number), but it also benefits voters in other states. Think of the George Allen macockah incident, but on a national scale. With out the necessity for retail politics, those type of moments wouldn't occur until after the nomination, or worse yet general election. People would only see the Fred Thompson on TV. Think about how sharp and professional he looked a few months ago, spouting off to Michael Moore about Cuba. Perfect lightly, probably numerous takes to get it right, or think of Hillary's 5 Sunday morning interviews where she controlled the setting (she insisted they be at her NY home where she had perfect lighting and looked the best I've see her). A Presidential campaign that didn't start out in two small states, that didn't force the candidates to actually engage in human interaction, would produce a mass media only campaign, not only would it exclude a candidate who might be the best, but not best financed, but it would also prevent the public from seeing the real candidate. The real Fred Thompson in Iowa, the guy asking for applause (how sad!)at an event, has not been appealing. Isn't it important for people to have a chance to see the candidates interact with actual voters, and rise and fall as a result. I think so.

Because Iowa caucus goers (a very small % of Iowans) value the benefit retail politics brings to the nomination process, not because we are petty self absorbed jerks, it will have a negative effect.

I heard on good authority the Sen. Dodd's Iowa offices were literally inundated with calls from angry people last night, including committed supporters regarding his decision. It is expected he'll change his mind.

Oh-eight (D): Off and on the MI ballot

Ken Collins/Wagoner,Oklahoma — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 17:45:51 GMT

Hey Pat/Illinois
You are RIGHT ON !!!
Chuck Todd stinks of favoritism toward Hillary and Bill.
It is impossible for Todd Sloan and MSNBC to keep their mouths shut about how Hillary is the CANDIDATE, might as well shut the show down and give it to Hillary per Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann and Mr. Sloan !!
Get back with rhe real world and at least wait and see how the votes go !!!

Oh-eight (D): Off and on the MI ballot

Dar, Albuquerque, New Mexico — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 17:50:00 GMT

Fair trade. Protectionist trade. Managed trade (NAFTA, for example). The concerns of advocates for these are best addressed by true free trade, the prosperity trade under a Ron Paul administration.

Oh-eight (D): Off and on the MI ballot

jerry/corpus christi texas — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 18:14:07 GMT

the only reason Iowa starts off first is because democrats need someone gullible to push their programs that will not work on.

Oh-eight (D): Off and on the MI ballot

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 18:30:33 GMT

I just want to reiterate what Sara said. I don't necessarily think that Iowa and NH are "entitled" to be first in the nation in every presidential election cycle. But that is the way it has been done for several decades now, and the states agreed to abide by a certain schedule of primaries and caucuses. It is disrespectful to the parties and to the voters for the state party organizations to engage in last-minute leapfrogging to try to improve their impact. They should have been making the argument for going earlier BEFORE the calender was decided and the dates were set.

Oh-eight (D): Off and on the MI ballot

Dot, Illinois — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 19:09:29 GMT

Sara & Carrie

It is important for candidates to interact with voters personally, but a national primary would not rule that out. Candidates have already been campaigning for months and it is still more than a year before the election. With such an early start, they could make appearance in many states and do national debates so that anyone in ANY STATE who seriously wanted to know each candiate's position could do so. As it is now, there are probably some states that receive little attention from any candiates.

Lets(as the debate moderators love to say) pose a hypothetical situation in which it is August, 2008, the conventions are over, and Rudy and Hilary are the nominees of their respective parties. On the first Tuesday in SEPTEMBER, people who live in the eastern 1/3 of the country would vote. On the first Tuesday in OCTOBER, people who live in the middle of the country would vote. On the first Tuesday in NOVEMBER the people living in the western 1/3 of the country would vote. Given that electorial college votes determine the outcome of the election, let's also imagine that one candidate has gained enough electorial votes to win the election. Does such a scenario seem fair to the people in the west?

In the past, we have experienced this problem to a small degree in the reporting of results of the election before the polls have closed in western states.

Not saying that a national primary is the perfect answer, but we are the United States and whether for good or bad, we all live with the results of primary and general elections.

Oh-eight (D): Off and on the MI ballot

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 21:00:11 GMT

Dot:

A national primary is the same as a national election. It's all about wholesale politics, not retail politics. It's about who can raise the most money to put the most ads on TV and to travel all across the country. Think about how many candidates barely have enough to keep going now, when they are only heavily campaigning in a few states. Also think about the fact that many of the candidates have jobs in government already. To cover territory in every single state would require almost a full-time commitment for a year or two years prior to the nomination. People don't want a longer campaign - they want a shorter campaign.

I understand people's gripes about the current nomination process. I don't think the way to solve it is through a national primary where the candidate who raises the most money is the candidate who is going to win. I just don't see a way around that, unless we require that all campaigns be publicly funded through the primary and the general election to level the playing field.

Finally, I have to make a plug for the people of Iowa. Although Jerry and others may think that we are "gullible" and serve only as guinea pigs for candidates to test their bad ideas on, Iowans who participate in the nomination process are very politically aware. There is seldom a day that goes by that at least one candidate is not in the state. We pay attention to what they have to say, and we are not shy in our criticism of bad ideas and bad candidates. Iowans take their responsiblity in the nomination process very seriously, and recognize that the rest of the country is watching to see what we do.

Oh-eight (D): Off and on the MI ballot

sonya, atlanta,ga — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 23:13:46 GMT

More proof, more reality that Clinton isn't electable from a moderate democrat:

GALLUP: Hillary With 21% Lead Over Obama -- But 'Negatives' Remain

By E&P Staff

Published: October 10, 2007 12:45 PM ET

NEW YORK A new national Gallup Poll of Democrat shows Sen. Hillary Clinton holding what Gallup calls "a commanding lead" over Illinois Sen. Barack Obama and the rest of the Democratic field in the 2008 race for president. Clinton's lead over Obama is 21 percentage points in the current October 4-7 poll, at 47% to 26%.

Former Sen. John Edwards is the only other Dem who cracks double digits, at 11%.

But Clinton's high "negative" rating still raises concerns.

Among Democrats that's no problem. Eighty-one percent have a favorable opinion of Clinton, compared with 70% for Obama and 69% for Edwards.

But among all Americans, Clinton (51%), Obama (54%), and Edwards (48%) have similar favorable ratings, with Clinton's negatives much higher -- at 44%. This leaves her, in Gallup's calculations, as just +7 in the ratings, while "Obama has a +27 net favorable rating and Edwards +17 among the general public."

Hillary is loved by the glee club but hated by the whole high school. For once, will the Democrats nominate someone who is electable to the vast majority of Americans and have a democratic control congress to legislate are much needed domestic and foreign policy agenda. Hillary will follow the long line of failed democratic nominees- Carter (second term), Mondale, Dukasis, Gore and Kerry. Can we get it right this time.

Oh-eight (D): Off and on the MI ballot

Christa, Dearborn Heights, MI — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 03:13:00 GMT

I've lived in MI my entire life...I think it blows that Iowa and NH get to go first every time. Why can't there be a lottery or rotation system. That would truly be fair.

Oh-eight (D): Off and on the MI ballot

Joshua Blair, Davison, MI — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 13:04:59 GMT

I have been a staunch supporter of John Edwards throughout his second campaign to become president of the United States. Through blood, sweat, and tears (in some cases, literally), I have fervently campaigned for Mr. Edwards. I have sacrificed money for the campaign, countless hours of campaigning, organizing events, and countless discussions and arguments defending Mr. Edwards. My family and I have spent many weekdays, weekends, and holidays campaigning on Mr. Edwards’ behalf. We have sacrificed. Why? Because we believed in the campaign. We want a better future and believed that Mr. Edwards was the solution. But we have been betrayed.

Mr. Edwards has betrayed us. He will no longer be on the ballot in Michigan. He sent a clear message yesterday that he no longer wanted our vote. The people of Iowa and New Hampshire trump Michigan voters. Perhaps, Mr. Edwards does not want Michigan votes. However, he will continue to accept Michigan money. Mr. Edwards, no doubt, knew that he would be removing his name off of the Michigan ballot prior to Tuesday. Yet, I still received a myriad of e-mails, phone calls, and text messages from the campaign expressing their desire for me to donate cash. Recently, Elizabeth Edwards was in Grand Rapids, Michigan for a house party. It only cost $250 to attend. Did she know that her husband was contemplating his removal from the Michigan ballot at this time? If so, I am certain that she made no indication of the decision that night. Why did Mrs. Edwards walk a picket line with members of the United Auto Workers in Michigan the next day? Was it because the Edwards campaign is concerned with Michigan union workers? Or was it because of the looming SEIU endorsement decision? I think Mr. Edwards answered that question yesterday.

If there are any lingering doubts of Mr. Edwards’ apathy for Michigan, his campaign manager, David Bonior has trampled them. "In these early states issues matter more than money, celebrity and advertisements. Voters want and deserve a candidate who represents real people, not corporate special interests, and this primary process will help ensure that's exactly what the American people get," Mr. Bonior stated. Perhaps, as Mr. Bonior has insinuated, Michigan is only concerned with “money” and “corporate special interests.” If this is true, it is not saying much for Mr. Bonior, who was elected to Congress by Michigan voters for 26 years. But I disagree with Mr. Edwards and Mr. Bonior. Michigan, which would greatly benefit from many of these issues, wants a candidate for all Americans. I believe that Michigan voters will make certain that America gets the candidate we deserve. A candidate that will not betray any American.

Mr. Edwards has betrayed Michigan. But he is not alone. Barack Obama, Bill Richardson, Joe Biden, and Dennis Kucinich have betrayed Michigan. These Democratic candidates have insulted and embarrassed Michigan voters. All have affronted Michigan voters without humiliation, sorrow, or apology. These five candidates must be held accountable for their actions. I, for one, will hold these candidates responsible. I will not vote for these candidates even if Michigan’s primary is set back to a later date. Nor will I support these candidates’ campaigns in future presidential primaries. I hope all Michigan democrats hold them liable.

However, there is still hope Michigan. The Chris Dodd campaign stated, “it does not benefit any of us if we are the nominee to pull our name off the ballot and slight Michigan voters." I concur. My loyalties are now with Chris Dodd.

Thank you,
Joshua Blair

Please let the John Edwards for President Campaign know how you feel:

Phone: (919) 636-3131
Fax: (919) 967-3644
E-mail info@johnedwards.com

Mailing Address:
410 Market Street
Suite 400
Chapel Hill, NC 27516