The battle for New Hampshire

Sarah — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 14:44:05 GMT

I love when Mark Penn has to eat his words.

The American people need to realize that a candidate will lead the country in the same way that they run a campaign. Let's take a look at who is running a negative, divisive, secretive campaign and decide if that is what we want in the White House.

The battle for New Hampshire

Bee, NH — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 14:50:44 GMT

Like i have said in the past, pay attention to the early states poll numbers. The new gallop poll pretty much sum up how ineffective Clinton’s negative attack on Obama has been.

If Obama can do well in IA and NH, the Clinton’s campaign should just forget about South Carolina and Nevada.

The battle for New Hampshire

Ron, TX — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 14:50:52 GMT

It makes me so happy when I see Clinton falling and Obama rising. It means America has hope again, hope to be a better nation, and hope for REAL CHANGE in one year... If Clinton is elected, on January 21, 2009, the world will look and feel pretty much the same. Another Clinton in office, another day like any other. If Obama is elected, the world will look and feel like a whole new place with an America that can -lead-. We must send a message of REAL CHANGE to the world. We won't settle for war-hawk diplomacy and typical replays of our current foreign affairs. We -desperately need change- and Obama can make it happen.

The battle for New Hampshire

Jennifer Hunt, Spokane, Washington — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 14:53:56 GMT

Oh the AGONY!
I can't vote for Hillary.She is just not Just towards the poor.The system is still too gross.Full of underhanded duplicities and exasperations.Yeah, people make their choices...right.

I can't vote for obama. I'm a real christian.That's almost sacreligious for me. But I'm sure there are muslims who would admit they are not at all exactly unlike me....They just wouldn't encourage or condone voting for a christian....well if they are actually that peaceful about it.

And DANG IT!I thought Edwards was darn nice looking.I know...some vote for obama because they think he is cute,but I have to differ.

Now I'm left with the GOP
Lets see..
A morman... for CRYING OUT LOUD!
For the record...MORMANS ARE NOT CHRISTIANS!!

OK...then theres a new yorker.You know he's about the bling bling. But does he share? I'm a christian.If you don't like to share the bling bling.NO!

McCain...I still don't get what happened.Now if its about that pesky oil issue in Iraq.I have no problem rescuing us both.Just give the stuff to me and I'll cash in! The church needs their cut to help people in Gods will and I despise a mundane lifestyle.I feel No guilt!:))))

The battle for New Hampshire

Obama Hater — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 14:56:35 GMT

If Obama is the Dem nominee, then expect another republican administration. Vote Hillary!

The battle for New Hampshire

Paul, NY, NY — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 14:56:57 GMT

And yesterday's CNN/Wash Post poll had Hillary with a double digit lead over Obama in NH.

Just goes to show you can pick and choose whatever poll makes you feel better. No one's going to know for sure until Jan 3.

HILLARY '08

The battle for New Hampshire

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:09:38 GMT

Latest NH polls show that Hillary is resurgent;

ARG 12/16-19 Clinton-38 Obama-24

USA 12/10-19 Clinton-32 Obama-32

RAS 12/18 Clinton-31 Obama-28

CNN 12/13-17 Clinton-38 Obama-26

RCP average Clinton-34.0 Obama-27.8 Clinton by 6.2

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/nh/new_hampshire_democratic_primary-194.html#polls

Van

The battle for New Hampshire

Paul, NY, NY — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:10:23 GMT

For accuracy sake, it was the CNN/WMUR poll that has Hillary up by 12 points in NH, NOT CNN/Wash Post.

My bad.

In all other polls she has a commanding lead over Obama in NH - this is the FIRST and ONLY poll to show a dead heat. Just goes to show these polls are as volatile as some of the moods on this board.

We'll just have to wait and see....

The battle for New Hampshire

Kelly (from Pittsburgh) — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:19:57 GMT

Jennifer Hunt- I'm not sure whether you are uninformed or being sarcastic here but here is the facts about Obama. He is a member of the United Church of Christ.

He is not nor has ever been a Muslim. His father is a muslim, but he has had very little contact with him. He spent four of his childhood years in Indonesia where he attended a secular public school (not a Madrassa).

Please do not spread false rumors about Obama's faith. I am a christian as well, and if you are "real christian" you wouldn't be so judgemental of people who are different than you. That is not what Jesus Christ taught his disciples. Think about it.

The battle for New Hampshire

Dean, Waterbury, CT — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:20:42 GMT

Another biased report... Why don't you mention the other polls: Opinion Dynamics, ARG, Suffolk which have Hillary up substantially in New Hampshire? You got it!

Just go to the Realclearpolitics website and they can help you out. God, the bias never ends.

How about a mention or two of the Survey Usa polls which show Clinton in a much stronger overall general election fight with the Republican potential nominees than Saint Barack. Nary a word about it.

You got it!!

The battle for New Hampshire

NBB — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:20:47 GMT

VOTE HILLARY,,,,SHE IS WHAT WE NEED.

The battle for New Hampshire

Gary Schear, Bozeman Montana — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:23:53 GMT

Frankly I am done with the current President, I am done with the President before him and I am done with the current presidents Daddy. I Don't even want to deal with the current Presidents predecessors Wife taking over for the current president whose brother couldn't run for the job as planned due to the amazing failure of his brother the current President as compared to their fathers performance as President before he lost to the current Democratic front runners husband.
When you've lost your way, at some point you have nothing to lose in choosing another direction.
These people have had their chance for the past 20 years. They do not need 8 more.
We can do better.
Change NOW!
Change for the sake of Change!

The battle for New Hampshire

Jesse, Burnsville, MN — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:24:31 GMT

Jennifer, nobody gives a damn if you're a Christian. Jesus wasn't in politics and Christianity shouldn't be either!

Someone could tell you that they're going to take all of your rights away and you would still vote for them if they banged the bible enough. Moron

The battle for New Hampshire

ace p washington, d.c. — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:24:33 GMT

jennifer, obama is not a muslim. he has been a christian for at least 20 years. you have a need to believe he is a muslim. the time he has been a christian is a proven fact. you can check on this, but have a need not to.

if you really wanted to know the truth about obama's religous belief you would check in to it. for some reason you need to find a reason to disguise your real reason for not voting for him.

it is o.k. not to support obama. my first choice is biden and still wish he could break through, but msm isn't going to allow that.

i have viewed so many of your post. you have a need to believe this viscious lie about this man. i just wonder what your real reason for dislike of him is because it isn't that he is a muslim. he surely is not that.

why don't you reveal your actual reason for not liking obama and stop saying it is because he is a muslim. because that is far from the truth.

The battle for New Hampshire

Kristi, Cedar Rapids, IA — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:28:26 GMT

How a candidate runs their campaign tells you a lot about how they will run the country. We've seen how Clinton has run her campaign - negative and dirty.

How does Obama run his?

"Obama runs tight campaign ship"

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1207/7508.html

The battle for New Hampshire

CE, Wisconsin — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:28:41 GMT

Jennifer,

Enuff already! Obama is a Christian and a Member
of the United Church of Christ. The same church
in Chicago where my wife was baptised and my
kids attended Sunday School. Even Fox News disputes
the contention that he is not Christian.

The battle for New Hampshire

CE, Wisconsin — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:30:49 GMT

The battle for New Hampshire

Sierra, SF — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:36:02 GMT

This is the transcript from last night's Anderson Cooper's Raw Politics
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0712/20/acd.01.html

In it the Clinton camp was accused of using the 'race card'

From CNN Raw politics for 12/20/07:

'... want to read you something that "TIME" magazine's
editor at large mentioned to "The Washington Post,"
Mark Halperin. He said: "She's just held to a
different standard in every respect. The press rooted
for Obama to go negative. When he did, he was
applauded. When she does it, it's treated as this huge
violation of propriety. It's not a level playing
field."

JENNIFER DONAHUE, SENIOR ADVISER FOR POLITICAL
AFFAIRS, NEW HAMPSHIRE INSTITUTE OF POLITICS AT SAINT
ANSELM COLLEGE: Well, they're doing it in an entirely
different way.

When Barack Obama went negative on Hillary Clinton, he
did it after Edwards did, first of all,. He grilled it
and got it ready. And then Obama flipped it, and he
basically did it in a way that was policy-based,
issue-based.

What Kerry did the other day and what happened last
week on the drug issue with Shaheen, and, moreover,
with Mark Penn, who then kept repeating it over and
over and over, they're playing the race card. This is
not some small thing where they're saying, like Gore
did about Bradley in 2000, he wanted to raise the
retirement age, when, in fact, he didn't.

This is the race card. They're attacking his race. And
I think it's really above the pale. Voters here don't
like it.

COOPER: David Gergen, do you agree with that?

GERGEN: No, I don't, I don't think they're playing the
race card at all. He happens to be black. He also
happens to be a very major, dramatic candidate.

(CROSSTALK)

DONAHUE: You don't think that saying that -- that --
that selling drugs, and that, did he buy it, did he
use them, did he sell them, has anything to do with
race?

GERGEN: Wait a minute. We went through a whole
campaign back in 2000 in New Hampshire about George
Bush and drugs, and he happened to be white.

We have had various other candidates who happened to
have been white, there have been questions raised
about their drug usage. I do think, when you start
using the word cocaine, as Mark Penn did, it does
suggest it, and I think it can have some
reverberations.

But I think it is unfair to say that they're playing
the race card. I do think they have been clumsy, but I
think they're -- playing the race card suggests it's
racially motivated and, in effect, it's racist. I
think that's unfair to them.

COOPER: John King?

DONAHUE: Well, I guess -- if I could just really
quickly...

KING: Anderson, I'm getting e-mails -- as we're having
this discussion, Anderson -- as we're having this
discussion, I'm getting e-mails from Democrats. One of
them suggests, go to the Web site
hillaryattacksbarackobama.com. They say that is an
Obama Web site. I can't tell you if that is true or
not.

But this is the kind of thing that happens at this
point in a campaign. The Clinton campaign would also
point out, very early in the campaign, an Obama press
release said, "Hillary Clinton D-Punjab," making fun
of the money she was raising from Indian sources that
the Obama campaign was questioning. Senator Obama had
to apologize for that.

So, there's a lot of this from all camps in the
campaign, some of it authorized, some of it not, some
of it done by kids who go overboard in their first
campaign, especially their first presidential
campaign.

But does it matter in electing a president? I don't
really know. It's not much about the economy. It's not
much about what you do in Iraq.

(CROSSTALK)

KING: But it does set the tone of the campaign.

COOPER: Jennifer?

DONAHUE: Anderson, can I just jump in? Because I want
to hear David's perspective.

I mean, would you also say, then, that Huckabee is not
playing the religion card against Romney?

GERGEN: No, I think he is playing the religion card.

But that's -- that's said in a positive way. But I
think, when you say somebody is playing a race card,
you suggest that they have racist motives and they
have a racist quality to them.

DONAHUE: I don't -- well, I guess I don't...

GERGEN: I think that's unfair to the people involved.

DONAHUE: They're trying to -- but don't you think -- I
don't mean that Hillary Clinton is trying to play a
race card, but I think that they're bringing up the
issue of fear of African-Americans in a way that is
either intentional or not, but is real....;

Is this Clinton campaign using the 'race card' ?
Is the Clinton campaign 'too ethical' to do so ?

Does anyone remember the 'Hope Fund' dust up ?
Remember all the one line posts with Clinton 'talking points' ?
Compare those posts to the posts we're getting now about 'cocaine' and 'Obama is a muslim'

Any similarities ?
Are they produced by the Clinton campaign in both instances ?

J'accuse !!

The battle for New Hampshire

Shadow, Hamden, CT — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:37:39 GMT

Yes, now weeks after the coverage of a McCain comeback began (actually, those stories began sporadically popping up in SEPTEMBER), the public has decided to give him a second look, now finally resulting in a poll number increase.

Only problem is, pundits are supposed to report the news, not influence it.

This is one independent voter who sees the Republican establishment behind the scenes jumping back to McCain from Giuliani, resulting from the scare of potentially seeing Huckabee win the nomination; there is nothing remotely grassroots about a storyline forced through the national press, so I ask the punditry to stop insulting our intelligence and drops the false pretense.

The battle for New Hampshire

Travis, Louisville, Ky. — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:47:05 GMT

Polls are nothing more than horserace story editors' fluff pieces. Remember, Kerry was pretty much owning Bush in all the debates, polls, and exit polls and ended up losing.

As far as all this silliness in regards to another Clinton in office another day as planned - there's been one Clinton in office.

There's been at least 2 senators named Dodd, both ran for President, there's been 2 presidents in the Bush family... well 3 if you consider Nathaniel Pierce, direct descendant of Daddy Bush, and I can bet you all tons of money that when the Republicans lose this election Jeb will be their nominee within the next few cycles.

Only problem, Pierce was hated by his party and didn't even win re-election for his own party.

Daddy Bush ruined the economy and entered into 2 needless wars.

W... this biggest disaster in American politics since, well Nathaniel Pierce, 3 needless wars, ruined economy, and oh look... now even Republicans are saying he's full of the same S#$&% he's been spewing from the beginning.

How are those CIA tapes coming along Cheney and Bush? Oh, wait, Gonzalez is getting strapped with most of the blame, because he's you know... disgraced and everything.

Then we have the Kennedys

The battle for New Hampshire

Abraham, SF, CA — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:48:07 GMT

I agree with Paul, these polls are all over the map. They do not poll people with cell phone and the polls are done with DEMS only, how about the INDEPENDENTS.
Jan 3 will be the judgement day for each candidate,

The battle for New Hampshire

ace p washington, d.c. — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:51:09 GMT

paul, you are wrong. most recent polls are showing them in a statistical tie. cnn network/ted turner is pro hillary. abc/wallstreet is pro hillary. anything owned by rupert murdoch or the hearst's is going to be pro hillary.

msnbc's chris matthews is not capable of unbias when it comes to the clinton's. he has a personal hate for them. his ranting on morning joe was evidence of that.

what i am saying is this. you can see chris matthews agenda. he is overt with it, but most of media tries to be less obvious with their agenda.

we can't trust polling. hillary and obama are in a dead heat tie in n.h. in iowa i think that there is a three way tie. i think john edwards is a lot stronger than polls indicate and is the inevitable second place finisher. the question is who is going to be first or third? hillary or obama?

if edwards or biden had more private campaign funds we could have had a 5 way tie, possibly.

no one can choose polls as evidence of what is going to actually happen. msnbc is pro obama. all the media has an agenda for who they would like elected that will best represent their interest.

it is actually unfortunate that someone like dodd (filibustered congress over fisa) a true leader with experience, biden a foreign policy expert(look at his record. no one can touch it), or richardson who was energy secretary, , diplomatic emissary for the u.s., state gonernor and more aren't even given the time of day by the media.

polls mean nothing. research is of value, always. truth is of value, always, transparency is of values, always. ethics and morals are of value, always.

i agree with the post that as a candidate runs their campaign is very much indicative of the type of white house they will have.

that is what american presidential political history has shown time and again. so the question is what are we seeing from the candidates? what type of character or lack of character are the candidates revealing to us? on both sides.

The battle for New Hampshire

Dan, Detroit MI — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:52:52 GMT

Jennifer, Obama is a Christian.

The battle for New Hampshire

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:54:30 GMT

Strategic Vision republican pollsters (Previous poll in parens)with increase/decrease from previous poll.

Obama-30(33)-3 Clinton-27(25)+2Edwards-27(24)+3

Obama down three, Clinton up 2 and Edwards up 3

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/ia/iowa_democratic_caucus-208.html#polls

Van

The battle for New Hampshire

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:58:52 GMT

Van: I call that polling variability; Hillary is hardly resurgent. The Iowa victory for Obama will give him a ten point boost and will concommitantly eat at Hillary's support. Their own internals are undoubtedly not good and are the source for all the surrogate nastiness that Team Hillary is unleashing. After wins in Iowa and NH, SC will fall for Obama as well. My crystal ball doesn't go beyond those three states but I don't think that these victories will necessarily sew up the nomination for Obama. In fact, I suspect that there will be a battle royale for the Super Tuesday states. You're a smart guy Van, despite your pro-Hillary stance, I know that I'm not telling you anything that you don't know.
Obama '08

The battle for New Hampshire

MK,MO — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:05:11 GMT

mark penn and the corrupt clinton machine are the only reason the polls show hillary in contention, what are you bogus poll regurgitators going to do after the vote shows the polls were meaningless and a complete farce? nobody but the beltway 'good ol boy' eletist's and a few deranged feminazi's want hillary, you know who you are, most voters want change and to get away from politics as usual in d.c., and that my friends disqualifies the mrs. (bush lite) clinton, sorry

The battle for New Hampshire

David new york — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:08:44 GMT

What is becoming clear is how biased nbc,msnbc is against the Clintons. Obama can not and should not win and as much as the media tries it make it happen it will not...How is this for change Present..Obama is no different from any other politican...change to what..at least the Clintons have proved that they can get the job done and that is why Hillary will get my vote.

The battle for New Hampshire

Jennifer Hunt, Spokane, Washington — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:14:20 GMT

:))))))))) :))))))))) :))))))))))) :)))))))))) :))))))))

Hey, I'm not the one that did what obama and their crew did.Their bad.I'm just surfing off the results!Their BAD NOT mine.As a real christian I can and should make corrections.Knowledge is power.Power to the people!Understanding correctly after that mess is a good thing.Don't HATE!Just don't hate!

The battle for New Hampshire

Sean — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:17:37 GMT

Funny how Bee was slamming the USA Today poll the other day (when Hillary was ahead), but doesn't knock this one.

The battle for New Hampshire

Sean — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:18:38 GMT

Agree with you "Obama Hater" well don't hate him, but do agree if he is nominee, Republicans will win the administration.

The battle for New Hampshire

MK,MO — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:30:47 GMT

all you cats whimpering about how the media is biased against clinton one day, obama the next, if you look back over the coarse of this election cycle the press have been consistently pro clinton and pro obama because they both play the game, edwards is the only dem candidate that the media despises, he doesn’t command the tabloidish qualities required to keep the media entertained, and doesn’t bow down to the powers that be, and quite frankly scares hell out of the corporate interests that own the media and the government, good enough reason to vote for him I would say

The battle for New Hampshire

Windy City Girl, Chicago IL — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:39:27 GMT

Oh Wow. Jennifer, I know you are being sarcatic. In your post you put every funky thing people have been saying about the contenders. Maybe if the rest of the posters tuned in to news about all the candidates they would see the joke.

Anyways, you forgot Guiliani, and since you are a Christian you can not possibly endorse a cross-dressing adulterer either.

Besides that, what I find funny is that everyone is posting about MSNBC being against the Clintons. Just a few months ago I was upset because I thought Chris Matthews for sure was way too much Hillary Clinton, and I thought oh, great....here we go again....just like he was with Bush. But, it is not MSNBC's fault with the way she is behaving, and her behavior is creating news and they are reporting it. I personally love it- GO OBAMA!

Oh, and Jennifer, what does being a Christian tell you about Huckabee? I know he is a good pastor and everything, but what about the rapist/murderer he let walk while he ignored the pleas of his victims? What do you think of his parenting skills (his son and a friend found a stray dog and hung and mutilated it)?

I will say this, Mormons can be Christians if they want to be. If Christians are willing to believe that a virgin got knocked up and gave birth to the Son of God who was able to come back from the dead and directly ascend into heaven (don't forget the magic he was able to perform), then why shouldn't the garden of Eden be in the American midwest, and why is it so improbable to believe that Jesus could have came to America- he healed the terminally ill for God's sake! My problem with Mormonism is that it is a rascist faith, with an anti-African-American past and that they believe Native Americans killed Jesus. Wouldn't Jesus have killed off the Native Americans with his western infectious diseases before they had the chance to do something like that?

The battle for New Hampshire

Paul, NY, NY — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:41:15 GMT

ace p washington, dc

Excellent post. The point I was trying to make was how crazy all of the polls are right now - every day it's a different poll - it's all in who's doing the polling and how and what type of questions they ask.

While I guess we could use them as some type of barometer, but I'm just getting to the point of dismissing them all and waiting for the results on January 3rd like everyone else.

Happy Holidays!

The battle for New Hampshire

Daniel, NY — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:50:31 GMT

Actually, an ARG poll yesterday has McCain and Romney completely tied completely: http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2007/12/mccain-on-fire-arg-comes-out-with.html

And in TRULY shocking Senate news, Sununu is leading Shaheen in a Senate poll: http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2007/12/morning-polls-has-sununu-made-comeback.html

The battle for New Hampshire

Fred C Dobbs — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:51:10 GMT

Hardball's Matthews almost had a heart attack going after Hillary last night, the spittle was rolling down his chin. Ugly, very ugly.
Matthew's has high praise when Obama or Edwards attacks Clinton. However, when she counter punches it's a different story.
It's a Tale of Two Standards on Hardball. I want hard line conservatives out of the White House.
HR Clinton is a proven winner.

The battle for New Hampshire

Believer, Durham, NC — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:56:55 GMT

Jennifer Hunt - you say "Don't HATE", but looking through all the other posts you have you do nothing but spread hate. Yet in your mind you are the true Christian and everyone isn't. Didn't Christ teach something about hypocrisy?

The battle for New Hampshire

Rick,ky — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 17:04:28 GMT

The battle for New Hampshire

Jennifer Hunt, Spokane, Washington — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 17:21:26 GMT

What are you talking about?I don't hate people.I hate certain teachings that are false.Don't hate!
Some of you are big meanies:))e and you know it.You just don't want to be told the diffrence because you only like to hear about religion if it serves your self centered agenda not the truth itself.The truth shall set us free...

The battle for New Hampshire

MBW , Tempe AZ — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 17:40:49 GMT

I like Hillary just fine, but if she's elected, it will mean up TWENTY-FOUR straight years of presidents named Bush or Clinton.

Enough of the royal families! Let's show the world that we are NOT a stagnating, has-been superpower.

The battle for New Hampshire

Soji, Lawrenceville, GA — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 17:47:27 GMT

Obama is the man. Our only hope in this period of despair.........................................
I'm sure a lot of American's like me are tired of the same old Clinton politics that will bring us to deadlocked congress and several investigations allegations of corrupt practices etc. It's time for unity, not division. Another Clinton Presidency will divide us further, we need a unifier. Common sense politics of working together towards a common goal. We cannot afford distractions from either party complainining about conspiracy about the other party.
Some of our founders had no experience, but they're intelligent and love this country dearly. That is what we need. A president that genuinely love America and all Americans and desire to bring realistic change to our society.
Hillary is not a uniter and so many republican will refuse to work with her. It will not be different from the Bush Presidency and lack of cooperation from Democrats. Vote Obama, stand for change and let's revive America's glory.
Obama represents common American and that's what we need right now, not a President that will be controlled by Corporate America.

Nobody has experience being an American president, they all learn on the job. Unless a President that had a 2nd term. President George Bush is supposed to have experience in his 2nd term but she how he messed up things more. Huge deficit, Iraq problems, messed up economy to mention a few.
Obama is smart and real....... He represents the emergency of Future America, full of hope and Glory.

The battle for New Hampshire

Fred C Dobbs — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 17:48:36 GMT

Why is it on Hardball that when Clinton responds to Obama attacks she is "destroying" the candidate?
Obama has no experience unless you factor in voting "present" in the Illinois state senate on over 100 occasions.
Is this leadership, voting "present"?

The battle for New Hampshire

Kelly (from Pittsburgh) — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 17:50:41 GMT

Jennifer Hunt, I am having a hard time understanding you. Hope windy city girl is right and this is sarcasim. But if not-what bad thing did Obama do?

As far as the bias arguement. I too used to complain and think that Chris Matthews was pro-Hillary. Now I see it is not bias just coverage. Someone made an excellent distinction the other day. Hillary is giving the media things that are generating negative coverage. I wouldn't say Chris is pro-Obama. The past to nights he sat down in cozy settings and threw soft ball questions to Edwards and McCain. These are the 2 candidates who can keep Obama from being able overtake Hillary. As much as it worries me, I can recognize that every candidate deserves a chance to make their case.

The battle for New Hampshire

Carol Neese, Columbia SC — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:04:31 GMT

I don't want Obama in the White House voting "Present" and too lame to vote a "Yea or Nay!!!!!!! He has NO experience dealing with the tough issues facing this country. Like it or not, Hillary Clinton is NOT responsible for her husband's failures!!!! This country has been hardened by George Bush's harsh, sarcastic and negative rhetoric for so long, we've forgotten how to forgive others and move on! george Bush has lied more than once to all America and we've allowed him to remain President!!! Hillary Clinton is strong, courageous and dedicated to what is best for this country...all the whining in the world won't change the fact that she was hit FIRST with neative remarks and now that she has spoken out and moved forward, people are whining. That Obama had to invoke celebrity fame to make his case is pretty immature and a commentary on his own insecurity. Obama will not survive and be elected. The American people aren't going to vote for someone who amy have charisma over Hillary who is tried and true, intelligent, deidcated and able to think on her own feet and stand toe-to-toe with the leaders of other countries and re-cultivate our respect in this world. And the Republicans...what a joke!

The battle for New Hampshire

sharon Walker, Folsom, CA — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:17:54 GMT

Dear Friends:
God Bless you all but we must know satire is not an afront or hate crime on faith. You may not believe that is the nature of God knowing. In the Bible he speaks of the athiest. One who may have heard but does not see. Your rights are protected in the USA and the world you are an A. Our rights needed to be protected as Christians, Jewish, Arabs and all faiths.
Peace on Earth Good will toward men. Do you hear what I hear. A sun the light, the Lord the light, God almighty night and day. The Creation. The Messiah. I believe.

The battle for New Hampshire

sharon Walker, Folsom, CA — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:18:16 GMT

The battle for New Hampshire

CitizenJ — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:27:30 GMT

I don't want Obama in the White House voting "Present" and too lame to vote a "Yea or Nay!!!!!!!

Carol Neese, Columbia SC (Sent Friday, December 21, 2007 1:04 PM)

Uh, presidents don't vote. Nor do they write legislation because the Constitution prohibits it. So unless the Supreme Court overrules the line-item veto case, then fear not. There will be no legislation coming from the White House.

"Like it or not, Hillary Clinton is NOT responsible for her husband's failures!!!!"

Carol Neese, Columbia SC (Sent Friday, December 21, 2007 1:04 PM)

If she's not responsible for the failures, then Bill needs to stop telling us she is responsible for the successes.

"That Obama had to invoke celebrity fame to make his case is pretty immature and a commentary on his own insecurity."

Carol Neese, Columbia SC (Sent Friday, December 21, 2007 1:04 PM)

You mean celebrity fame like Bill Clinton's? So, are you saying that endorsements are signs of a candidates' insecurities and "immaturity"?

The battle for New Hampshire

ace — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:34:39 GMT

paul, i agree with you whole-heartedly. we can't trust any of the media to give us the straight facts. not t.v., radio, newspapers or magazines.

i will say as an independent, a good majority of us talk, correspond and are really analytical of the race on both sides. i know some folks are poll driven, but if they really want a possibility, here's one.

there will be a few independents that will support hillary because they want hillary to win as a woman. there is nohing with a woman or person of color winning the presidency. that isn't an issue with most independents.

most independents aren't going to support hillary. i am not saying that to be nasty. it is just a truth.

independents have the luxury of not being badgered by not having an established party affiliation. we get to look, listen, watch patterns and can be pretty much objective about what we see. we kind of think of ourselves as a party of sorts that has a big screen with a birds eye view.

we difinitely are the ones who will decide who will win the general election. i know hillary supporters will take this wrongly, but she is seen as very divisive figure amongst most independents.

we see her as a driving force towards partisanship in washington. if the gop base is willing to spend everything they have just to go after her, we think it would be even uglier in washington.

despite what a lot of good people would like to believe, she hasn't worked successfully with a lot of republicans(just a few) and some will not work with her at all. again, i am not saying it as a slam. it is the truth.

if dem's want to find out the truth about bipartisan cooperation with hillary then they need to check out the republican consensus towards her. they loathe hillary and bill.

some dem's want her in to fight with the gop. to indy's that just brings us back to more of the same. haven't we suffered from the dem's and repub's tryig to get one up on the other enough? people seem to act like we are playing a football game.

her dirty and below the belt campaign tactics don't settle well at all with us. we hear her supporters reiterate her speak points about they did it first. that isn't really true either.

she started with the naive and no experience theme.(example-obama said he would talk to iran directly without preconditions. she jumped on that to say he was naive). obama was getting crticism because he wouldn't fire back. he was considered to soft.

when he began to fire back(in october), it was said he was going negative. as hillary began to slip she made a statement,"he started it first," then put her corporate media attack dogs on it.

the truth is john edwards was the first to go on attack, but he never got personal, he never lied, he never put out misinformation on hillary. john stayed to the diferences in ideas, on issues and what he felt needed to be done. pointing out these things aren't negative to us. lies, misinformation and slander are negative to indy's.

obama didn't come at hillary until the debate in which she slipped a little. even then he was not that assertive. he didn't take the gloves off totally. pointing out differences in ideas, issues, policies or how you would try to implement them isn't wrong. those actions are apart of the campaign process.

hillary went negative. she started with misinformation. hillary called obama as naive. that is a direct reference to a person's character.
i know that hillary supporters say obama said she was old. that is not what he said. obama said, "we don't want to return the the politics of the 90's. the media added in the age issue. that is important to note because people get caught up in spin and become apart of the ugliness we see here and all over. people should search for the truth as much as possible.

she keeps moving to points of acceptability to the publics ears.

because it takes independents so long as a rule to make up their minds, we have the chance to watch the campaign process unfold.

we see who is constantly shifting or playing dirty politics. because we haven't decided to support immediately we don't get caught up in the emotional side of not losing to someone else's candidate.

hillary has really damaged herself amongst the independent's the last few weeks with the type of dirty, below the belt and slanderous campaign she has been running. that just reminds us of bush's gop the last race. we don't like that kind of politics at all.

we participate in blog's like this and get accused of all kinds of things because it may be some candidates we won't support or we point out what we see or feel we know.

at the end of each day we are running a tally. i would venture to say that after the iowa caucus the majority of independents will align with a certain candidate with a plan b if their candidate doesn't win.

that plan b will probaly be stay home or vote republican depending on who is the democratic nominee. i will say that the democrats have a few people that we feel make fine candidates, but the wrong choice as nominee will cause the democratic party the majority of the independent vote.

something that will be sorely needed if the dem's are to win the general election. just like dem's and repub's gravitate towards each other so do indy's. we just don't get that much attention. not even on c-span (smile).

we are important. any dem that thinks that there candidate has the independent vote sewn up because a poll may suggest it is fooling themself.

there is one candidate in your party that the majority of indy's will walk away from to the gop or a small percentage will stay at home and the rest would go to the gop.

you dem's need to really consider that.

i expect to get some hateful post's for saying this but it is true. the dem's need us to win the general eection. it would be a shame to force most us to side with the gop. that isn't our first choice.

don't be emotional about this post. it is a fact. some will the majority won't. think about it if you really want the white house, please.

it would be great to see the first woman president as a part of history. a lot of independent women don't think hillary is the right woman.

i was a bill clinton supporter. i voted for him when i was younger. i watched him take the integrity of the white house to a very low level. i watched him sell his soul to corporate america. it was hurtful as a democrat to see. it is well documented. i remember his campaign. the same one he is saying experience count. then he was saying the same thing obama is saying. bill has flip-flopped over the years. he twists the truth. i don't like that. during those years i was willing to over look all of his dire and voted for him a second time. his second term was the end of supporting him for me.

The battle for New Hampshire

Karen, Concord, NH — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:49:53 GMT

Remember, Obama got the endorsement of the very influential Boston Globe. I'm not sure when this latest NH poll was conducted, but that endorsement could have played a role in him drawing even with Clinton. His support has been growing steadily in both Iowa and NH, while Clinton's has been dropping. This is great news for the Obama campaign. Clinton's nastiness with the Billy Shaheen story last week probably also had something to do with her declining poll numbers. People want fair play - and that was so below the belt that many voters here in NH were disgusted. Obama is on his way up, and Clinton is on her way down. 2008 is looking good, Obama fans!!

The battle for New Hampshire

boynLA, LA, CA — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:53:25 GMT

wow - shocker! the NBC family of news networks and websites over-reports the pro-Obama poll. Nevermind the other polls this week that show Clinton with a substantial national lead, a significant lead in NH and even a slight lead in IA.

The battle for New Hampshire

Sarah, Vienna, VA — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 19:11:15 GMT

I tried to post something about an hour ago which has not appeared, so I'll try again!

Wanted to point out that this latest NH poll showing Obama tied with Hillary is in sync with what has been happening the last seven weeks. Ever since Hillary's stumble at the Oct. 30th debate, her campaign has been spiraling downward. Mark Penn & Co. have been in something of a panic mode. Kindergarten-gate, the use of surrogates like Shaheen and Kerrey to do her dirty work, Bill's wild claims, Hillary's nervous cackle, AFSME's misleading fliers, etc. etc. are all overt examples of a campaign coming unglued. Their desperation is showing. And the people in Iowa and NH can see it. That is why her numbers are dropping, and Obama's are rising. Obama is going to win both Iowa and NH - and the nomination!

The battle for New Hampshire

MK, Los Angeles, California — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 19:13:35 GMT

Obama down three, Clinton up 2 and Edwards up 3

Van

Hey Van your so-called "dramatic shift" is all within the poll's margin of error. Without further proof in polls that come out next week (meaning sustained proof of falloff, and I might add that the ABC poll this week from Iowa SHOWED NO FALL OFF IN SUPPORT FOR OBAMA but actually showed him gaining three points from the previous poll), then your + a couple here and minus a couple there comment could be seen as nothing more than "statistical noise" signifying nothing.

The battle for New Hampshire

MK, Los Angeles, California — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 19:22:13 GMT

Hey Obama Hater you should perhaps eat your words that nominating Obama would lead to a Republican President but nominating Clinton would be the reverse. Zogby just came out with a poll today of head to head match ups between the top three Dems and top Repub candidates:

a new Zogby telephone poll shows.

Obama

Romney: Obama leads 53%-35%
Huckabee: Obama leads 47%-42%
Giuliani: Obama leads 48%-39%
McCain: Obama leads 47%-43%
Thompson: Obama leads 52%-36%

Clinton

Romney: Clinton leads 46%-44%
Huckabee: Huckabee leads 48%-43%
Giuliani: Giuliani leads 46%-42%
McCain: McCain leads 49%-42%
Thompson: Clinton leads 48%-42%

Edwards

Romney: Edwards leads 50%-38%
Huckabee: Edwards leads 47%-41%
Giuliani: Giuliani leads 45%-44%
McCain: McCain leads 46%-42%
Thompson: Edwards leads 51%-35%

The performance of the Democratic candidates among independent voters is notable. For instance, Clinton trails Giuliani by one point (43% for Giuliani, 42% for Clinton among independents), but Obama leads Giuliani among independents by a huge 56% to 31% edge. Edwards leads Giuliani, 52% to 38% among independents. Clinton has similar trouble among independents against McCain, in that she trails with 37% support to his 46% support. In a prospective Obama versus McCain match–up among independent voters, Obama leads, 51% to 35%. Edwards and McCain are tied at 42% apiece among independents.

As among independents, Obama is the Democrat moderates like best, but his edge among moderates over Edwards is not nearly as pronounced as with independents. For instance, against McCain, both Edwards and Obama lead, but Clinton loses badly. Obama leads McCain by a 51% to 37% edge, while Edwards leads McCain by a 47% to 41% margin.

Clinton loses to McCain among moderates, with McCain winning 51% and Clinton winning 38%.

In polling stretching back to last year, Zogby International has identified moderates and independents as key voting demographics in the 2008 election cycle.

Obama '08

The battle for New Hampshire

Beth H, Cocoa, FL — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 19:37:15 GMT

Windy City Girl,
I don't think you have got it right about the Mormons believing that the Native Americans killed Jesus. Thank you for a least being able to spell MORMON correctly. Jennifer, Mormon is a nickname for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Can't get any more obvious about being for Jesus in the name. For the record, quit shouting what you think you know and be quiet. Because you are wrong.

The battle for New Hampshire

Grant Vaughn, Centerville, Utah — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 19:54:07 GMT

Jennifer- The unofficial name of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is spelled "Mormon" not "Morman" I wondered what else you got wrong. And Windy City Girl - Mormons believe that "the Native Americans killed Jesus"????? That is an entirely new one to me - a Christian "Mormon." Yes, there is some racism in our history - Do we get any credit for great strides in overcoming it as evidenced by our congregations with local leaders of all races and Temples in Africa and elsewhere.

The battle for New Hampshire

Aidyn,NY — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:01:02 GMT

It takes a Clinton to clean up the mess of a Bush.

HILLARY 08!!

The battle for New Hampshire

M@ - Chicago — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:34:54 GMT

Look! Hillary Co. are not even president and they are already bringing people together.
Or not.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/12/21/unionists-slam-hypocriti_n_77899.html

The battle for New Hampshire

csh, IL — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:45:21 GMT

Here are the numbers from today’s Survey USA poll which clearly show Hillary more competitive than Obama in red states:

Virginia: Hillary leads all GOP contenders – Obama has smaller leads against GOP candidates and is defeated by McCain. No democrat has carried VA since 1964.

Kentucky: Hillary leads all GOP contenders except McCain – Obama loses to all GOP candidates

Alabama – Hillary loses to GOP candidates by single digits while Obama loses to all GOP candidates by double digits.

Furthermore, Hillary is more competitive in blue states than Obama

New York – Hillary leads all GOP candidates by huge margins (in a state where they know her best) while Giuliani is tied with Obama.

Massachusetts - Hillary leads all GOP candidates by huge margins (while McCain is tied with Obama.

Just the latest of MANY polls to dispute the myth that Hillary is not electable in a general election.

And you can bet that Chris Matthews will not report on any of these polls on Hardball tonight as he continues his propaganda campaign against Hillary.

The battle for New Hampshire

Fred C Dobbs — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:54:03 GMT

Try Real Clear Politics: they compare a number of poll results.
Judge for yourself just how accurate they are when one candidate is leading by 9 in one poll and down by 4 in another.
Hardball prefers to quote the polls favorable to Obama like some manna from heaven. Give me a break, Matthews lost his objectivity some time ago if he ever had any at all.

The battle for New Hampshire

ace p — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 21:43:05 GMT

i am independent. i have been trying to tell the dem's we indy's think the dem's have some fine candidates. obviously, there will be some indy's that will vote for hillary (no where near the majority of us).

the bulk of us aren't going to support hillary. we will move to mccain more than likely. a few will just stay home.

republicans don't offer us a lot. john mccain or ron paul is the closest thing to morally and ethically acceptable candidate that they present.

we don't agree on his stance about the war, but john mccain or ron paul to us is better than hillary.

when it comes to the indy's i would pay attention to the polls at least to the point that they point to the fact that we will pull the majority of support from the democratic party.

i am not saying that as to inflame a bunch of negative emotions towards us indy's. i am saying that as a truth. you will find some indy's that are going to support hillary. some will support ron paul and mccain.

what dem's have to come to grips with is that the majority of indy support will be lost to the gop. not the dem's nor the gop can win the general election without the independent vote. i would strongly advise the democratic party to remember that fact.

if the dem's nominate the right candidate and you all have 4 that we would lend our support to as consideration, you will likely win the general election.

if you choose hillary you will lose the numbers of the indy vote needed to beat the gop.

dem's and repub's aren't the only ones that get together or correspond. don't think that. there is a consensus with us just like the dem's and the gop.

just like you guys we have preferences, but when it comes down to it we know who we absolutely won't get our bulk of votes. hillary and rudy can absolutely forget it.

i guess the dem's have to ask themselves do they want to win or lose to the gop. we indy's have more choices than either party.

i know i will get some ugly stuff thrown my way be hillary and rudy supporters. it is not meant as a knock to anyone personally. it is just how the majority of us indy's are thinking.

hint: we do like biden, edwards, richardson, obama and even dodd, but we are smart enough to see that only a few will survive iowa. those wo do survive iowa will have their final test in n.h.

if most of us haven't decided after the iowa caucus we will know who we will get behind after n.h. the rest will be upon the democratic party because indy's can change horses in the middle of the stream if the dem's pick the wrong nominee.

we would hate to say we told you so. we would like to see the deocratic party win. the majority of indy's anyway.

The battle for New Hampshire

CitizenJ — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 21:50:15 GMT

csh, IL (Sent Friday, December 21, 2007 3:45 PM)

And yet the fact still remains that it is still a year before the general election. There are ZERO accurate head-to-head general election polls out there right now. The candidates haven't even been chosen yet.

The battle for New Hampshire

Sean — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 22:09:20 GMT

MK, Los Angeles, California: Head to heads for general elections prior to the nominee being selected have always been a joke...but keep quoting them.

The battle for New Hampshire

Kaye Miller, WA — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 04:38:44 GMT

Love Obama. Did not realize Spokane WA had so many Hillary surrogates Jennifer. I live near there and Eastern WA is majority republican and majority of Democrats are liberal enough to be happy to have someone of Obama's stature and message of change and hope to be supportive of him rather than selling the lies of the Clintons. Totally transparent Jennifer.

The battle for New Hampshire

Jose Alemar — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:56:37 GMT

Friends All. First of all have a happy holidays.
A new yeas is ahead of us, a new page in the life of all Americans. We are heading into very dangerous territory if we allow the republican party to continue in power. We are already deep to our knees bu we will have the opportunity to change. We need a strong and proven president that can face the psychological fear mongering of the Right wing cult and the Republican party. We can not allow our self to hire a trainee and to experiment with a new face just because he sounds hopeful and convincing. We had that with Bush and look where we are now. We need someone that knows the game and the machinery to win.
It does not matter which party is your favorite what really matters is the future of our nation and we want to continue the killing of our men and women just because the president don't want the apparent war while he is power. Bush don't want to be the one to end the war now because if he does he will be enter in his legacy as a looser. That is why he want to let war continue and live it to the Democrats to decide. He already suspect that the Democratic party has a very good chance to win if we elect the right individual. Question Why do you think the right wing talk shows and some in the main stream media are openly endorsing Barak Obama? because it will be the easies to defeat. I am sorry to say ' I do like Obama but is not the right time for him; he need to mature more and for that he need to return to the senate and let us know what he is made of.
Remember one thing and please do take the above as an offense, I do respect every follow American but we need to eliminate the evil that is darkening our nation and sending hate waves around the world.
We are precessing a false economy a bogus sense of security, we are borrowing from our once enemies our army is broken our cost to put food on the table has tripled our privacy has been eroded our freedom has been take away we are selling out our most precious resources to foreigner, we are helping countries with our resources and tax money so they in the future could be use our help against us. Now everywhere you go to buy an item, the item has a label made in chine, Pakistan. Taiwan, India etc. REMEMBER THIS EVERY DOLLAR WE EXPEND I A CHINA PRODUCT IS A DOLLAR EXPENDED IN REINFORCONG THIER ARMY AND THEIR POWER AGINAT US.
As our tax money leaves our nation to help other countries wars we are here paying high prices for everything we buy.

I can continue on and on. I just want you all to take time to think before you cast your vote.
Again happy holidays.
Jose

The battle for New Hampshire

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 19:59:38 GMT

Jose Alemar: Happy holidays. I appreciate your concern but disagree with your conclusions. Hillary is in fact the easiest candidate for the Republicans to beat (see recent Zogby polls); they (the demon Republicans) salivate at the prospect of running against her (remember the people who would vote against Barack because he is black would never vote for a Democrat in any case; Hillary has so many more negatives going into the race). Just anecdotally, you should know that Republicans in my area pledge to work actively against her while the other Democrats, including Barack engender interest.

Hillary voted for Bush's war policies on three separate occassions, so it is incongruous to support a pro-war candidate, to trust a candidate who has consistantly postured to convey a strong military position for the right (in the general), as one who would be the best to end this travesty in the Middle East.

So although I trust your sincerity, I suggest that you reconsider your choice, if ending this war is as important to you as it is to me.
Obama '08 - right about the war from the beginning

The battle for New Hampshire

Jose Alemar, Williamsburg, Colorado — Sun, 23 Dec 2007 15:30:48 GMT

Mitchell Feldman: I have been involved in uncountable polls and I can tell you they are a form to manipulate people minds. Polls are a double edge knife. and they in most parts serve the best interests of certain unknown individuals or groups. The bottom line is that polls are not free, someone (s) is paying for and can gives misleading information for the benefit of those who are paying or receiving the benefits.When it comes to politic no one is to be trust.
In a political arena the best way to see who is the best one is to closely listen to the right wing cult talk shows embedded in FOX and Clear Chanel. I have done that as part of my daily income (now retired) When the right wing cult talk shows practically endorses Obama and trash Hillary is because they find that they have something on Obama. Remember one thing, This people are desperate, they need to be in power so they can continue giving away our resources in ex chain for power and control. Remember how they destroyed Kerry and how they are going against the congress.
I thing my dear friend that there are two choices, proven Hillary and Edward. I don't expect you to change I do like for you to take time to think and do the best according to you inner conscience.

The battle for New Hampshire

Ed Rowling — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 01:19:31 GMT

Independents, and Republicans...
Please get out and vote tomorrow for John McCain. He'll need the independent vote to defeat Romney... indies don't waste your vote on Obama- he is already going to give Hillary hers!

Mitt Romney is a single term governor from Massachusetts who did little in office. When he left, the Dems took over. Nice job Mitt!
Also, he rescued the Olympics? Google this and find out the the Olympics were already turning around. What, they were going to skip them that year?
Finally, the genius of Romney as businessman. What? He is a venture capitalist who gutted companies. ( Ever notice how Mitt doesn't name the companies he owned? )And by the way, he didn't run a GE or IBM.
Finally, his attacks on McCain are offensive. A candidate will run the country as President much like they campaign. Mitt's tactics when down- get ugly and go for the kill. When he's up, he is Mr. Sunshine. New Hampshire, stop this man now.