First thoughts: Mitt's big day

vanreuter, NY NY — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 14:23:39 GMT

Daily First Read Truth-Pak-

Trust no one...
The following sites devote as much time and space to Denis Kucinich and Joe Biden as they do to the big three. Whether you are a dem or republican, liberal, moderate or conservative, your candidate is represented equally at these sites. Forget about Big Media and the MSM, create your own narrative.

We don't need anyone to spoon-feed information to us about the candidates or the election, it's right there for everyone if you know where to go. Campaign money, donors expenses, go here

http://www.opensecrets.org/ Opensecrets.org is "Your guide to money in U.S elections."

Just about every poll from every pollster, averaged out, with a link to the source
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ Is THE source for political junkies, with links to every major political site on the right, left and center.

What the candidates actually have said about the issues.
http://www.ontheissues.org/default.htm This is a Great site! Every candidate on every issue!

How the candidates have voted and their LIberal/Conservative ratings
http://nationaljournal.com/voteratings/sen/lib.htm?o1=lib_composite&o2=asc#vr Has the voting records for all members of congress, and their Liberal/Conservative ratings.

http://votesmart.org/index.htm Here's what they say at the site;
Thousands of candidates and elected officials. Who works for you? Who is seeking your vote? Project Vote Smart, a citizen's organization, has developed a Voter's Self-Defense System to provide you with the necessary tools to self-govern effectively: abundant, accurate, unbiased and relevant information. As a national library of factual information, Project Vote Smart covers your candidates and elected officials in five basic categories: biographical information, issue positions, voting records, campaign finances and interest group ratings.

http://www.govtrack.us/ Do you take transparency seriously? Consider how important to you an open and transparent government is to a healthy society. More work needs to be done to make Congress open. Make a statement to your elected officials by joining now 200 others in signing a pledge for transparency.

Van

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Dickie Flatts, Charlotte, NC — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 14:26:34 GMT

The media wants to hype Obama hoping to stoke a close race and boost ratings / sales through Feb 5. To do so the media cherry picks polls.

The WaPost / ABC poll isn't inline with other recent polls, including the Marist poll released yesterday which, like other recent polling, shows Clinton up double digits in NH.

The collective media is largely ignoring the LA Times / Bloomberg poll out yesterday as well. Nationally it shows Clinton strong as ever, and shows no movement for OBama. It doesn't fit the narrative that the media is pushing --- that Obama is "surging". He isn't.

The collective media is largely ignoring the Zogby polling out yesterday that shows Clinton CRUSHING her opponents in FL, OH, and PA.

The collective media is largely ignoring two recent polls that shows Clinton with a small, albeit insignificant, lead in Iowa. Furthermore they ignore the RealClearPolitics and Pollster.com averages.

Again none of these things fit the narrative they are pushing as they try to help Obama heading into January.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

diane — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 14:30:03 GMT

it is a pity that religion has intruded into state so much now. It use to be in our history that there was a separation of church and state that has been breached to the point that religion is dictating our politics now.
At the same time, look at the smear email about Obama. They hit on religion and not on anything else. They try to paint him as a muslim radical, which not only is hurtful to the millions of muslims who have suffered a great deal of prejudice because of a few who were zealots, but, also to Obama. He lived in a largely muslim country in the 1960s. this was before radical and zealot ideas took hold. It was a time when religion was not so demanding whether christian or muslim or whatever.
And he was raised by parents who were not religious. Plus he is a christian.
But, the email, along with the suspicion for Romney just shows how much religion has taken over our politics and our government and this is troubling because of the separation of church and state and what our founding fathers wanted

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Charles Whitehurst, Springville FL — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 14:31:29 GMT

FR --> The news yesterday that a Clinton volunteer in Iowa was passing along the Obama-is-a-Muslim email doesn’t seem to be the HUGE news it was when it first surfaced. After all, this person wasn’t a high-ranking official doing this . . .<-- FR

Well, now this makes it easy then now doesn't it? Just come up with the smear, and have "low-level-flunky" do the dirty work, and then just deny it when you get caught.

The Clinton's are the biggest culprits in smear behavior, and the biggest whiners when someone smears them. Two big babies.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

jerry/corpus christi texas — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 14:33:46 GMT

Mitt can give his speech today and then we can get back to the real issues facing this country.....

a Clinton volunteer in Iowa was passing along the Obama-is-a-Muslim email

Why does that not surprise me?

I'm sure we will see more surprises Hillary has in her dirty tricks bag as her campaign gets more desperate.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Chuck,San Diego — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 14:36:45 GMT

If Mittie is going to run as a religous nut, any and all questions on that religion are fair, including asking him if he believes his underwear are magic.

Do you think this forum could include some Edwards information?
Please!

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

vanreuter, NY NY — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 14:46:45 GMT

The Democratic Race Appears Static
A Commentary By Douglas Schoen

Thursday, December 06, 2007
Advertisment

Several recent polls and the Real Clear Politics Averages have suggested that Hillary Clinton no longer leads the Democratic race in Iowa, raising questions about her inevitability as the Democratic nominee. Based on the polls that have been released recently, the race has certainly tightened, but Senator Clinton maintains a clear advantage over the field – an advantage that continues to be quite considerable. An examination of the five most recent polls shows that the race began within the margin of error in Iowa, and remains within the margin of error in Iowa.

This weekend, The Des Moines Register released their new Iowa poll of likely caucus-goers, and for the first time in the Register’s poll, Barack Obama leads with 28%, followed by Clinton with 25% and John Edwards with 23%. An ABC News/Washington Post poll of likely Iowa caucus-goers released last Tuesday shows Obama at 30%, Clinton at 26% and Edwards at 22%. And a poll just released by the American Research Group has Obama at 27%, Clinton at 25% and Edwards at 23%. These polls were taken by many in the media that Hillary Clinton had slipped. Earlier polling shows that the race in Iowa is still within a margin of error.

In the two most recent polls conducted by Strategic Vision and Rasmussen Reports, Clinton is either tied with Obama or ahead. The Strategic Vision poll has Clinton and Obama tied at 29%, while Edwards trails at 23%. The most recent Rasmussen data shows Clinton at 27%, Obama at 25% and Edwards at 24%. The Real Clear Politics average of the latest polls shows effectively a statistical tie with Obama at 27.5%, Clinton at 27.2% and Edwards at 22.3%. This is the best approximation of where they stand.

What does all of this mean? Not much.

In the first three polls – the Des Moines Register’s poll, the ABC News/Washington Post poll and the American Research Group’s poll, Obama’s lead falls within the margin of error of the surveys. Obama and Clinton are essentially in a statistical tie in Iowa, which in effect confirms what we have known for a while: that Iowa will be a very close race.

All of this media hype should not allow us to overlook the fact that Clinton still has a strong lead in national polls, other early states like Michigan and Nevada, and a very solid lead in the February 5th “Super Tuesday” states. Real Clear Politics averages show Clinton leading Obama 50% to 20.7% in New Jersey and 48% to 20% in California. In New York, Clinton leads Obama 50% to 20% and in Arizona, she leads 44% to 14%.

However, her lead in the New Hampshire primary is also thinning, although it is still outside the margin of error. The most recent Rasmussen poll shows Clinton at 33%, Obama at 26% and Edwards at 15%. This is the first time her lead over Obama has shrunk to single-digits in this state. Thus, the Democratic primary race could well be tightening, but Clinton has not suffered any serious erosion despite what has been reported. The race is still Hillary Clinton’s to win.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/political_commentary/commentary_by_douglas_schoen/the_democratic_race_appears_static

Van

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Sierra, SF — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 14:50:20 GMT

'...the new Washington Post/ABC poll that has Obama trailing Clinton in New Hampshire by just six points (35%-29%). Do we need any more proof that Obama has momentum right now? It seems a poll has come out every day in the last two weeks adding to the pro-Obama noise...'

Wasn't Hillary leading by 18% a month ago ?
Is this Hillary's 'fire wall'

What will happen to her lead if she gets caught with more 'dirty tricks' ?
What will happen to her lead if she loses Iowa ?

Serrt

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 14:51:50 GMT

Interesting way to "spin" the news Mark & Domenico.
You do almost a whole paragraph on a Washington Post/ABC News Poll that suggests Obama is only six (6) points behind Hillary in Iowa, and ONE SENTENCE on The Marist Poll that has Hillary fourteen (14) points ahead in the same state. (Can anyone here say BIAS?)

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Lyn, MD — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 14:52:49 GMT

" The news yesterday that a Clinton volunteer in Iowa was passing along the Obama-is-a-Muslim email doesn’t seem to be the HUGE news it was when it first surfaced"

I am not sure whether your analysis is correct...but what it did do was ONCE AGAIN put Hillary on the defense and allow Obama to rise above it and appear the statemans since the campaign said "We take their word that they had nothing to do with it personally" vs the Clinton campaign attack on tuesday with no proof at all that the Obama campaign was behind anything ..but accussing them.

Who do you think got the better of this (character) exchange...?

Once again KARMA.....

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

John Z., Mt. Pleasant, Iowa — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 14:53:54 GMT

On Clinton's small lead in NH: If Edwards doesn't win Iowa, it's likely to come down to a two-person contest between Clinton and Obama in NH. Then, whatever solid support she has in her 35% likely won't help much as most of non-Clinton supporters coalesce around Obama -- similar to what happened during the past Mondale-Hart and Bush-McCain races there after Iowa narrowed the field.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Nashville_fan — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 14:56:46 GMT

"The news yesterday that a Clinton volunteer in Iowa was passing along the Obama-is-a-Muslim email doesn’t seem to be the HUGE news it was when it first surfaced. After all, this person wasn’t a high-ranking official doing this, and the campaign quickly denounced and dismissed the activity. "

Huh?

Why is it that whenever the Clinton campaign does something wrong, she is never held responsible?

Questions planted? She knows nothing about it.

Hateful emails sent from campaign headquarters? How could she have known.

Attack your opponents grade school records? We were just joking.

Either she is the most out of touch presidential candidate in history, or she needs to show some of that "ready from day one" leadership we keep hearing about and take control of her campaign. How many free passes does she have left?

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

DickieFlatts@yahoo.com — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:01:30 GMT

WaPost / ABC poll has been an outlier before.

Look at the 3 WaPost / ABC polls since the summer. The first had Obama ahead of Clinton, the only poll to do so at the time. The rest showed a Clinton lead.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

DickieFlatts, Charlotte, NC — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:01:44 GMT

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Sean, Racine — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:03:52 GMT

Kennedy's speech said, in part:
I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute -- where no Catholic prelate would tell the President (should he be a Catholic) how to act and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote -- where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference -- and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the President who might appoint him or the people who might elect him.

I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish -- where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source -- where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials -- and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all.

For, while this year it may be a Catholic against whom the finger of suspicion is pointed, in other years it has been, and may someday be again, a Jew -- or a Quaker -- or a Unitarian -- or a Baptist. It was Virginia's harassment of Baptist preachers, for example, that led to Jefferson's statute of religious freedom. Today, I may be the victim -- but tomorrow it may be you -- until the whole fabric of our harmonious society is ripped apart at a time of great national peril.

Finally, I believe in an America where religious intolerance will someday end -- where all men and all churches are treated as equal -- where every man has the same right to attend or not to attend the church of his choice -- where there is no Catholic vote, no anti-Catholic vote, no bloc voting of any kind -- and where Catholics, Protestants and Jews, both the lay and the pastoral level, will refrain from those attitudes of disdain and division which have so often marred their works in the past, and promote instead the American ideal of brotherhood.

That is the kind of America in which I believe. And it represents the kind of Presidency in which I believe -- a great office that must be neither humbled by making it the instrument of any religious group, nor tarnished by arbitrarily withholding it, its occupancy from the members of any religious group. I believe in a President whose views on religion are his own private affair, neither imposed upon him by the nation or imposed by the nation upon him as a condition to holding that office."

A muscular defense of his own choices in the context of the larger questions of character and leadership. Romney, on the other hand, seems to be saying to those who DO believe in religious tests "hey, I'm just like you..."

I would not look with favor upon a President working to subvert the First Amendment's guarantees of religious liberty (nor would our system of checks and balances permit him to do so). And neither do I look with favor upon those who would work to subvert Article VI of the Constitution by requiring a religious test -- even by indirection -- for if they disagree with that safeguard, they should be openly working to repeal it.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Nashville_fan — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:04:58 GMT

Van,

Clinton has a lead in Michigan? Isn't she the only one running? lol

And didn't the latest Stategic Vision poll show Obama ahead and breaking the 30% mark?

One thing all these dueling polls points out is that contrary to the picture that was being painted earlier this year, the only thing that is inevitable is that WE THE PEOPLE decide when we vote, not polls.

I'll be glad when we just let the good folks of Iowa caucus and let the chips fall where they may.

Regardless of who wins the Democratic nomination, I think the message has been sent and received the people are TIRED of politics - we are ready for some GOOD GOVERNMENT!

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Sandy Clauser, Wilton, NY — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:07:01 GMT

It is unrealistic to believe that ones religion doesn't play a part in the decisions they make. Since the issue of religion is looming so large in this campaign why doesn't Chris Matthews have a panel of religious figures explain just what the Mormon religion is all about,and Evangelical Christians for that matter. Lets dispel the fear!

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

George Sears, Cedar City, Utah — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:07:44 GMT

I don't know what Mitt should say, but the way religion gets incorporated into politics is weird. Bush gives his housing bailout speech soon. Will he mention that we are 'here' because a lot of people were pretty greedy for the last 3 years? Everyone wanted to get rich, I guess. And now we bail the thing out. Bad message...

People pick apart religion. Can we ask if purely secular people end up worshipping money or social status or sex, or tend to narcissism? No.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Chuck,San Diego — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:07:47 GMT

Obama had several volunteers who did dirty tricks months ago.. are you Obama supporters saying that his volunteers were really workiing under Obama's directions? Is that where you come from?

Edwards is Honest
Clinton experienced
Obama, please join the military

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Mike Alsobrook Bedford, TX — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:08:23 GMT

".... no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."

Which Romney will we see today? The secular Romney that eschews a religious test as he appeared to do in the California debate back in May or the "values" Romney that embraces it?

Kennedy rightfully, and artfully, made it clear that his religion should not be an issue. If Romney repeats this, and rhetorically rejects the religious test, he will have my respect.

But if he does not and makes the center of his speech on how his values informs his decisions and how much those values are common with Evangelicals and other Christians, then he is not rejecting the religious test; he is supporting it and just asking for his religion to be included.

I could think of few things he could say more ugly and craven.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Sam — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:09:22 GMT

Charles of FL, the non paid low level flunky was let go or fired from the Hillary campaign as soon as it was known what happened. Be careful for ranting too much about how Hillary is involved. This happens in cmpaigns and it may happen to your boy's campaign also.
It is unfortunate that this low level mud slinging occurs. The CLinton campaign has denounced it but this type of thing does happen in every campaign without the knowledge or approval of the candidate or campapaign.

It does give hate filled people like you and Jerry a chance to hiss and spew.

Again, be careful...WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Ron, TX — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:09:27 GMT

Van- Nice way to pick and choose articles to post. Pick a Zogby poll with Clinton winning in states no one campaigns in, ignore a Zogby poll that shows Clinton losing nationally to all of the Republicans.

Pick a Rasmussen poll with Clinton in the lead, then ignore a Rasmussen poll that shows Clinton dropped down to 35%, within 10% of Obama nationally.

All this illustrates is that people love picking polls for their own purposes, and polls taken on the same day or two even show pretty different results. In the end, there will be one day that matters in Iowa, one day that matters in NH, one day in SC, and after that, a clear winner will likely be chosen.

The bottom line: one clear indicator aside from all the changing and cherry-picked polls- Clinton went negative. She would not have gone negative if she still thought she had a solid lead.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Dave, IA — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:12:03 GMT

Van,
And didn't the latest Stategic Vision poll show Obama ahead and breaking the 30% mark?
Nashville_fan (Sent Thursday, December 06, 2007 10:04 AM)

http://www.strategicvision.biz/political/iowa_poll_120607.htm
Obama 32% Clinton 25%, margin of error 4.5%
Schoen is a known Clinton rat. He worked on Billy's campaign.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Oz, Lisbon, IA — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:15:37 GMT

The primary reason that the news media ignores national polls and polls for some of the Super Tuesday and later contests isn't because of bias or the need to stoke ratings or anything of that nature. It's one reason: voters in the later states aren't paying attention right now. The race is extremely fluid because a lot of voters are sheep.

What you're seeing with the national polls being static is because the people who have galvanized their support are the people responding to the polls.

Once the Iowa, NH, and South Carolina races are over and done with, you're going to see a surge in support for the candidate who "wins" and probably the candidate that comes in second.

If it's not Hillary that wins, you're going to see her support plummet. If it's Edwards or Obama that has a surprisingly large showing you're going to see a huge surge, especially if they do well in more than a couple of the early contests.

The only polls that are worth listening to right now are the polls in the early contests where voters are paying the most attention. Nationally, people that have already made up their minds are going to be pretty much static in the polls, and the real movement is going to come when the larger majority of voters become engaged some time after the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary. Then, you'll see some fireworks.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

MK,MO — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:16:24 GMT

no candidate can be 'ahead' or 'behind' until votes are cast, you talk continually of poll numbers as if they were scripture, when in fact they are merely figments of someone’s imagination, all manufactured and marketed much the same way as any cheap, plastic chinese toy, with the same amount of toxicity. you cats are laughable, being lead around by the nose like a cart oxen. you realize you can, for the time being, vote for the candidate of your choice even if it is contrary to what the polls dictate?

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Nashville_fan — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:21:20 GMT

Why doesn't Hillary Clinton address the e-mail situation with her own mouth? That would squelch it for me.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Rick, WS, NC — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:23:00 GMT

I'm going to ralph my lunch if I hear anymore about mittflips religion speech...here's what I know about this...bush came into office as the compassionate conservative and he was anything but compassionate or conservative except to the social (religious) conservatives...we don't need 4 or 8 more years of religious extemism in the WH...we need someone who believes in science over parables

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

bill c. — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:28:02 GMT

'lookie here' lie's, deception, polarization, divisiveness, one site has it all. hillary.com

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

disgusted — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:29:23 GMT

CHRIS MATTHEWS???CHRIS MATTHEWWS ....I'm having a stoke here.

Sandy Clauser wants to have, of all people...the unwell Chris Matthews have a panel of "religious figures" explain just what the Mormon religion is all about. I had to read that twice because I couldn't believe my eyes.

You bet Sandy...the most vile crackpot biased journalist in news who NEVER deals in facts or fairness...RUDY'S MAIN SQUEEZE...Rudy's boy who works feverously in promoting and protecting him no matter what facts are revealed about Rudy's sleezy life.

Sandy, dear, you want CHRIS MATTHEWS who hates Mitt Romney and who goes after him unfairly if he seems to even theaten Saint Rudy...you want Matthews to get a panel to ...WHAT......discuss Romney's belief FAIRLY...........!!!!!!!!!!!!!

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Oh, help, I'm passing out.....get the big blonde drooling Snake to get a panel of foxes to discuss the eggs in the henhouse!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sandy, have you not ever really listened to Matthews ....oh, wait I get it....

SANDY FOR RUDY

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Bee — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:29:58 GMT

Folks,

Start your engine and get ready for the final stretch.

Here is my take on the new ABC poll; Clinton lead is shrinking really fast; however, she is maintaining her lead among the democrats that are loyal to Bill Clinton. Obama is on fire and a win in IOWA will knock Clinton off her game in NH.

The democrats in NH are not going to determine the election, the independent voters will do. Obama knew all along the power of independent and I am sure they will deliver come Jannuary 8 2007.

There are still some republicans in NH that are going to cross over and vote for him in the primary. Combination of republicans, Democrats and independents will get Obama the nomination.

On a side note, watch out for key endorsement coming from Boston, MA in the next few weeks.

On a side note, watch out for key endorsement coming from Boston, MA in the next few weeks.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

pat huntington ny — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:30:10 GMT

I am so sick to my stomach about this whole religion thing. Hello! This is America, freedom of and from religion, separation of church and state! Have we forgotten all of this?

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Charles Whitehurst, Springville FL — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:31:22 GMT

Hate? What hate? Sam, you protest too much. The theme of the campaign is set by Clinton herself. We're told over and over that her campaign is a well run, tight, and professional campaign. A staff member of hers sends out some of the worst kind of bigoted, and shall we say hateful e-mails, that one can imagine. Then you stand there and say -"Oh - this happens all the time - so what". Here's the "so-what" - The Clinton's run some of the most in the gutter and hateful campaigns imaginable. There's your hate Sam. We see nothing from other campaigns about Hillary's personal life, and what she personally believes. We see no lies and smears from Edwards, Obama, or others regarding Hillary's life. These types of smears do not "happen all the time". Others will attack Clinton's policies, but never have they attacked her on a personal level. There's your hate Sam. It's all from Hillary.

> WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND.

Very true Sam. Very true. Hillary should be very careful in that regard.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

pat huntington ny — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:32:24 GMT

Hillary Clinton obviously had nothing to do with the Obama is a muslim emails. It came from a rogue campaing staffer, and she has proven her leadership in this matter by quickly firing the guilty individual. Anyone who things Obama is muslim is an idiot anyway, and she knows this. Say what you will about Hillary, but she's too smart to make this part of her campaign.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

astounded again at the ignorance of history — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:32:39 GMT

Diane: the long history of America is one of RELIGIOUS
ideals permeating all of American politics, social life, and economic fabric. It is only in the past 40 years that secular atheistic humanism has creeped in to the moral fiber of America.

The founding fathers did not set the constitution to abolish Religion from America, it made sure that there would be NO STATE SPONSORED religion, that all would be forced to join, as was the case in England. Everyone was FREE to PRACTICE their religion as they saw fit, and GOD was NEVER banned from state OR Federal Government policy or laws

The mention of God is everywhere in the establishment of America in the 1790's, just not a PARTICULR religion. Each and EVERY state WAS FOUNDED WITH A CERTAIN RELIGIOUS origin: Maryland: Roman Catholics, Pennsylvania: Quakers, New England States: Puritans and Calvinists, New York: Anglicans, etc., etc., etc.,

read your history

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Bee — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:33:24 GMT

Oz, Lisbon, IA ,

Thanks for your brilliant analysis; I hope folks that have been pushing national polls take note.

Tim Russert said it best in his quote "National Polls are meaningless at this point, pay attention to early states"

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

vanreuter, NY NY — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:34:32 GMT

All races tighten as election day draws near, and anyone who thought that Clinton would win many states by 20 or more points in a six or 7 or eight person contest doesn't really know much about politics or elections. I have written about this on several occasions here and elsewhere.
While the fringe fixates on the day-to-day campaign minutia, the general electorate goes about their Holiday season with the candidates on the back burner.

Rudy seems to have hit a real wall though. His support, soft to begin with, is now in full, "abandon ship!" mode, and Mitt's speech today is more a sign of panic than anything else, as he can see the tens of millions of dollars he's spent, much out of his own pocket, on TV ads coming to naught against a rival who has surpassed him without spending a dime on media and little time in the state. Huckabee is, right now, anyway, THE conservative who the republican base appears to be coalescing around, as many had predicted, when the air went out of Rudy's souffle.

Romney's entire strategy has been based on building the early momentum by winning in Iowa and New Hampshire. If Huck derails that train in Iowa, anything can happen. If Huck takes Iowa, Mitt wins in NH and Thompson wins in SC, Rudy has a must win in Florida. So you could see four different winners of the first 4 republican primaries. If that happens, it will be a long road to the nomination for whoever is the eventual winner.

Van

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

disgusted — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:44:44 GMT

Ron, if attacked repeatedly for weeks and weeks, would you have your candidate respond?

Obama atacked and attacked and Hillary ignored him.

Personally I think she should have gone after Saint Obama much earlier. It may be her undoing that she didn't nail the holier than thou hypocrite

But even if it is,,,don't run your victory laps yet.
Obama will go down in flames in the GE against RUDY.

Wait until Crackpot Chris Matthews gets in on it when Obama goes up against his boy, RUDY.

See how the unwell Matthews and Timmy TURD Russert treated all the sleeze behavior of Rudy that came out last week...almost silence while viciously attacking Hillary. I know, Ron, you love the Chrissie Crap and Timmy Turd show as long as they are going after Hillary, but just wait, Ron, until Obama is the one.

They'll turn on him with daggers...it won't' be so funny them will it? Obama will fold. He is not battle tested like that.

It is shocking to see and now believe that it is true, we Democrats eat out own and in an election that most people said Dems could NOT loose....here we go again

Wonder what good stuff President RUdy will do for us and you ROn?

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

GIve Us a Break — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:48:54 GMT

If Tim Russert said it, Bee, it must be the honest, unvarnished, unbiased truth.

Weren't you quoting that crazy Chris Matthews yesterday?

Now I know...you are a Rudy Republican plant!

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Sierra, SF — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:52:29 GMT

I'd have a lot more sympathy for Mitt's religious statements if he hadn't been seen next to Obama/Osama signs during his campaign......

George Sears, Cedar City, Utah: '...People pick apart religion. Can we ask if purely secular people end up worshipping money or social status or sex, or tend to narcissism? No....'

George, it's unfortunate that religious people have stereotype of secular people and vice-versa
I've had stereotypes of the religious.....
I plead guilty

But, I'm secular (a recovering Catholic) and I don't whorhip materialism or sex, etc....

PS
If you look at Ted Haggard or Jimmy Swaggert, you'll see that 'religious leaders' are interested in sex, too

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Bee — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:53:43 GMT

As for Mitt Romney, I understand his exasperation regarding the pressure of his religion. Let's face it faith is for real in America and to act otherwise is disingenuous. I am a little bit sympathetic to his course but won’t vote for him, though, except democrats nominate someone i don't like.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Sierra, SF — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:53:53 GMT

van, are you Dickie Flatts ?

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Bee — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:54:44 GMT

disgusted,

Why are you obsessed with Chris Matthew and Tim Russert?

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

CJ — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:56:39 GMT

This speach is a mistake by Romney. I understand what he is trying to do but he is giving trying to give a sermon. People don't want sermon's...they are interested in honest leadership. Not que cards...what is your honest view on what you as POTUS can do to move this country foward. Sermon's do not accomplish that. #1 Huck for all accounts and his shortfalls appears increadibly honest. #2 Romney cannot out-sermon Huck. I predict this will not help him regain the lead in Iowa. I believe heavily in religion in everyday life...but I don't need to be told that from a politician. This is what weighs down and limits the modern GOP from talking about real policy issues.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Bee — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:57:53 GMT

If Tim Russert said it, Bee, it must be the honest, unvarnished, unbiased truth.

Weren't you quoting that crazy Chris Matthews yesterday?

Now I know...you are a Rudy Republican plant!
GIve Us a Break
---------------------------------------------

Call me name all you like that doesn't win you a single vote and it doesn't stop me from watching their show.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

S.K.M. — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:58:27 GMT

One state Hillary marked off of her wish list; Michigan.
Every other major Democratic contender(Edwards, Obama, Richardson) withdrew their name from the nominee list over there because the state Dems broke party rules by moving their primary way up. Hillary sat back, said she wouldn't campaign there because the state Dems broke party rules, but oh wait.. she doesn't have to campaign there, does she? Who's her only competition, KUCINICH?!

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Bee — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:59:02 GMT

Mitt was so emotional, it is a shame to see folks subject him to religious test.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Noelani — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:05:15 GMT

This speech of Romney's was some of the most over-hyped media coverage of the entire campaign, thus far. I give to shhh-its to the wind whether he's a Mormon or not. I find the whole idea that the deciphering of whose Christian and whose not within a Political campaign is absolutely ridiculous and does exactly what these politicians claim to not 'want' to do and that's exclude others who may not be...um...Christian.

The Media's salivating for some big news tidbit over-hyped his big 'My Faith' speech. The next Media frenzy is this coming weekend with Oprah campaigning for Barack Obama. Another worthless feeding frenzy in my opinion and I'm an Obama supporter.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

sam — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:05:38 GMT

Charles, did you just say that the other campaigns attack Hillary's policies but never her on a personal level?

Obama says Hillary doesn't stand for anthing
AP 11-7-07

Obama said Hillary is only about winning eloections and isn't concerned about solving problems and she lacks principle
Washington TImes 11-8-07

Obama called Hillary disingeneous
11-12-07

Just to quote a few, Charles.There are many, many more.

If someone says I'm a liar, not telling the truth, that I have no principles, that I don't stand for anything...I think I'd consider that a PERSONAL very personal character...not on the issues attack.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Dickie Flatts, Charlotte, NC — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:06:36 GMT

I love watching religion do a Republican in. It is just fun to watch.

Republicans have used religion as a wedge issue for the last 30 years. They have used issues like school prayer and the display of the 10 Commandments to rally their base. They have held events like Justice Sunday. Bush wears his religion on his sleeve, and used it to wipe away his years of drinking and doing drugs. He found Jesus, all is forgiven, his past wiped clean.

Now the monster they created within their party is biting of the head off the head of one of its own. Awesome! Sorry Mitt. You don't stand a chance.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Jack, Cambridge, MA — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:11:36 GMT

Please stop using "JFK" and "Romney" in the same paragraph. The only thing they have in common is Massachusetts.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

disgusted — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:11:49 GMT

Bee, you can watch all the Crackpot Chris Matthews you want and be totally in love with the guy...no problem...buy don't subject the rest of us to biased, baseless, guotes from a nut like Matthews.

Your credibility slips everytime you quote Matthews.

I'll respect YOUR personal views although I disagree with you but please refrain from cramming Matthews or Russert down our throats.

We know what they are.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

diane — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:15:55 GMT

Bee, I watch Hardball and Russert as well. I don't think they are bad. they sometimes drive me crazy but, sometimes they make me cheer as well.
Disgusted, Hillary's problems are her own fault. She has made alot of boneheaded moves lately and seems intent on continuing to make them.
There is a way to stand up for yourself and there is a way to deal with attacks. As the frontrunner, she is going to get attacked. that is what happens to frontrunners. The rivals job is to attack and challenge. but, it seems she gets some mild challenges and she goes completely off the rails.
that should raise some concerns for voters.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

vanreuter, NY NY — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:16:52 GMT

Thursday, December 06, 2007
Advertisment

New York Senator Hillary Clinton’s lead over Illinois Senator Barack Obama in South Carolina’s Presidential Primary has disappeared. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of the race shows Clinton with 36% of the vote while Obama is the top choice for 34% of the state’s Likely Primary Voters. A month ago, Clinton had a ten-point advantage. In September, the former First Lady was up by thirteen points.

Currently, John Edwards is a distant third at 13% in South Carolina and no other Democrat tops the 2% level of support (see crosstabs for current survey).

Fifty-one percent (51%) of Clinton’s voters name Obama as their second choice. Fifty-nine percent (59%) of Obama voters name Clinton as their second choice. Among supporters of John Edwards, Clinton is the second choice for 34% while Obama gets the nod from 16%.

Two trends in the South Carolina data mirror national trends.

First, Obama’s overall level of support has remained relatively steady while Clinton’s has declined. Nationally, Clinton’s support among likely Democratic Primary Voters has fallen to its lowest level in the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll.

Second, Obama’s showing has improved significantly among black voters. He now attracts 51% of the African-American vote in South Carolina while Clinton picks up just 27%. A month ago, the candidates were even in this important constituency (Obama 46%, Clinton 45%). There is virtually no movement among white voters in the state--Clinton now earns 43% of the white vote, Edwards 22%, and Obama 17%.

In the South Carolina survey, African-Americans constitute 49% of Likely Democratic Primary voters.

Among women in South Carolina, Clinton leads Obama by eleven but Obama leads by ten among men 47% to 34%.

Eighty-three percent (83%) have a favorable opinion of Clinton. Seventy-six percent (76%) view Edwards favorably and 74% offer a positive assessment of Obama.

Sixty-three percent (63%) of Clinton’s supporters say they are “certain” to vote for her. Sixty-five percent (65%) of Obama’s say the same along with just 47% of Edwards’ South Carolina supporters.

Thirty-three percent (33%) of South Carolina Democratic Primary Voters say the economy is the number one voting issue. Twenty-eight percent (28%) name the War in Iraq while 14% say Health Care.

Fifty-six percent (56%) believe Clinton will eventually win the Democratic nomination, but 28% believe Obama will be the nominee.

Clinton, Obama, and Edwards are virtually even in Iowa, the first state to vote in Election 2008. Clinton leads by ever smaller margins in New Hampshire, and national polls.

Among South Carolina Republicans, the surging Mike Huckabee has taken the lead."

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008__1/2008_presidential_election/south_carolina/election_2008_south_carolina_democratic_primary

The mystery remains; While Clinton's support fell, Obama and Edwards didn't pick it up. Obama gains ONE point in the poll. This has been true for most if not all of the tightening in the polls; Clinton losing points but Obama and Edwards remaining static. What is happening to those voters and why aren't they reall switching sides like the republicans are? When Rudy and Mitt slip, Huck gains. Why hasn't the same been true for the dems?

Van

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Dot, Illinois — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:25:05 GMT

"While Clinton's support fell, Obama and Edwards didn't pic it up."

----------------------------------------------------
Could this support be going to Senators Biden, Dodd, or others? Do those polls give any indication that the level of support for the lower tier candidates is changing? Could I, just maybe, have a small reason to hope that Senator Biden is gaining? Thanks for posting the info.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Bee — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:25:31 GMT

Disgusted,

I'll take Chris Matthew any day to Hillary Clinton and Clinton News Network.

You don't have a problem when Chris is praising Hillary but you do have a problem when he criticizes her, eh

Perhaps, your name disgusted explain a lot... lol

Long live MSNBC!! Long live Chris Matthew!! Long Live Chris Tucker!! Long live Tim Rusert !!!

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

disgusted — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:31:49 GMT

Bee,
Chris Matthews and Tim Russert are two of the most biased closet Republican journalist who are not on Fox or hate radio.

If they dealt fairly with ALL candidates and were fair in discussing policies and political issues I would have no problem with them.

Matthewes has especially gone around the bend. I consider it vile "journalism" when a pundit like him nightly rants about a candidate's clothes, mannerisms, manhood..to name a very few while spreading untrue stories and hate.

Chris Matthews has dug out his playbook from the 2000 campaign when he vilified Gore while giving candidate Bush a pass.

With his lies about Gore month after month, he helped to sway the vote for Bush. When candidate Bush made surprisingly ignorant statements showing his total lack of experience, Matthews covered and have him a free pass. He repeatedly talked about the likeability factor and how Bush was just the kind of guy you'd like to have a beer with.

Unfortunately, Bee, then just as now, people listened and allowed a crackpot like Matthews to help pick candidate and president.

AND LOOK WHAT WE GOT. Rather than checking Bush on his policies, intelligence, what he would do as president, Matthews dealt in the trivial with Bush while violently attacking Gore but not on real issues or policy. AND LOOK WHAT WE GOT.

When a crackpot gossip monger like Matthews influences the vote of the American people with his personal jealous attacks, we voters don't focus on the real facts or what we should really be considering when voting for a president.

When unwell men with hidden agendas spout, it affects the shape of world history and the lives or deaths of American citizens.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Barbara C., Pompano Beach, FL — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:34:32 GMT

As a supporter of Hillary in South Florida, I just want to say two things: 1. If the polls had not tightened, that would be really scary as it would mean voters in this country are not weighing in on this presidential election cycle; and they should be.....and 2. "Mud Bath Politics" is going to get even muddier before this is all over, as this is a field this year where everyone but the Disney Characters are running for President. Whoever gets the nomination on either side, (R) or (D) is going to have to "ramp up" their rapid response team as though it were the "Changing Tire Pit Crew in a Nascar Race." Yes -- the polls have tightened. The numbers are supposed to get closer at this point.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Freeman Female, Dallas, TX — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:36:03 GMT

The Democratic Race Appears Static
A Commentary By Douglas Schoen

Thursday, December 06, 2007
Advertisment POSTED BY VAN

I am glad you keep advertisment in there because that is all it is for Clinton. A window show with no substance.

A magic show where she places the audience under the spell. That she is not playing dirty tricks but accuses others of doing something that is exposed once you raise the curtain on her.

Time to turn the page on the Bushes and the Clintons. Give me something new.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

CitizenJ — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:37:23 GMT

The mystery remains; While Clinton's support fell, Obama and Edwards didn't pick it up. Obama gains ONE point in the poll. This has been true for most if not all of the tightening in the polls; Clinton losing points but Obama and Edwards remaining static. What is happening to those voters and why aren't they reall switching sides like the republicans are? When Rudy and Mitt slip, Huck gains. Why hasn't the same been true for the dems?

vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Thursday, December 06, 2007 11:16 AM)

Van,

I think, and this is my personal opinion, that at least part of the reason is that there are so many people who really haven't made up their mind. Again, this is my personal opinion, but I think the polls that were done in the past got a lot of people who weren't really paying attention to the race yet. And those people's most likely response would be Clinton because of the name recognition. Now that more people are paying attention, they realize they don't really know who they want to vote for. So instead of saying Clinton by default, they aren't saying anyone's name, which would explain why she is losing support, but others aren't gaining.

I think for all the fuss people are making about these polls, and who is up by 2 points and who is down by 2 points, lots of people might be surprised come election night when the results don't match with the recent polls.

This is such a unique point in our history, that I think it is hard to guage public opinion like we have in the past. This isn't really a standard election, which is why I, personally, am not putting a whole lot of faith in ANY of the polls that come out. People can say look at this poll and look at that indicator, but NOBODY is going to have a real clue until January 3.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

vanreuter, NY NY — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:38:10 GMT

Dot-

If you look at the link, it has Edwards at 13%, "some other candidate", and unsure both at 9%, which doesn't leave a lot of room for Biden or Dodd. It looks like the support goes from Clinton to undecided. Whether those undecideds will move to another candidate from Clinton is the question. The fact that Clinton's support has softened is a concern to her supporters for sure, but that the support hasn't deserted her for another candidate indicates that they haven't gone anywhere else.

Van

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

disgusted — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:41:27 GMT

Wrong, Bee. I have a problem with Chris Matthews ANYTIME ANYWHERE. I never watch him anymore becaue I think he is seriously sick.

Even it he were praising Hillay and bashing Obama
I would still be opposed to Matthews vile rhetoric

I guess I could turn your comment around and say tht you like Matthews and Russert because they are bashing Hillary and praising (sorta) Obama.

But you may sing a differnt tune in theh GE if Obama is the Dem. candidate and Rudy is the Rep.

Matthews is a closet Rep and Rudy is his and Matthews guy. They will go after Obama, not as vile as clinton becuase they are viciously jealous of Bill and Hillary but never fear, they will attack Obama.

Maybe that will be okay with you but maybe you will see it differently then.

It is not about the candidates as much as it is about biased "pundits" who set out to shape and pick the candidate or president for US THE AMERICAN VOTERS.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Lorenzo, Tyler, Texas — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:42:14 GMT

I found Mitt's speech to be energetic, and give a great view of America. Obama's religion apparently is an issue (is he Muslim or Christian?); Romney's religion seems to be an issue (are Mormon's Christian?); Huckabee's religion is obviously an issue (is he a Baptist like Jimmy Carter?); Clinton's religion (is she born-again as her husband was?) matters. Religion does matter.
That said, I listened to his speech. Mitt was dynamic, friendly, powerful, and sure seemed to be pretty dog-gone Presidential.
If I'm going to have a real leader be President, I think I'd like someone who acts like Romney looked today. My uncommitted vote is awfully small, but after today's speech, I have to say I'm leaning heavily toward Mr. Romney.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

REG; East Valley Phx. AZ — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:45:56 GMT

One Important Question All (Democratic as well as Republican) Candidates Should Answer:
On Sept. 11, 2001 America was attacked by a crazed cult of brainwashed ‘wackos’ who were following an egotistic, maniacal, self-appointed leader and, rightly so, the Bush administration aggressively responded with the intent of punishing and putting them out of business/existence. But the Bush administration’s priority too quickly returned to their previous preoccupation with Iraq and then by committing the bulk of our resources to basically unilaterally attack Iraq they greatly reduced the real effort against al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden who were the perpetrators of the atrocity and who were still the real threat. It has become clearly evident that action had very questionable justification, was supported by exaggerated and deceptive claims and has proved to be of substantial benefit to Special Interests and a select few while providing great costs to the American people. As the polls now substantiate, the majority of American people have come to realize that this mentality has become the consistent belligerent way and arrogant irresponsible real focus of the Bush administration with regard to most everything and it constitutes the apparent pursuit of a private agenda for benefiting only a select few. To date the Republican Party has been totally steadfast in their unified and strong support of the Bush administration’s stubborn prosecution of these policies and behaviors. The question then for each candidate is, “When recognizing the serious concern and discomforting fears of the majority of Americans over experiencing more of the same, please explain how your focus and administration would differ from Bush’s and then how the people can really trust that it would be truly different. Please realize that, at least for me, any effort to excuse or deny the problem would only be avoidance and would just tend to alienate”.

An ex-long-term-registered Republican
(since 2003 registered as “Undeclared”)

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Tom, Monmouth County, NJ — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:49:23 GMT

If he's smart he'll talk about principles and the strength his faith gives him. If he's dumb he'll try to downplay his faith. This is also a good time for him to go after other candidates on the Law and Order issue while at the same time seeming above it all. Maybe quote Solomon or something and then point out some specific blunders of his opponents.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Dante — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:54:18 GMT

sam,

Obama didn't say " Hillary doesn't stand for anything" he said "It is difficult to know where Hillary stands on certain issues"!!

All of your quotes are made up, I mean it is ridiculous the lengths that Hillary supporters (Madrasa thing for example), will go to make a point. I mean really if you have to lie to get your candidate to win, then maybe they aren't the best candidate for the job!!

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Dot, Illinois — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:55:33 GMT

Citizen J

Good post!

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Bee — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:57:35 GMT

You will also admit that Chris Matthew is the one that makes Hillary looks good when he wrote her the famous line in the debate.

Like Obama said, the Clintons cannot cherry pick the good and live the bad behind. The same goes for Clinton's campaign, they cannot attack Chris Matthew whenever he exposed their lies and they must also embrace him whenever he his giving them good coverage.

That is why it is called "Hard ball".

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Ron, TX — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 17:16:42 GMT

sam, give us the QUOTES not the reporter-written headlines. Obama was refering to policy distinctions the entire time.

Lest we forget Hillary cast the first stone so many months ago when she moved past criticizing Obama on his foreign policies, and declared that he, as a candidate, was just "naive".

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

MK, Los Angeles, California — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 17:19:16 GMT

Sorry Van but the article you quoted saying not much has changed in Iowa is out-of-date. The article cites to five recent polls in Iowa three with Obama ahead (ABC, American Research, and Des Moines Register) and two with Clinton tied or ahead (Rasmussen and Strategic Vision). Well you can now scratch off one of those pro-Clinton polls. Strategic Vision has just released a poll today showing Obama ahead by SEVEN points in Iowa. So now four out of the last five polls in Iowa show Obama ahead. The ground HAS CHANGED in Iowa.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Larry Craig, Minneapolis Airport — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 17:19:50 GMT

My name is Larry Craig and I'am running for President. larrycraigi'amnotgay.con

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 17:24:44 GMT

Could this support be going to Senators Biden, Dodd, or others? Do those polls give any indication that the level of support for the lower tier candidates is changing? Could I, just maybe, have a small reason to hope that Senator Biden is gaining? Thanks for posting the info.
Dot, Illinois (Sent Thursday, December 06, 2007 11:25 AM)

Dot, I cited a poll (last week maybe?) in which Biden moved up a few points - but it seemed like his support came from those leaving Richardson.

A recent Des Moines Register Poll has Biden at 6%, which puts him in fifth place behind Richardson.
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071202/NEWS09/312020006/-1/caucus

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

CitizenJ — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 17:35:56 GMT

Carrie, Eastern Iowa (Sent Thursday, December 06, 2007 12:24 PM)

Another important issue in Iowa is who will be the second choice of people whose candidates can't make the 15% cut-off? Any Biden, Dodd, Richardson supporters here care to reveal their second choices?

I'm not saying they won't necessarily reach 15% by the way :)

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

MK, Los Angeles, California — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 17:38:52 GMT

Van,

Where did those Clinton supporters go? As some of the other posters have noted those supporters were probably giving support based on name recognition. The fact that they have not switched to another candidate yet means that these voters had not been paying attention to the race. These voters are going to be moved by what they see in the next month and a half, that is, if these voters see a movement in support to another candidate they are more likely to go there as well. This makes the results of the Iowa caucus (where voters have been paying more attention)all the more important. Whoever wins Iowa will get a tsunami of support from these now unaffiliated former Clinton supporters. A loss in Iowa for Clinton therefore would be A BIG DEAL.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Charles Whitehurst, Springville FL — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 17:46:27 GMT

>> Charles, did you just say that the other campaigns
>> attack Hillary's policies but never her on a
>> personal level?

Yes I did Sam.

>> Obama says Hillary doesn't stand for anthing
>> AP 11-7-07

What does Hillary stand for? She's all over the road in what she beleives. Supporting war, against war. For illegal immigrants getting licenses, against illegal immigrants getting licenses. If you are on all sides of an issue, then you don't stand for anything. It's impossbole to debate someone that takes the stands Hillary does, because she doesn't stand for anything. When that is the case, you have to point that fact out by saying she's disingenuous, which she is.

> Obama said Hillary is only about winning eloections
> and isn't concerned about solving problems and she
> lacks principle
> Washington TImes 11-8-07

Prove him wrong. See above items for futher details. And atleast Obama's didn't go snooping around for Hillary's KINDERGARDEN papers to show that she is too ambitious to be Presdient. Didn't stop Hillary from doing that though.

> Obama called Hillary disingeneous
> 11-12-07

> Just to quote a few, Charles.There are many, many
> more.

Did Obama or someone in his campaign call Hillary
a lesbian? If so, that would be a personal attack.
Did Obama or someone in his campaign call Hillary a total b*tch? That would be a personal attack. What your saying Sam is that if anyone ever did these types of things from Obama's campaign, then that's okay with you because, you know, thats politics. I'm saying you're full of it.

I don't even like Obama, but as far as running a clean campaign, he is light years ahead of Hillary, who uses personal attacks on her opponents on an everyday basis.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Mike Texas — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 17:47:45 GMT

He did it. He asked for solidarity of the religious.

No matter what is quoted, he was not asking genuinely for "no religious test." He was asking for religion to be the test.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Richard, Fort Worth, TX — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 17:50:27 GMT

Don’t we just live in a Great Country?

We have freedom of Religion.

But a Mormon can not be President

We fight for Women’s rights in other Countries.

But a Woman Can not be President in our Country.

I wonder how many of our History’s Great Men in this COUNTRY came here as illegal immigrants?

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 17:50:49 GMT

I find it difficult to listen to Mitt Romney because he is only consistant in his inconsistancy. To me the man has no credibility. That being said, Mitt delivered a well executed speech.

Yet, I find it very irritating, in this day and age, within the framework of our Constitution kept in mind, that any candidate would have to define his brand of Christianity as being Christian enough. I would assume that his religious predilections wouldn't affect his decisions as president, but him saying so, doesn't make it so. Still, I realize that this was a speech to reassure evangelicals and with that audience in mind, this was something he had to address.

However, as a Jew, I must say that I feel that issues of faith should be held personally and should not be a subject of discussion in a presidential race. If one follows the teachings of Jesus (and I do) this is more than evidenced by one's behavior; by one's tolerence, attention to the poor and avoidance of war. If you don't walk the walk then the talk is worthless.

As this race progresses, the true Christians are emerging, as shown by consistant behaviors that attest to those principles listed above and by the manner in which they conduct themselves during this campaign. Harry Truman once warned people to beware of Bible thumpers and I think that this notion has played itself out too many times to be considered anything but self-evident.
Obama '08

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Coy Reese, Shady Spring, West Virginia — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 18:23:29 GMT

Flatts has it 100% correct. Additionally Mitt Romney is an empty suit..no substance...no core beliefs...nothing. When right wing hate filled infidels like Pat Robertson..embrace the totally corrupt and morally bankrupt Rudolph Guilliani, you gotta know this "evangelical" claptrap has bitten these guys in the ass.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Mary, Birmingham, Alabama — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 18:27:45 GMT

I can not believe they (all the major news outlets besides the local news channels) put Romney's speech on live when there was a live news conference from Omaha about a real tragedy. If Romney was so sensitive and wonderful would have waited. This speech belongs on the regular political banter not to pre-empt real news. So now do all the candidates get to pre-empt real news and make some "important" speech on all the news networks at the same time?
Real news of real tragedy should take precedence over political nonsense!!

So what he is Mormon big deal!!! Should all the evangelical candidates be worried that they won't be voted for because their extra devout belief? Should all the candidates declare that their religious leaders will not influence their decisions? Should we be worried if they don't clarify how their religious leaders will or will not influence them?

Romney is just one of many republican candidates. This is not important enough to be live news!!!

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Richard, Washington State — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 18:54:42 GMT

disgusted:

Chris Matthews would probably be delighted to believe he has the influence you credit him with.

He swayed the 2000 election to Bush by criticizing Gore? Get a grip! He's not that consequential, except maybe in your own mind.

Frankly, reading your posts about him, and considering where you are usually coming from, you're actually increasing my estimation of the guy.

If he pisses you off that badly, he has to have something going for him and I might just give him another look. And if he's a closet Republican, all the better.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

AB — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 18:57:50 GMT

You can't help but noticing all those Obama's supporters crying. We told you guys many times, go home and be with your family. If you choose to stay here, at least, talk issues, don't learn from Obama, speech only.
AMERICA CAN NOT AFFORD TO HAVE A SPEECH GUY. WE NEED A REAL LEADER TO CLEAN THE MASS. OBAMA IS A GOOD APPRENTICE, NO CHANCE TO WIN.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Richard, Washington State — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 18:57:54 GMT

I am having a hard time coming to grips with the idea that Democrats employ dirty campaign tricks.

I'm going to remain in denial because the prospect of rocking my world by even contemplating the possibility is just too much to take in.

Is it really true?

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Randy, BibleBelt, Mississippi — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 19:10:07 GMT

I respect Romney for not being willing to explain the tenets of his faith. He has a right not to. I can't stand that folks are try to use his religion against him. Saying he is not a christian is a fallacy, yet accurate inasmuch as those who claim he's not do so on the grounds of the Nicene Creed, or so I've heard. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, which he belongs to does not adhere to the Nicene Creed per se, and any church that doesn't in their opinion is not christian. The LDS do, however, accept Christ as their savior and their church teaches it's members to strive to live "christ-like" lives and to put family first, and to do good to all men, ergo, I would say that makes them more Christian then most.
A lot of this hatred of Mormons comes from evangelical church leaders that teach their congregations to hate Mormons, and fill them with disinformation about the LDS's beliefs.
Also, from a misinformed media that associates splinter groups of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints with the actual Mormons; said splinter groups having only the Book of Mormon in common with the LDS. As one born and raised in the bible belt, and evengelical churches, I've seen/heard/experienced these teachings of
ill-informed/mis-informed ministers.
I was raised and went to school with Mormons. They, generally, are honest hard-working, god fearing people, but like most faiths they do have some bad seeds.
Why do they do it? I don't know, but I speculate that as far as the ministry is concerned it has more to do with the almighty $$$ than anything else. When churches lose members to the LDS church they also lose tithes and offerings, which means these ministers don't make as much. By the way, Mormons don't have a paid ministry. as for the media, laziness and a good headline story.
www.mormon.org
A little research would tell anyone the character of these people.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Cedric, Charlotte — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 19:39:07 GMT

@ diane:

"it is a pity that religion has intruded into state so much now. It use to be in our history that there was a separation of church and state that has been breached to the point that religion is dictating our politics now... He lived in a largely muslim country in the 1960s. this was before radical and zealot ideas took hold. It was a time when religion was not so demanding whether christian or muslim or whatever.... the suspicion for Romney just shows how much religion has taken over our politics and our government and this is troubling because of the separation of church and state and what our founding fathers wanted."

I disagree. Religion has always been accepted in the public sphere. Religion didn't change- people did. People are becoming less religious and therefore more hostile to religion. The faith that you used to be able to assume the person next to you had is no longer a given, or even a plurality of the population. We have changed as a country. Very few people expressed the lament of people like Diane, I dare say, evan as late as the mid 90's. Times are a' changin. Religion is no more invasive or intrusive than it was 40 years ago. It's just that so many more people were religious that we never argued about it.

This country is in the process of redefining what it believes and stands for at its very core, a process that probably started in the vietnam era, and in my view this process has resulted in very little outside of equal rights for blacks and women, and tolerance of gay people (Full disclosure: I do not view gay marriage as an advance, though I do support civil unions.) This country is less religious, more hedonistic, more self-centered, less compassionate, more corrupt than it's ever been. We only have our place in the world because as scary as it sounds, almost every other country is worse than us. I honestly believe it is our religious people, the "salt of the earth," as Christ called them, that gives us the tiny edge we have on others. As a Christian I obviously view things from a religous perspective, and I quote Christ's words to inform the uninformed about how we see things; Christ says in Matt: 5:13 of his followers that "Ye are the salt of the earth: but and if the salt be once unsavory, what can be salted there with? It is thence forth good for nothing, but to be cast out..."

So this is why Christians must be at least insistent, though hopefully not annoying. The founder of the religion says be who you are and if you ain't gone be it, then you're of no use. Christians, and I would argue, others of faith, are the salt in an increasingly bland melting pot of atheism, secular humanism, and social depravity.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 19:42:41 GMT

J:

I can tell you, for myself, if I have to resort to second choice, that choice will not be Obama. It would be either Edwards or Hillary or, if he manages to clear 15%, Richardson.

I really support Biden and I truly believe that he is the best candidate out there on both sides of the aisle. I have never caucused before because I have never really felt that it mattered much who got the nomination because I would vote for them over the Republican nominee. If he doesn't clear 15%, it honestly won't much matter to me who wins. I'm not saying that they are all the same, just that I don't have a strong enough feeling about the others to say right now that I would support them.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

pat huntington ny — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 19:51:10 GMT

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Neil Trengove, Duck Creek Village, UT — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 20:00:41 GMT

Now that Mitt Romney has had his say, when are we going to hear from the Catholics? After all what other church in the history of the world has paid out hundreds of millions of dollars to settle child molestation charges?

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

oldgeek, Augusta, GA — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 20:14:12 GMT

I would have been impressed if he just flat out said that someones religion is their own personal business and not that of the Government. There are some that do not embrace his religion and others that do not embrace Jesus.

He should have taken the real high road instead of pander to Christian right

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

John Newport Beach, CA — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 20:20:29 GMT

Randy
I echo your feelings as well. Although I am not a member of the LDS faith I have grown up and around many LDS families throughout my life. I find it amazing that hatred of Mormons is so strong. The ironic part is that the majority of this religious bigotry is coming from so called "Christians" and "Evangelicals" who seemed to have forgotten the Golden Rule, how "Christian" of them. Mormons for what I have seen have strong beliefs about family, marriage and being good people and doing good to others. What could be so evil about those things? If you hate Mormons get to know one and you probably will take a different opinion of them. I agree that the misconceptions that are out there about Mormons comes from ministers and preachers whose livelihood is tied to the wallets of their parishioners. Why would they (Ministers) say anything good about any other faith. They need the $$$ to live. As far as the speech is concerned Mitt was eloquent, sincere and he earned my vote. If more people in America acted and treated others the way Mormons do, then yes the World would be better off.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Chelse C. — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 21:07:36 GMT

Lookie here everyone...hillaryclinton.com the winner

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Len Franklin, Gloucester MA — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 21:18:27 GMT

Mitt Romney was governor of Massachusettes when they started the Big Dig. Remember, the huge tunnel under Boston that was crumbling down on drivers? He signed off on the shoddy work and cheap inferior materials. This is not who we need as president.

-----------

Sure. Lets talk about the Big Dig. It was offically conceived by Mike Dukakis (D-MA) in 1982. Being that is was a federal project, mostly sponsered by Masschusetts senators Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and Paul Tsongas (D-MA). The original federal bill was approved by congress and vetoed by Republican Ronald Reagan (R-CA). The veto was overroad by the Democratically controlled congress.

Romney of course came in on the backside of this disaster in 2003 when he became governor and finally got something completed so that is was at least a little usable by the public.

So, pat huntington ny, your statement that Romeny "started the big dig" is an absolute lie. Its more like he finished the big dig. And the big dig is just more proof you shouldn't let Democrats do difficult jobs.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Fact/AZ — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 21:27:49 GMT

Two little boys about to have a contest,,""Who could piss highest on a wall>>> A female voice stepped in and stated the rules ""no hands"". Reflecting to Hill billy report, Call the local Corps of Engineers office to order flood control water measuring poles!!!

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Mary, Cedar Rapids — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 21:40:18 GMT

Michigan's primary is listed here? Ok, is there no warning attached to this, that on the Dem ticket there are only three people who chose not to do what they were asked and take their names OFF the ballot? In alpha order, Clinton, Dodd, Kucinich. Write-ins will be ignored. Get it?

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Mary, Cedar Rapids — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 21:46:03 GMT

Sam, if you want to assume Obama meant HRC because your conscience is guilty, be my guest...obviously most would agree so you're in a safe majority.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Jennifer Malford, Tulsa OK — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 21:50:38 GMT

\\Please stop using "JFK" and "Romney" in the same paragraph. The only thing they have in common is Massachusetts.\\

Romney is an accomplished business man, olympic organizer, successful executive and governor. He is a devoted husband, father, and is a man of faith. Kennedy got elected to President because of connections his bootlegging father had, managed to get his fast PT boat sunk by a slow moving cruiser, and became Bill Clinton's idol by playing around with Marilyn.

You're right, those two have little in common.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Sky — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 22:09:02 GMT

All this ridiculous comments about religion doing a republican in, and people bringing down Romney because of his religion. If any of you listend to his speech, I would think that would explain it all. So, in my own opinion Romney stands a very good chance, maybe people should stop thinking they know more about a religion they never practiced.
Further more, it makes no sense why you would go to an anti mormon site to find out about Mormonism? They don't know anything, and for those that say they where LDS, and have gone away from it, and bash it, There just pissed off because they either got excommnicated, stopped going to church because someone made them angry, or they felt ignored by the pepople. That dosn't make Mormaism un Christian just because some people don't live by it to the fullist.
If the person has values and lives by them thats all that should matter. Not the opinon of an angry minister.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

avraam jack, alexandria,va — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 22:13:46 GMT

CLINTON SLEAZE FATIGUE WILL INVIGORATE GOP, DISPIRIT DEMOCRATS AND SINK DEMOCRATIC TICKET
.
It is possible that Senator Clinton is the best candidate. However, even though many may like the policies that Senator Clinton proposes, they should also consider her record, just as Senator Clinton insists.
.
The last Clinton Administration, when faced with the fact that protection rackets where assaulting, torturing and murdering people with poison and radiation, chose to avoid its responsibilities to incarcerate the criminals and to protect the citizenry.
.
Instead, they made a deal with the criminal gang stalker protection rackets to leave them alone and to consequently abandon the citizenry.
.
Do we want a President who sells out the citizenry for votes?
.
Do we want a President who sends a \"crime does pay\" message to society?
.
Would you vote for a President who signed nonaggression deals with the KKKlan or the Nazi party? Gangs that torture with poison and radiation are much like the KKKlan and Nazi Party.
.
We do not need a sellout President. We need a principled leader President.
.
If you are one of the few who do not know what the above refers to, do a web search for "gang stalking" to see the tip of the dirtberg. Please do it before you decide to reply to my post. Here let me make it easy for you: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22gang+stalking%22.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

chris schouten, salt lake city utah. — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 22:23:04 GMT

Nics comment of if he becomes pres, he will put his hand on a bible, what one in most hotels accross the nation or the ones found in utah motels replaced by the new rev NIV book of morman.. your call

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Marty CR Iowa — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 22:23:59 GMT

Remember the "Last man Standing" will be John McCain we all know where he stands. For a united America. He doesn't preach to us about religion, he tells it like it is, Lets fix things for all.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Ed Deitz — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 22:25:21 GMT

Thank you Sean for printing JFK's eloquent speech; would that we lived in a time when church/state separation was the ideal. Instead Mitt says "hey fundies, I'm just like you! Vote for me and I'll impose religion on everyone!"

Yes, Mitt Romney is no Jack Kennedy. JFK was one of the wisest leaders we ever had. Mitt is a tool, an idiot, a shameless opportunist, and a plastic wind-up toy. He was shocked to wake up in the wrong century, and doesn't believe a word out of his own mouth. Jennifer, what planet are you on?

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

William Edick — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 22:39:40 GMT

We separate church and state affairs in this country, and for good reason. No religion should dictate to the state nor should the state interfere with the free practice of religion.
I live in Utah. I see the church of the LDS controlling every aspect of law,community and much more, that most Americans have no idea excist.
If Utah is an example of how the Mormans will not interfer with affaires of the state, I will never vote for one for commander and chief of my country.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Jan, Toledo OH — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 22:54:19 GMT

Chris Matthews is back at it again today. Bashing Hillary - praising Obama. Is this unbiased reporting?
I don't think so.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

Marbw — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 23:46:41 GMT

Who referred to Barack Obama months ago as naive/inexperienced(aka boy)? The supporters are still spewing that same 'naive' garbage everywhere. Who started a 'whisper' campaign in order to garner black votes( by using surrogates to push the 'Is he black enough?' or 'Is he acting white?'). Whose supporters are playing the race card by attacking Oprah or spreading the false smear email.

UPDATE: The email address for the sender is associated online with the name "Judy Rose," and there's a Judy Rose as one of 250 members of Clinton's Iowa Women's Leadership Council.(b smith)

---Judy Rose, a Clinton coordinator in Jones County, Iowa, forwarded the e-mail without comment to eight people, according to a copy of the e-mail obtained by The Associated Press. One of the recipients was a Clinton staffer and another was a Democratic Party official in Jones County.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

A. Glenn Las Vegas, Nevada — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 04:39:45 GMT

Chuck from San Diego said," If Mittie is going to run as a religous nut, any and all questions on that religion are fair, including asking him if he believes his underwear are magic." This is the kind of narrow-minded, bigoted religious prejudice that belongs in the 19th century not in21st. century America. Chuck, go back to your trailer and practice whistling through your one tooth. Try reading a book that has a hard cover, no pictures and more than 12 pages for a change.

First thoughts: Mitt's big day

JJ Jax, Fl — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 14:55:36 GMT

Pat, if she'll attack him on his kindergarten record, it isn't impossible to believe she'll attack him on his faith...