Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

PollM, Dallas TX — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:37:38 GMT

Democrats Debate in Las Vegas

Who Won the MSNBC Democratic Debate in Las Vegas?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1548

.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Lynette, NYC — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:40:08 GMT

Obama has a very ladi dadi attitude about how if he were president he is going to change it all and Clinton says ok we will implement change, but it has to be done within the bureaucracy and she is 100% correct. Do you think that all the powers that be in DC are going to hang up there hats and go home if Obama becomes president, UNLIKELY. Although many argue she is a part of the machine, and rightfully so, she certainly knows how it works and can tinker with it. Obama's vision is a bit fairytale like and unrealistic, and although in an ideal world, his vision would come to fruition, we all know that this is the real world and I say lets hand it over to someone who knows hows washington works, but who also sees the need for change.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Indygirl, Piketon, Ohio — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:41:26 GMT

Edwards spoke the least and said the most. He is so right about nuclear power, immigration, job creation, funding college education...well, I think he is right for hard-working, AMERICANS (notice he never uses the terms brown, black, white). Edwards has my vote in 08!!! Hillary good job but quit using John's, Plan for One America, as if it was your own. Obama you are witty but for the candidate with the most speaking time, you said absolutely nothing.

GO JOHN GO!!!

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Stopwatchingfoxnews, Rochester, NY — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:43:38 GMT

Hillary won the debate hands down. Both Obama and Edwards were also great. I am proud Democrat to have these three exceptional candidates to choose from. I just want to say how bad Russert and Williams were as moderators. I don't think they should be allowed to be moderators anymore. The first 40 minutes was a waste of time. As for Chris Matthews fawning over Hillary after the debate. Please. Just because you got the memo that you are sexist, doesn't mean you need to go overboard with praise for her. This race is still close and once again, Matthews decides he is going to predict who wins the nomination after 3 states. Hasn't he learned anything?

Hillary was awesome. She knew the issues and had indepth answers and solutions to the problems Americans face. I think the debate did show that all the Democrats are on the same page on Iraq despite the MSN article that said they were sparing over Iraq. I didn't see that at all. There really is very few differences in the three candidates. I just thought her experience really showed. I do want to point out to Obama that Social Security isn't taxed, so you can't give tax relief to people receiving it.

Either way, Hillary, Edwards,or Obama, the Dems will win in November.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

jerry/corpus christi texas — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:48:15 GMT

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

adam/Brooklyn New York City — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:51:11 GMT

Is Hillary trying to scare me into voting for her? The only thing that scares me is four more years of The Bush/Clinton Era.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Nashville_fan — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:55:04 GMT

Another debate, and no real questions for Senator Clinton. Maybe some kind Nevada or South Carolina citizens could ask these questions, since the media won't . . .

You ridiculed President Bush for begging Arab countries to drop the price of oil, yet what would you do differently? How did the first Clinton Administration prepare America to rely less on oil?

After your (detailed) explanation of how terrorists test new leaders, what is it about yourself that will keep the terrorists from striking?

If you are such a hands on CEO type that demands accountability, why are you unable to keep your surrogates from (repeatedly)spreading (the same) slurs about Senator Obama?

Name one thing that went wrong in the first Clinton Administration that you actually had any involvement with?

Can you please detail some of the "changes you have already made" in your oft repeated "35 years of experience" that are not from your term as a U.S. Senator?

Will you be able to control your tendency to get "impatient" when people don't see things your way when the time comes to work with the same Republicans you have been fighting for so many years>

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Cindy B, New Castle, PA — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:06:11 GMT

I am a strong Hillary Clinton supporter. I enjoyed the Las Vegas debate more than any of them, because the three candidates were civil to one another. I appreciated their ability to treat each other with respect and kindness and still deliver their individual messages without upsetting and confusing and even infuriating the viewers.
Although I felt it was clear that Hillary proved herself clearly the leader we need in this debate, I will say that Sen. Obama and Sen. Edwards gathered respect last night in a clearer playing field of positive demeanor and unity in respect.
It was VERY NICE TO SEE NO COMBATITIVENESS in a world already fighting out in the field. It was nice to see RESPECT and DECENCY allow a viewer to see who they think is the right candidate and respect the position, however different, of the others.
I now genuinely feel that they are all three very fine people who believe strongly in their own way in what is to come and how.
I applaud the media for FINALLY ASSISTING IN DECENCY and get the muddied air clear so we can all focus and make our judgments.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

celticfire, erin, wi — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:06:16 GMT

I find very interesting Hillary's characterizing the role of POTUS as that of "Chief Executive Officer". I think its a BIG mistake.

Seems to me this was President Carter's claim as well. At meetings with members of Congress, Carter was clearly in command of the facts and figures --- so clearly in command of them that he frequently failed to remember the true purpose of the meeting. In other words, he was caught up in the minutiae of government.

What we clearly need is a President who is formulating vision and direction for this nation and providing the leadership to take us there. Thus the more correct role of "Chairman of the Board".

Hillary just doesn't get it. But that's okay --- Barack does get it....bigtime!

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Sam — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:07:10 GMT

It was so obvious last night in the debates.

Hillary CLinton is strong knowledgeable qualified experienced and ready to lead from day one.

She will not be like Bush...LIKABLE, FIGURE HEAD while others actually govern.

I'm definitely voting for Hillary.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

jerry/corpus christi texas — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:08:08 GMT

Nashville fan:

I can add a few more questions...

Senator Clinton, a panel has suggested that the gas tax be increased by $.40 a gallon to fix the bridges in this country. Are you in favor of this proposal and if you are, how can you say you want to help the lower and middle class when this tax would hurt them the most?

Senator Clinton, you recently tried to have a $1 million dollar earmark given to a Billionaire so he can build a memorial dedicated to the Woodstock Music Festival back in 1969. Can you say with a straight face that a Billionaire really needs help from the federal government when building such things?

Senator Clinton, if you are indeed elected President, will you give up your positions in such companies as Media Matters and other outlets you either founded or helped created?

Senator Clinton, you recently stated that "no woman is illegal". Are you saying that only female illegal aliens will be allowed to cross the border into our country?

I could go all day.....

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Stacy — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:10:05 GMT

Nuclear energy is the best way to cut our dependence on oil. It isn't popular to support, especially in Nevada, the nations dumping ground for waste. But we do need to follow the technology and find a way to better handle the waste byproduct. We are running out of oil, and there isn't any way that wind, solar, or biofuels can replace it. This is another example of Obama saying what is right even when it is unpopular.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Herbert Bliss — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:10:24 GMT

It's finally time for a smart, informed on policy, strong leader as president aftr George Bush.

We need a chief operating officer who provides vision as well.

Clinton clearly is that person

Didn't think I'd ever say this, but I'm voting for the best leader and it is Hillaty Clinton

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Little Benny Franklin — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:10:45 GMT

There is much documentation for the facts that Hillary has been involved in social issues for a very long time. Repeating the same nonsense Nashville_fan will not get you any points just makes you a schill for the other side. Keep it up though you make me snicker everyday when you make the same non points. Issues speak volumes, republican attack points is for a person who would say anything and not move forward. Change comes from within. History shows that the outsider candidate becomes an insider or becomes a talking head with empty words.
Can't believe much a politician says during the primary, pick your battles with issue oriented discussion or become a verbal political yard sign!

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Howard, Sidney Center, NY — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:11:03 GMT

The nomination process is almost over, and this is hillary's to lose and here's my take on all three candidates last night:

Hllary- delivered a knockout punch and obama needs to pick himself up now before he can get restarted...she delivered an allstar performance on every issue and solidified the fact that she is the most qualified of the three...she was right on- on every issue and the one on one questions played right into her hand, she was brilliant...they say that al gore was a great debater- well, hillary was gore-esk

obama- debate inexperience showed through and thats not his fault its just the way it is...he bumbled and stumbled on 2 issues that he wasn't prepared enough on and the debate experience comes from doing some of these types of debates....its like the olympics balance beam- hillary just scored a perfect 10 from the judges and obama tweaked his ankle twice on turns; he didn't fall off but he did just enogh damage to score an 8.5 or 9......he's not battle tested and we know from experience- you perform like this in a debate and it will come back to haunt you because any little mistake at this point is magnafied

Edwards- unfortunately he wasn't going to be judged on how well he did but on how poorly the others did, and hillary just shined...he gave a very good performance and shoowed himself to be the heart and soul of the party; he actually has the best democratic platform at this point but may not get it through....he fumbled once on the calling the pakistan leader question and we were left scratching our head saying "what did he just say", but because he's been through these before you could see that he rolled with his own punch and was able to get out of the question without too much damage and actually ended up giving a pretty good answer

overall- if all three are still standing after super tuesday, my former home state of Pennsylvania is going to pick the winner and whoever wins PA will win the nomination and ultimately the presidency....PA is the only April primary and it is a very big state with alot of delegates; like California and New York, PA has a big cross-section of voters....we're going to see some big double digit wins now for hillary; and obama and edwards are going to have to ask themselves and each other what do we want to do because there will be a Clinton in the whitehouse next year, hillary is going to steamroll now and sit back and run on her strongest stuff- health care, children, education and the economy; she can now take the high road on all the racial stuff and the insults that really don't matter anyway

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Lynn Southville — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:14:01 GMT

First Read: Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) extended an olive branch to Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) on Tuesday night and declared that she and the other Democratic presidential candidates are ‘all family’

All "family"? Maybe The Addams Family. Aren't debates supposed to be contentious and be a platform where the candidates show how they are different from each other? The town meetings and forums they have are contrived enough, so now the debates are going to be staged too? Not very informative.
.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Sam — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:15:29 GMT

In the debates:

Obama seems to believe tht the essential role of a preident is to profide vision, inspiration. He says he is NOT a chief operating officer or a leader who would actually run the government,

Clinton seems to believe that the essential rolke is to provide vision, etc., but also to run the gov. because the buck stops here. She points out that Bush was incapable of that task and therefore left the running of trhe gov. to others and he has failed.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

MONTE OLSON, YUMA ARIZONA — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:15:38 GMT

BUSH DID NOT RID HIS PEOPLE OVER THE PLAME-GATE EPISODE AS HE SAID HE WOULD-----HILLARY DID NOT RID HER GROUP OF JOHNSON AFTER HIS SLURS ABOUT OBAMA. WHATS THE DIFFERENCE? SHE SEEMS LIKE MORE OF THE SAME OLD CRONIESM.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

MONTE OLSON, YUMA ARIZONA — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:16:23 GMT

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Amy B Portland, ME — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:20:15 GMT

I can see why some people support Hillary, she was definitly in control during the debate. I was irritated with Edwards for just repeating his usual lines, but if people are hearing him for the first time, they might be more impressed. Also, the more I listened to him the more I realized I agree more with his positions than with the others, for instance that the perception we are occupiers in Iraq is very dangerous. I think Edwards really "gets" it, which is why I sent him money not too long ago. Still, I love Obama, I think his intelligence is very deep and insightful and he will truly grow in office. I have turned into an Obama supporter after following this campaign closely and weighing all the pluses and minuses of everybody.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Sam — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:20:35 GMT

In times of relative prosperity, we can have a president who is into the visionary thing rather than detail...Reagan.

But in times of megapolitical challenges, we need a pres. who is willing to lead in a much more concrete and involved manner. We need a person of action who understands the issues....Roosevelt and Lincoln

Hillary this kind of leader.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

George — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:23:24 GMT

Why didn't Russert ask Obama about his questionaire from his Ill days when he said:

I am oppose to the manufacdture, sale, or even POSSESSION of a handgun in ILL?

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

DCortez, Houston, Texas — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:25:34 GMT

I don't think Cryllary is a racist. She is a power hungry person ready to run over anyone, regardless of race, to win.

The debate was lame at best.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Jay — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:26:32 GMT

Obama seems weak on leadership I'm sad to say.

No matter whether you like her or not, there is no doubt that Hillary Clinton would hands down be the smartest best prepared leader and president.

After the joke joke uniter not a divider days according to GWB when he ran for president, it would be refreshing to have a REAL LEADER who can restore respect around the world and a president who knows what the hell they are talking about.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Susan, Dayton OH — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:29:26 GMT

Obama may be able to expertly deliver a "prepared" inspirational speech, but it's a different story when he's being interviewed. Never heard so much hemming and hawing, and he seemed to get lost in his answers...couldn't hold a thought and stay on point.

Clinton, on the other hand, is always prepared and gives unhesitant, intelligent, well-informed answers to all questions. She won the debate hands-down. She WILL be ready on DAY 1. Very Presidential.

Edwards is just too angry, and we're tired of hearing the words "mill worker" and "corporate lobbyists". His money from "trial lawyers" is, in my opinion, much the same as lobbyist money. Give it up, John. You already had your chance. It wasn't your time then, and it certainly isn't now.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

John, LA — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:32:26 GMT

Barack was so weak in the debate, it is not even funny. While hillary looked like she was ready to be president "on day one" (like she claims), obama looked like he was not. I think she benefited from that.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

GAB, Austin, TX — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:33:07 GMT

OH please Nashville_fan, how far back do you want to go? Why did Reagan and Bush 1 not do anything about our reliance on foreign oil after the Saudi's turned off the spigot in the 70'S?

Yes, there is something unseemly about an American president going begging to the Saudi's. Supposedly the Saudi's are great friends of the Bush family and our allies, yet they gave Bush the bird didn't they.
..and then he turned around and sold them billions of dollars of weapons so they can protect themselves. Who are they protecting themselves from? Iran? Unlikely. Those weapons will come back to bite us in the butt, just as always. So when the world runs out of oil they'll be able to protect their oil fields against countries like the United States.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Pat Huntington NY — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:33:21 GMT

With the Clinton's being called racists and using their talk to tick off the African American vote, i can see why they would ask for a truce. They played the race card and it backfired on them, now they are asking to play nice. This should last for a day....
jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Wednesday, January 16, 2008 9:48 AM)

-----------
Your posts are full of lies and distortions...typical republican.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

mahenry, quanah, texas — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:39:28 GMT

Hillary Clionton has so much going for her. She has a very bright mind, she expresses herself wonderfully well, she has a winning manner about her. Clearly, she can work accross the aisle. My concern is the occasional lack of judgment.

Her vote in favor of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard resolution is stuck in my mind. It strengthened the President's hand in respect to the preemptive war doctrine to the extent that he now defines it as the right to go to war against any nation that "thinks" like the Iranian militants think. No mention of anything like the "clear and present danger" test.

The preemptive war doctrine is very dangerous thing. Especially is it so in these present times of hard ball for political profit, spin doctors, and misinformation games. We all know that.

So, it was a serious lapse on Hillary's part and it worries me.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Wendy, Mechanicsburg PA — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:39:50 GMT

The only way the democrats will win in Nov. is if the nominee can get crossover votes from republicans. The only democratic candidate who can deliver those votes is John Edwards. Republicans will not cross over and vote for for either Clinton or Obama just like they didn't cross over for John Kerry.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

A.Brocco, Albuquerque,NM — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:43:40 GMT

Jerry/Corpus Cristi....
Speaking of cards, the Repubicrooks seem to be playing with a deck full of JOKERS.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Stick to the facts, not fancy - no matter how 'boring' — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:48:10 GMT

It will last longer than a day Jerry, and Hillary wasn't the only one who tried the race card. Remember Jesse Jackson Jr.
However, I thought all candidates were both classy and substantive last night. No matter how much the moderators tried to stir up the pot - and they sure tried - not one of the three would bite to continue the schism. They have come to realize that it will only be to the detriment of all three and the party as a whole to show disunity on anything that is not a policy issue.
I couldn't believe the press this morning ho-humming about the 'boring' debate, just because they weren't at each other's throats.
Actually, if you were listening, there was more substance in this debate than I heard in all the others combined.
Another commentary this morning was how their eyes glazed over during the discussion of America's financial institutions seeking foreign capital to keep afloat after the subprime debacle.
Hello? You've been begging for substance and relevancy and this has your eyes glazed?
Dubai ports anyone?
Chinese holders of American debt?
The terrorists won't have to sneak in over the border if this keeps up.
They'll just buy their way in.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Betty Martinick — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:52:39 GMT

All this who is more qualified reminds me that I cast my first vote at21 for Truman.He inherited the presidency suddenly on FDR'S death and was clueless to that office even to having the atom bomb.The times were against him but he saved this nation in war and peace. I consider him the greatest president in my time. No other president achieved success in crisis as this man with little education who taught himself.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Mike — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:53:05 GMT

All of this back and forth and the end result will be someone from the royal famaily will be President of the U.S in the end. It is the Clinton's turn to run the country and that means Hillary. What we should be discussing is which member of the Bush family will be President in 8 years, and then which royal family member will be President after that. Let stop pretending and just do away with elections. It is a waist of time and money. HRC has already won the Presidency.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

PollM, Dallas TX — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:55:28 GMT

Democratic Nevada Caucus - Prediction Time!

The road to the White House now goes through Nevada because Saturday's statewide caucuses will help to clarify presidential nomination races in both major parties.

Who do you predict will win the Nevada Presidential Caucus?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1551

.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Selma Winston — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:57:05 GMT

"I don't think Cryllary is a racist."

To a point she is. Earlier last year, polling showed that she had the black vote wrapped up, and she didn't pay too much attention to the details of maintaining that group of people. Now that she is losing that vote to Obama, it's been Hillary on stage with every black person she can find. She seems to only pay attention to blacks when it suits her needs.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

George Hoffman, Lexington, Kentucky — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:57:30 GMT

We should recognize one fact: When you are president of the United States you can buy all the experience and expertise you want. What the POTUS needs is intelligence, curiosity, and excellent judgement. And what he or she needs be able to do is translate their vision to the American people in a way that informs and inspires. You don't need a CEO in the Oval Office. That's what Bush claimed to be and look at the mess he's made of things. The clear choice to lead this country, not just shuffle papers, is Barak Obama. He can bring the country together in a way no one else can, and Hillary least of all.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Shadow, Hamden, CT — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:59:36 GMT

Obama won the debate with an outstanding performance. His remarks on the economy and the role of fathers were the best answers of the night, and what really stuck out was that Hillary and Edwards would be going into a general election having to explain why they've changed positions on issue after issue; Obama's consistency sets him apart, and that became abundantly clear last night.

That said, all three did extremely well in what was substantively the best debate of the season. Even Hillary Clinton, whose debate performances have been generally overrated, did very well, never raising her voice inappropriately or harshly.

If I had to grade each candidate in the debate:

Obama 98
Edwards 96
Clinton 93

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:59:58 GMT

Lynette - I don't think you fully comprehended Obama's comments on bureaucracy. To put it in business terms, he's saying a president needs to be like a chairman of the board more than like a chief operating officer. I think history supports this statement.

In modern history, President Carter was heavily criticized for being too involved in bureaucratic processes below his office. Those critics say it slowed his ability to respond to issues across the board, because once a president starts micromanaging, bureaucratic managers tend to wait for micromanaging on other issues.

This criticism also was directed toward President Clinton for the first 18 months of his presidency. It ended when he replaced his chief of staff, and Leon Panetta is credited for getting Bill Clinton out of micromanagement mode.

The thing to remember is the executive branch is huge. Its probably too large with too many layers of management to ever function efficiently, but that is what it is. Most people inside the executive branch are civil servants, who continue working from one administration to the next, regardless of party affiliation. These people don't need a president to tell them how to do their jobs. They need upper management to set priorities and goals, and that management comes from the president's appointees (who presumably are getting their broader priorities and goals from the White House), and then they need intermediate management (again mostly at the civil servant level) to oversee daily operations.

In a sense, this is why the experience question is irrelevant. A president doesn't keep the trains running on time. He tells his administration where he wants the trains to go, and they make it happen. Judgment is much more important than experience. Probably the most important acts of judgment most presidents ever do is determining which appointments to make and from whom to receive advice.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Betty Martinick — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:00:20 GMT

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Mitch McMahon, Brooklyn, NY — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:01:32 GMT

John Edwards was given about 3 minutes of speaking time in the last 20 odd minutes. And the two specific questions about Yucca and the Bankruptcy law seemed intended to expose him (what Senator's voting record wouldn't?). Post and pre debate coverage all but avoids mentioning him. Fortunately, Edwards may carry Nevada on the 2nd Amendment question in last nights debate, which of course none of the paid blabbering heads can comment upon as part of the Hillary/Obama sell.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Rebecca, Las Vega$$$$ — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:02:31 GMT

Hillary won this debate....I will be caucusing for Hillary this Saturday!!...GO HILLARY

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Lewis, Cincinnati, Ohio — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:09:14 GMT

I'll say this, if American/democrats wanted real experience wouldn't Dodd and Biden still be in this race. They completely trump Hillary in experience and they didn't get the votes to remain in the race!!!

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Deborah, Portland, Oregon — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:09:24 GMT

I feel Obama was the winner last night. He was reasoned and thoughtful in his answers. He just looked "presidential!" Very, very impressive.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Nashville_fan — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:11:07 GMT

Little Benny Franklin wrote:

"There is much documentation for the facts that Hillary has been involved in social issues for a very long time. Repeating the same nonsense Nashville_fan will not get you any points just makes you a schill for the other side. "

Thanks for the shout out! I am sorry if you don't like my questions, but of course that is not the same as answering the question, is it?

Please provide this "documentation" of Senator Clinton's experience . . . if I am going to be asked to support Senator Clinton if she wins the nomination, I would think that my questions deserve an answer, even though Senator Clinton is not my preferred candidate.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

F.K. — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:11:52 GMT

Just because Obama isn't as aggressive as Hillary does not make him weak. Hillary is fake, and manipulating. Obama was on target when he was asked questions, but Hillary had more time to think her answers through. She will lose to the Republicians easily. Obama will become more aggressive at the next debate in South Carolina. He is still a winner.

Obamas Support

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

ginamc1 — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:15:05 GMT

What world am I in this morning? I hadn't committed to a candidate yet. Actually, I was leaning towards Obama. Until last night's debate. Obama's shabby performance last night on the economy was appalling. This country is in serious economic shape, and it's not getting any better. And, Barack Obama can't even find his pen or organize his papers! What?! Being a CEO, a bureaucrat is NOT his thing! OMG -- he seriously needs to get a clue. Hillary dessimated him on the debate last night, especially regarding being ready to take the helm as President from Day 1. I do NOT want another George W for our next President -- relying on the expertise of "others" for advice. And, that is all we would get with Obama. He clearly is NOT ready to lead as our next President.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Gil Fronzaglia, Wellesley, MA — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:17:16 GMT

the deabte was a real snoozer because they are all playing it safe.

NBC/MSNBC got the debate they wanted, which was, not devate at all. If they really wanted a debate thye would have let Dennis Kucinich join in. What are thye afraid of?....A real debate.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

--NSMsnbc — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:18:50 GMT

["Obama and Clinton, in one of their sharpest distinctions of the night, offered starkly different visions of the presidency. Obama said he believes that the job is about ‘having a vision for where the country needs to go’ rather than ensuring the ‘paperwork is being shuffled effectively.’

Clinton said. ‘But I think you have to be able to manage and run the bureaucracy.’”]

--Finally, people and the campaigns are waking up to the true distinctions between the campaigns (because really isn't necessarily policy). These two candidates have flagrantly different styles and approaches to problems.

--I think the comparison between Barack Obama and George W. Bush and the style of government is a fair comparison. They are both men of ideals and visionary. But that is where they diverge. B.H. Obama seems to have an uncanny abilitiy to sift through the bureaucracy and make the wise policy decision--he actually uses his advisors as a strength. And that is where his wisdom and his judgment comes from. For me, that's a positive.

--Furthermore, drawing out the comparision, that would make Hillary Rodham Clinton more like Dick ... Dick ... ahhh ... Richard Cheney!!! Dick Cheney is the detail guy, he's the guy who can manage the bureaucracy. So the question is, would we be better off with Dick Cheney as President?

--On a final note, I am merely comparing leadership styles. It would be foolish to compare policy or judgment for either Clinton or Obama to Dick and George.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Betty, S.C. — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:21:20 GMT

Here is a very serious issue for Barak Obama, and if you disagree please post why. Jeremiah Wright, the pastor of Obama's United Trinity Church of Christ honored Farrakhan just last month?

Farrakhan has repeatedly made hate-filled statements targeting Jews, whites, America, and homosexuals. He has called whites “blue-eyed devils” and the “anti-Christ.” He has described Jews as “bloodsuckers” who control the government, the media, and some black organizations.
Do you know some of these satanic Jews have taken over BET [the Black Entertainment Network]?” Farrakhan said in a speech on Nov. 11, 2007.
The month( Dec. 2007) after that speech, Obama’s minister and friend, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. and his Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, honored Farrakhan at a gala, bestowing on him its Rev. Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Lifetime Achievement Trumpeteer award.
This is serious business and Senator Clinton would not associate with Farrakhan or Jeremiah Wright yet
Obama was married by him and his kids baptized by him.
How does this help divisiveness in America?
Ron Kessler from the Washington Insider wrote the article - go here to read it http://www.newsmax.com/kessler/obama_wright_farrakhan/2008/01/14/64332.html

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Lynette, NYC — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:24:33 GMT

Wendy from PA, in case you didnt know it, The GOP has candidates right now vying for the presidency. Your statement proves that not even the republicans think any of their candidates would make a good president. You are looking to the democratic party to see who you could vote for Right on for the democrats. At least we have viable candidates who will make a difference.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Howard, Sidney Center, NY — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:24:33 GMT

obama lost the debate after his comment on not having to shuffle papers and then had a puzzled look on his face-....he tried to entertain the point later on and back peddle and when he got THAT opportunity he didn't do a very good job....the point is this: his inexperience showed through and at this point its too late-every little thing is magnafied at this point of the process.....isn't it very ironic that here we are with the end result that experience is going to win out over inexperience and change????

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Edwards all the way! — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:25:08 GMT

Did anyone else find Obama's long, rambling answers to be yawn-inducing? He seems to me to take a lot of time to basically say one thing: I will bring the country together. We are supposed to take this on faith. Hillary also talks a lot, is articulate and is the ultimate insider. Her message boils down to I know how to run the government and I will do it like Bill did. In contrast, Edwards speaks concisely, makes his points clearly, and lets you know exactly where he stands. His message is about the need to correct the course that America has drifted onto over a period of years. Hillary Clinton and Obama copy his lines, but I don't think either of them really get it. Neither do a lot of the pundits.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Mike — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:26:29 GMT

Hillary has already won the Presidency. It's the Clinton family turn to run the country. The Clinton and Bush families have been running the country in some form for the last 28 years. WE ARE NO DIFFENT FROM LATIN AMERICA.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Caroline, Bethesda, MD — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:27:58 GMT

I worked for the ultimate "bureaucracy" for over a decade - the Federal Govt. Believe me, we don't want a president who is trying to micro- manage the bureaucracy! We want a president who will, as Obama said, bring together the best and brightest to tackle and solve these enormous issues facing us. We want a leader who will inspire us to come together for the common good. We want a president who will have good judgment and reasoning who will not lead us into a war like Iraq. To me, Barack Obama will make a truly great president. He will be able to set an agenda to deal with issues like health care - and then be able to actually effect real CHANGE by being able to bring divergent sides together (political, medical, etc.) in a way that has not been possible for decades. THAT is what is SO EXCITING about BARACK OBAMA!! You get the feeling that we have the opportunity to actually GET SOME THINGS DONE for the COMMON GOOD!! He will inspire us to do better - and we will!! GO OBAMA!!!

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

GOOD LUCK — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:30:28 GMT

Hillary won in these 2 debates so far.I hav enothing against senator Barrack about in intention to change and his vision but LET'S BE REALISTIC, IT IS NOT GOING TO BE THAT SIMPLE AND EASY TASKS UNLESS HE IS PLANNING TO BE THE PRESIDENT OF " FAIRYTALE LAND " THAT ALL HE NEED TO DO IS JUST TALKING OR WISHFUL THINKING

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Javan Clark, Bellingham, WA — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:30:55 GMT

Why hasn't anyone stated the obvious yet? The "Truce", Clinton calling for Senator Obama (not Edwards mind you, just BHO) to co-sponsor a bill, the continued back and forth praise... I think all of us who watched, witnessed the birth of the Democratic Ticket.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:34:58 GMT

I think these comments pointing to a preference for a "bureaucrat" as president only demonstrates a lack of civics education in our schools.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Ellen, Kansas City, KS — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:41:14 GMT

If I hear about Hillary's 35 years of experience one more time... I have over 35 years of experience as an engineer's wife, but that doesn't mean you would want me to build a bridge! John Edwards is the candidate most likely to beat the Republicans in the general election and I hope the Democrates realize that fact before we end up without the White House for four more years.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Mike, Austin, TX — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:45:08 GMT

My fellow Americans. We all must admit that Hillary Clinton's performance in the Debate last night was superior to the other canadidates. She was poised, regal, and her delivery was crisp. BUT SHE HAS BEEN PRATICING THIS FOR THE LAST 16 YEARS. It is the Clinton's turn to run the country. Isn't Prince William better prepared to be the King of England than any of us? He has been being groomed since birth.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Sharon Stone — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:48:41 GMT

Susan, being also from Dayton, I agree with you on your assessment of Obama and Hillary, but not on Edwards. I believe Edwards would make the best president. I will vote for Hillary because Edwards is finished.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

John, Sturbridge, MA — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:48:48 GMT

It very much disturbs me when people say a candidate has no chance so he/she should quit. One of the reasons that these less than top tier candidates don't have a chance is because the media focuses on the leaders and basically ignores them.
I keep hearing that John Edwards has the best plan on this or that but he doesn't have a chance. Give him equal coverage with Obama and Hillary and see what happens to his poll numbers. Considering that his advertising is at a small fraction of the others I consider it INCREDIBLE that he has done as well as he has and is still competitive.
Hang in there, John.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Mike, Austin, TX — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:50:42 GMT

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Rob, Phoenix, AZ — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:52:57 GMT

Dear Jerry of Corpus Christi Texas you wrote: "With the Clinton's being called racists and using their talk to tick off the African American vote, i can see why they would ask for a truce. They played the race card and it backfired on them, now they are asking to play nice. This should last for a day....

Now wait a minute...I guess that you did not get the memo that Tim Russert waived in front of Obama last night? That memo that was waived in Obama's face was a talking points memo for his campaign to exploit the race issue. AND BO APOLOGISED. One doesn't apologize unless they did something wrong. Most educated and worldly people agree that neither Clinton remarks were racist. There is a great commentary in the Wall Street Journal today about how disingenuous it was for anybody to inject race in the Clinton's comments. So I ask you, who played the race card?

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Dom, Penn — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:53:33 GMT

NSMsnbc, you just did compare them. What do you think we are all stupid? So you're just yet another male who is intimidated by an intelligent, strong woman. Sort of like, ah..Chris Matthews? Of course I would NEVER make that comparison.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Mike, Austin, TX — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:53:44 GMT

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

electress — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:54:29 GMT

The message is very clear from Hillary, the problem we have with our economy is that not just blacks are falling into poverty, but whites, hispanics, asians,Indians, middle class people. It is an AMERICAN problem, and not one of a race problem.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Patty Ulatowski, Monroe, CT — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:57:19 GMT

No doubt about it: it will be President Hillary Rodham Clinton and I'm looking forward to casting my ballot for her.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Squirrel, S'ton,Mass. — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:57:38 GMT

In any business 35 years means it's time to retire because the times have changed.The two people you don't want are the ones that just started less than 4 years(too green) and the ones near the end(too stubborn)I like John McCain based upon what I have read about him,I don't like Hillary for similary reasons,but both belong with names like Ted Kennedy,Orin Hatch,Arlen Spector,and Robert Byrd who in the Senate to balance out newcomers.Either that or the media should call Hillary on the number she uses.Or is that the number of years she has been pulling shady deals like Whitewater,inside trading.She keeps having her agents bring up drug use.Look up White House scandals and the Clintons(both)are associated with them and not Monica.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Original Bob, Middletown, CT — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:58:19 GMT

The focal comparison in the post is, I think the most viable comparison between Obama and Clinton, whereby one looks at the role of visionary-in-chief while the other stands by the role of bureaucrat-in-chief. What's interesting here? They are both right, and they are both wrong. A chief executive most be smart enough to pick the right people to delegate so that monitoring and micro-managing doesn't overcome the role of the chief, yet too much visionary musing could lead to an awful lot of ill-selected leaders destroying any visions on the way to reality.
What's good about these two candidates is they at least hold to two perspectives that never excisted in the administration over the past 7 years.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Rob, Phoenix, AZ — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:09:12 GMT

This ran in the Wall Street Journal today...I think that this commentary says it all. Please read with an open mind.

Hillary and MLK
By JOHN MCWHORTER
January 16, 2008; Page A12 (Wall Street Journal)

There are many people in our great land aggrieved over the idea that Hillary Clinton thinks Martin Luther King Jr. was not the hero of the civil rights movement.

This idea seems so illogical that the only way to understand it is to approach it as a puzzle. After all, why would a white person running for president in 2008 dismiss the legacy of King near his birthday, which is celebrated as a national holiday, and right before a primary in a state with a large black vote?

To do such a thing would suggest inability to tie one's shoes. Let's imagine that in private Sen. Clinton thought little of King, which is vastly unlikely for someone of her background. Still, the puzzle remains: Why would she, an intelligent person, say it in public?

Yet there she was on "Meet the Press" Sunday, having to defend herself for simply saying that while King laid the groundwork (which she acknowledged), another part of the civil rights revolution was Lyndon B. Johnson's masterful stewardship of the relevant legislation through Congress. She was arguing that she is more experienced in getting laws passed in Washington than is Barack Obama -- which is true.

Why do people like op-ed columnist Bob Herbert, South Carolina Rep. James Clyburn and countless black bloggers hear a grievous insult in her simple observation? The outcry is so disproportionate to the stimulus that one can barely help suspecting something outright irregular.

I think of a study published last year in the Journal of Black Psychology. It documented that the extent to which black Americans perceive their lives to be affected by racism correlates with symptoms of general paranoia disconnected from racial issues.

To be able to hold in one's mind the notion that Mrs. Clinton would attack King suggests a bone-deep hypersensitivity that overrides sequential reasoning. "We have to be very, very careful how we speak about that era," Rep. Clyburn explains.

But why so very, very careful? What effect does it have on anyone's life if that era is occasionally discussed in less than perfectly genuflective phraseology? Is the Klan waiting behind a hill? Will a black man working at an insurance company in Cleveland have a breakdown because someone didn't give King precisely enough credit in a quick statement?

There is a willful frailty, a lack of self-confidence, in this kind of thinking. It suggests someone almost searching for things to claim injury about, donning the mantle of the noble victim in order to assuage a bruised ego.

Of course, there is a less depressing interpretation of the current uproar: Mrs. Clinton's critics are playing political hardball. You know, let's get blacks to vote for Mr. Obama by playing the race card to pretend Mrs. Clinton is dumping on King. John Edwards, for example, is obviously not mouthing agreement with these people out of insecurity about his blackness.

Well, politics is rarely pretty, but in this case the price is too high. For one, misinterpretation of statements in this vein makes black people look disinclined to process detail and context -- in other words, dim. It only gives that much more fodder to views on black intelligence like those uttered by James Watson.

Think, for example, how utterly unreal the notion is that Bill Clinton, our "first black president," would call Mr. Obama's whole candidacy a "fairytale" rather than referring, specifically, to perceptions of his record on the Iraq war. It's as if the outraged crowd is only capable of processing seven words at a time.

In an election that is supposed to focus on larger issues such as America's role in a violent world, playing the race card in this fashion distracts us from real problems. When most new AIDS cases are black and the murder rate among young black males is sky high, what kind of black representative throws tantrums over extremely unlikely implications of something someone said?

In the name of speaking for Mr. Obama, the people throwing these tantrums are presenting a parochial, cynical face, rather than the thoughtful, cosmopolitan one that the candidate himself is trying to show.

Overall, Mr. Obama has not run a "black" campaign. The past few days suggest that if he did, many would consider it a favor to him to churn up 10 more months of dustups over phrases carefully lifted out of context and held up as evidence of racism. Hopefully Mr. Obama is too smart, and too much a man of the world, to succumb to this twisted rendition of black identity.

Mr. McWhorter is a weekly columnist for the New York Sun and a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Mike Davey, Campbell CA — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:09:56 GMT

Did anyone else notice that the lion's share of the questions went to Clinton and Obama...its almost like they barely let Edwards in. Immediately following the debate all of the analyst ignored Edwards too referring to Obama simply as "him" like there were no other males in the race. The media runs on entertainment and since thats the case a 2 person horse race is more interesting and financially lucrative. Its really sad when Edwards was the one who essentially brought all the key issues to the table which everyone now debates. Shame on MSNBC.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

John Smith Boise, Idaho — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:11:51 GMT

Edwards clearly won and he's the only one who can win in the south

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Elliott, Los Angeles, CA — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:13:12 GMT

To: celticfire, erin, wi,

I would ask you to remember that GWB has an approach to being president that is very similar to what Obama is stating. I believe that Hillary in combining both a vision and directive alongside being the CEO is really what we want our presidents to be able to master. I think Bill Clinton was that type of president and believe Hillary will be as well. GWB talked about having a vision and hiring the right people. How did that work out? Not so much.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

sunny, nevada — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:16:26 GMT

Finally, a civil debate. It was good to get a chance to pretty much hear the candidates express themselves more clearly, without such a limited time allowance. I feel I learned more this time out than all the other debates combined.

I don't understand the media ... and some of the posters ... who are looking for combat. We can learn nothing from who can shout the loudest or be the most over-bearing. I like John Edwards a lot. I am completely behind Barack Obama, as I believe his approach is thoughtful. Those who critic his speech patterns in debates are not seeing through to the man whose mind is working at giving as thorough an answer as possible. This is the type of mind I would prefer seeing in negotiations to solve the problems he will inherit from the ill-advised, mis-managed previous eight years.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Staton Rabin, Irvington NY — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:17:22 GMT

Senator Clinton's pat and dogmatic answers may play well in debate, but strong presidential leadership and decision-making require a nuanced understanding of complex issues, and the ability to move the country forward toward change. Senator Obama has the strength and steady, calm judgement that we need in a Commander in Chief. Ted Sorensen, President Kennedy's aide and speechwriter, knows what kind of courage and judgment it takes to lead a nation and resolve complex international issues-- Sorensen was with Kennedy when he resolved the Cuban missile crisis at an equally dangerous time in our nation's history. Ted Sorensen knows that Senator Obama is ready to lead our nation and become a great president-- and so do I.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Ed Szewczyk, Belleville, Illinois — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:20:04 GMT

I heard an interesting comment by Mike Huckabee on NPR this morning regarding "push polling" and other negative campaigning done by independent so-called 527 organizations. He said that he has publicly requested that these organizations stop doing this kind of stuff to support his candidacy. The interviewer then pushed him a little bit, by saying, "Oh, c'mon, you can get them to stop it if you want to." (Not an exact quote.) Huckabee pointed out that it is illegal for any coordination to take place between campaigns and these independent groups. He indicated that all he can do is publicly call for them to stop, but any private communication would violate the law and that he didn't want to go to jail because someone is doing something that he disagrees with. If that's the correct interpretation of the law, that would explain why Hillary Clinton can be a good administrator, but be unable to stop the 527's supporting her from spreading whatever they're being accused of spreading about Senator Obama. In fairness to all the candidates, this should be pointed out by the corporate mainstream media. I'm sure this won't satisfy any of the irrational Hillary haters out there, but nothing ever will satisfy them. I'd still like to get a look at Karl Rove's private National Republican Committee email correspondence with the Swift Boat Veterans for....Truth? I bet we'd see evidence of campaign coordination there, and it wouldn't be Karl begging them to stop.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Spencer — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:20:38 GMT

Barack Obama does nothing to inspire me. He talks a lot about hope and uniting, but does not seem to have a plan to lead the country. Hillary Clinton seems to bring about more of the same blue state/red state divisiveness and Republicans can't wait to run against her.

John Edwards is the only candidate that has comprehensive plan to bring our country back together.

http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/

Go John Edwards!

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Adam, Sacramento — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:27:19 GMT

"John Edwards was given about 3 minutes of speaking time in the last 20 odd minutes. And the two specific questions about Yucca and the Bankruptcy law seemed intended to expose him"

The others both support nuclear power so if not yucca mountain where? Ignoring the fact we have to grab up ex soviet republic fissile material and get it to a secure location.

Edwards answer on Yucca was acceptabe in that he understood the changing nature of the debate, and is opposed to creating more nuclear waste. Are we going to make every nuclear facility Hillary and Obama builds into a weapons grade waste depository? Are they going to leave the loose material in the former soviet republics there, A wearhouse in longbeach? where?

As for the commentators acting like it was the most substantive debate yet on say the war. I saw a bunch of people channeling Richardson and Kucinich who were attacked for that position in previous debates by some of the people channeling it. I saw commentators that attacked richardson on how you get out in a year which he then explained give a pass to these three candidates. In fairness it was always clear Obama and edwards wanted out but were unsure on specifics hillary the experienced one however wouldn't even promise by the end of her second term. Russert didn't call her on that he lumped her in the 2013 crowd.

Edwards won for getting past those first two questions from san diego without getting himself embroiled in the racial politics the media had been pressing. As a white male I cringed on hearing those both could have been answered easily in ways that destroyed his candidacy.

Anyone that has seen every debate since last year and has a memory has to be asking "Will the real Senator Clinton please stand up" Of course most weren't watching leaving the question will the media run the tapes side by side and ask the questions and will they do it on the evening news.

If not Yucca Where? The Senators must answer as they support nuclear energy. Edwards should answer as we have free fissile material in the world we need to get secured to defend ourselves.

This was a softball debate on foreign policy but the choice I think we are making now is;

A visionary leader that wants to negotiate their way to change.

An experienced leader that wants to keep walking the halls of washington to make change.

A fighter that wants to take the battlements throw out the enemy and raise up the middle class and america along with it.

The good news for the dems is this race doesn't look to be over soon as the republicans appear to be heading to a nomination in September. Tactically if they have february through novemeber to attack discredit and smear our candidate while we don't know which one of them we are facing and therefore which messages to run would be a disaster for the party.

The later our nominee is named the better so personally I hope all three keep fighting and this goes to our convention in august.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

marywestminster md. — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:28:23 GMT

iam a republin but i have to give it to the old girl she won the debate hands down . she knows her stuff. go huck.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Longtimeindependent — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:28:58 GMT

Edwards is toast. Obama and Clinton will split his votes and the closer we get to the election, the more we will see just how inexperienced and weak Mr Obama is. Hillary will get the nomination and also the presidency. As she deserves. GOP is also toast...thanks to W.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Darrius, Arkansas — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:29:34 GMT

SAM SAID:---------------------------------

In times of relative prosperity, we can have a president who is into the visionary thing rather than detail...Reagan.

But in times of megapolitical challenges, we need a pres. who is willing to lead in a much more concrete and involved manner. We need a person of action who understands the issues....Roosevelt and Lincoln

Hillary this kind of leader.

Sam (Sent Wednesday, January 16, 2008 10:20 AM)
------------------------------------------------------

Sam you have it perfectly reversed. You need the vision during times of major change. For instance when Chrslyer was screwed it needed visionary leadership like Lee Iocca. Countries are no different. To bring us out of the Great Depression we needed FDR. To get us out of apartheid (called Jim Crow in the US) we needed Martin Luther King Jr. Bad times require visionary leadership.

When Ronald Regan came into office to country was in a bad place. He provided a vision of where the country needed to go that lasted for about 30 years, until now. That is what Barak Obama means and that is what he is offering, a vison or where the country needs to go. Hillary does not offer any vision, and she is not trying to offer any vision. Because of that she needs somebody to run against. Thus, Hillary is fighting Obama's vision, is trying to keep the country rooted in the now, is trying to keep the country operating along Ronald Regan's vision.

No President should be concerned with managing files and schedules. He has people to do that. If fact, the more bureaucratic work the President (or the person at the top of any larger organization) does, the worse off the organization is.

Obama is right, the Presidency is all about vision.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Karen Reese, Washington DC — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:29:45 GMT

Clinton said. ‘But I think you have to be able to manage and run the bureaucracy.’”]

And what bureaucracy has Clinton run? What details has she ever fleshed out? She has a million ideas, but none have ever been implemented. Hillary is more suited for a liberal think tank that writes policy statements then she is to run a government.

And John Edwards, same question. What bureaucracy have you ever run?

Same problems for Reid and Pelosi. Long on ideas. Short on building coalitions and general agreement.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Max, Los Angeles, CA — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:31:30 GMT

To: Edwards all the way

Edwards would win over more people if he would say something different on occasion. I feel everytime I listen to him is stuck on script. Also he needs to stop with the "This is personal for me" thing. For the others it is some sort of game. What is the point he is making?

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Tish Alexander, Everett, WA — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:31:49 GMT

I was immediately put off when the candidates, Obama & Edwards were asked if they felt they had ganged up on Hillary last debate. To me that set things off on the wrong foot right away! She is a candidate and believe me she is tough enough, likeable enough.....she can't be touched because she is "girl," remember that old saying well she can get down with the best of them so I wouldn't worry a whole lot. She was given way to much time as she acted a though she was debating Bush, her staff is smart I will give you that, since it was a ploy to not debate these other two. I will vote for Obama & Edwards in a race any day

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Mike P, Canton MI — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:34:28 GMT

It's too bad that John Edwards is disadvantaged because he's not a minority like Clinton and Obama are. He's got the right vision and the experience needed after 8 years of W. If the convention comes down to neither of the two front runners having enough delegates to win and they don't team up, Edwards would be a logical choice.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

larry texas — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:35:02 GMT

I do want to point out to Obama that Social Security isn't taxed, so you can't give tax relief to people receiving it.

Social Security certainly IS taxed, how do you get the fool notion is is not?

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Ed Szewczyk, Belleville, Illinois — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:35:57 GMT

The strongest and best ticket for the Democrats and America would be Clinton and Obama. That would also give Obama additional seasoning and experience for his run at the Presidency after Hillary's 8 years.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Kelly (from Pittsburgh) — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:37:34 GMT

I think some people were mislead by Clinton about what Obama said. He listed his weakness as being personally disorganized. And guess what, President's have loads of secretarys for that kind of paperwork. The quote originally mentioned said he is not an "operating office." Hillary get it right, that is COO not CEO.

She then comapares him to Bush. That is just wrong. Obama correctly points out that Bush's biggest fault isn't that he mis-manages people like Hillary claimed, but he consistently sets the wrong vision. Afterall, he managed Hillary pretty well when he covinced her to authorize the Iraq war. He is actually very good at the bureaucracy, which is why he has been able to usurp more executive power and make congress ineffective.

Look Bush has two faults. Bad people hired (cronyism) and Bad ideas for the country. A new Clinton administration would certainly be staffed with many cronies and she has proven time and time again to have bad judgement.

Hillary (nor Edwards) had the courage to list a real weakness, but let me interpret the Clinton double speak. She said it was being impatient (that's sort of what I say when I am asked this question on job interviews), but the true answer is she is a perfectionist. Perfectionism leads to micromangement, which can clearly be seen as a big part of her previous Healthcare reform debacle. There are many stories that document her unwillingness to bring people into her process as the reason for its complete failure.

Her pefectionist attitude is also what precludes her from admitting she made the wrong vote on Iraq. She would rather try rewriting history before admitting that she makes mistakes.

There are too many serious problems in this country for us to hand the country over to a micro-manager like Hillary. And we most certainly need a president whose not afraid to inspire and enlist people smarter than himself on particular issues, to turn this country around. That President is Barack Obama.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Just One Independent Voice — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:38:54 GMT

Another question for Hillary:

What, exactly, from your employment history makes you the most "experienced" candidate?

The only two jobs she obtained on *her* merits are the Rose Law Firm and the Senate one she now holds. Yes?

Being First Lady of Arkansas and the U.S. are not "vetted" positions. You do not obtain them solely on your own merits in a competitive environment. Nor is there oversight, a source of evaluation of your work.

On the other candidates:

I like Edwards a lot, but am troubled by his repeated claims that he voted wrongly. It undermines my confidence in him. Still, I'd consider voting for him - certainly over Hillary.

I could live with Obama, from what I see so far. We need a thoughtful leader who can communicate his ideas clearly and in a collegial manner. He's the strongest of the three so far. None of that 90's baggage, at least.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Randy Price Chattanooga, Tennessee — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:46:52 GMT

Who won? I think we all won. For the first time that I can remember we got three adults sitting around a table and discussing the problems facing our country and their ideas about fixing those problems. I got so much more information about the canidates and how they think, last night, than from any other debate. If I had to pick a "winner" it would probably be Hillory. She sounded Presidential.

Obama is slick but just didn't seem to have a clear vision on what to do except talk about having a vision. I would like to know what that vision is.

John Edwards is the most liberal but is passionate about what he wants to do...

And to the person above that said the Republicans are gonna win whoever the Dem's decide on...did we forget to take our medication? The Republicians are so scattered on what or who they want, have less money collectively than just one of the Democratic canidates and finally, the American people are tired of the B.S. that GWB and the Republicians have been forcing down our throats for 8 years. Any part of that you didn't understand?

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Nashville_fan — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:52:37 GMT

Rob, Phoenix, AZ:

Senator Obama apologized because he is trying to move on to more important issues.

Why is typing a memo about statements made by the Clinton campaign worse than the comments themselves?

Are you telling me that there has been NOTHING wrong with ANY of the comments that Senator Clinton and her surrogates have made about Senator Obama?

Is the Obama campaign supposed to pretend that everything is alright while Bill and Hillary Clinton unleash the dogs of hell on him?

Let's quit playing mind games - we all know dirty politics when we see it.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

RhettOracle — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:53:09 GMT

The Democrats held their fire for one night. Let's see if they can keep it up. Ronald Reagan always said the Republican's 11th amendment was: Thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow Republican. Apparently, the Democrats' 11th amendment is: Thou shalt not adopt the Republican's 11th amendment.

See, http://rhettoracle.net

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

jerry/corpus christi texas — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:57:19 GMT

So I ask you, who played the race card?

Rob, Phoenix, AZ (Sent Wednesday, January 16, 2008 11:52 AM)

The Clintons mentioned that MLK was not the driving force behind the civil rights bill signed by LBJ....

LBJ might have signed it, but MLK did the leg work...

The Clinton's tell people that Obama has not enough spade work.....

If Rush Limbaugh had said that, he would have felt like Frankenstein in that windmill while the townies were lighting torches to burn it down....

Who brought the race card into the fight?.....
The Clinton's...

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Donal — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:59:56 GMT

I refused to watch the debate after Dennis Kucinich was excluded. Likewise, I haven't watched debates that excluded Ron Paul. I won't watch NBC or any other media company if they are filtering out dissenting viewpoints from legitimate candidates.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

ndolan622, Las Vegas, NV — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:12:26 GMT

After listening to last night's debate, I could not help focus on issues others seem to have forgotten - the fact that the Clinton Administration was deluged with investigations, firings, indictments, etc. Does anyone else remember these things? And, if one has 'no knowledge' of wrong doing in their own administration, and consistently denies knowing, what does that say about their honor, integrity and leadership capabilities? Consider the same 'lack of knwledge' when it came to the recent actions of Clinton supporters. Are 'admit nothing, deny everything and make counter allegations' tactics going to work for this campaign? These were words used to describe Bill Clinton some ten years ago (and not just regarding the 'Monica' issue), and seem to be an apt description of Clinton's campaign tactics now. Also, risking the black vote seemed to be ok for Clinton because she is more focused on the Hispanic vote, which would appear a much larger potential - the Hispanics, even according to her comments as I saw them, are generally less educated. Does their 'less educated' status give her more of an advantage because she genuinely cares...or is it because they may not necessarily take the time to look back at the Clinton prior history, or be able to see through the political games? Frankly? After what I have read, and what I have seen, it's truly time for someone new...not the repeat of the same old 'dirty politics' of the past. Clinton lost my vote.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Steve, Madison WI — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:13:06 GMT

Clearly, Obama is the most thoughtful, reasoned, insightful candidate with the most leadership capabilities.

The other two are mostly hot air: Witness, probably the most single negative piece of recent legislation that is oppressive to America's poor and unfortunate is the Bankruptcy Bill.

Edwards, who will "fight and fight" because it is "personal" to him, clearly forgot to fight on this one as he voted for it, and when questioned said, "I made a mistake."

Hillary, who can "implement real change" did so in this case by screwing the poor and admitted to voting yes on the same bill. She also admitted to "making a mistake."

Only Obama voted no on this bill and said rightfully that it was heavily skewed in favor of financial institutions at the expense of the American consumer. He is the only one who acts on what he speaks. The other two are hypocrites who will say anything to get elected.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

AKB, NYC — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:17:36 GMT

"He will grow in office?"

I do not want someone who needs to grow in office - I want someone to govern on day one.

And as for the debate? It was the JV team (Obama and Edwards) against the major league pro team (Hillary). She know both of their records cold, and has specifics on every policy choice that needs to be made. She never says thing like, "I, uh, will give, uh, BILLIONS of dollars to that" (thank you Sen. Obama). She has figures, plans and specifics.

Slam dunk for Clinton - Hillary '08.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:18:27 GMT

I, for one, am not intimidated by a strong woman. But I expect her to be forthright and honest (as I would, any man). Hillary and her husband, Bill are neither and they both intimidate me because I fear the consequences of what their presidency will have upon the integrity of this country.

I thought that the elections of the 'Juan Perons' (and wives) of this world, were symptomatic of tin horn dictatorships (I do cry for you Argentina) and that we in the USA, were not susceptible to such manipulations of our strong (maybe not so strong) democratic tradition. I hope that I am proved right and that we are able to overcome the cynical manipulatios of the Clintons and their Clintonista machine.

Clinton supporters: You always wonder why we anti-Clinton people hate Hillary. Well, I can't speak for anyone but myself. I don't hate Hillary but I fear the Clinton machine. I fear that the Clintons represents the same elements that I detest in the Bush administration, powerful moneyed interests who wish to run this country as a fascist oligarchy.

Nader, whom I blame for the election of GWB in 2000(no matter what explanation he offers in his defense) is right when he says that changing Republican corporate interests to those of the Democrats is no change at all. We the people must take this government back and it doesn't have to be done in a confrontational manner, as suggested by Edwards (and Nader). The power of an involved electorate is unstoppable. Obama is the one who can inspire, he can awaken the sleeping giant and with that unleashed power, we can take our country back again!
Obama '08
Obama '08
Obama '08

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

AKB, NYC — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:18:59 GMT

And hmmm - who voted for Dick Cheney's energy bill...?

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

AKB, NYC — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:21:42 GMT

How can people talk about Obama being the winner? He fumbled through every question without a clear, thought-out or lucid statement on anything. He basically said that he doesn't want to worry about details, just talk nice and try to pull people together with some undetailed "vison" of "hope."

Maybe Hillary can hire him as a speech writer in the White House.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

--NSMsnbc — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:25:55 GMT

Dom, Penn
I must confess that I am confused by you objections to my post, so I will try to explain what I meant and hopefully that will clear things up for you ...
1) Yes, I obviously did make comparisons between both the leadership styles of B.H. Obama to G.W. Bush and H.R. Clinton to R. Cheney, and I was direct about that. I think they are fair and valid comparisons. Do you think they were not a fair nor valid comparisons when the candidates have essentially done so themselves? On a scale of Bush to Cheney styles: where would you place Obama, where would you place Clinton, if at all? Why or why not?
2) I did editorialize my opinion--which my whole post is, opinion. Posting on a blog, I think it fair to digress and share my personal opinion as to why Obama's style is okay by me.
3) On the other hand, I did not say which style was better. I could see arguments for both, and I left it with an open-ended question.
4) Finally, I said that it would be ridiculous to compare the policies that G.W. Bush and R. Cheney have enacted with the policies that B.H. Obama or H.R. Clinton would enact. Styles are one thing to compare; yet, the goals of what to achieve in office are different. And I did not compare policies between B.H. Obama and H.R. Clinton. (I even gave Clinton first billing on that point, which is subtle but important and deliberate in that I wasn't trying to be biased in making that final point).

**On a final and personal note, I must confess that I am becoming weary of the false accusation that I am a misogynist, which makes no sense if you actually knew me one iota. Frankly, I've been called an accidental racist more than misogynist to my face--albeit, most likely because I refuse political correctness in every scenario. I must ask if those making such baseless accusations are becoming as tired of making a point designed to shunt, rather than stimulate, intelligent debate as I am of reading it. Please don't answer my obviously rhetorical question.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Terry Gray Reno, Nevada — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:28:24 GMT

I would just like to point out one thing I saw on last nites debate. On the racial issue between Senator Clinton she stated she "would fire anyone in her campaign" whom she found to be racist however, last nite when she was asked about the person, she made up some excuse and was not in fact going to stand by her earler remark. To me, that shows early on,she will NOT in fact stand by her word.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Wendy-PA — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:31:36 GMT

Why are so many people saying that John Edwards doesn't have a chance? It's not up to the media or the polls to decide-it's up to the voters. If you support Edwards, then take a stand, vote for him and let the media know that you want equal time for your candidate.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Michiel Williams South Beloit, Illinois — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:33:52 GMT

Once again, John Edwards is being given the short end of the stick. If anyone listened to him, read his plan for America, paid any attention to what he is saying, they would realize he is the best prospect for getting this country back for the middle class and the poor. This is someone who was one of us, fought hard for the little people and will continue to do so once elected. We don't need to make history by electing someone for their race or gender. We need to make history by electing someone who will end the invasion of Iraq withing his first year in office, work for the middle class & poor to insure they have health insurance and homes and jobs, and will improve our standing with the rest of the world through diplomacy. FDR stated, "We have nothing to fear but fear itself." I do not live in fear of terrorist attacks, despite Bush, but do live in fear of another REPUBLICAN in the presidency. Or someone too entrenched in Washington politics to fight for the necessary changes to the system. Or someone with a vision, but without the energy or experience to carry it through. John Edwards has all of the requirements. Don't let the media pubdits and the corporate bigwigs select a candidate for us.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Rebecca — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:36:33 GMT

My boss is a really really nice guy...but his desk is a mess...can't find a thing....I write his speeches...I pay his bills....I make his plane reservations...I do everything....He makes over $750,000.00 a year.....I make $42,500.00 a year....I do the work and keep everything in order....Hillary will do the work and keep every thing organized and running smoothly....I am semi-retired...I do not want to make too much money or I will be in another tax bracket....or else I would have fired my boss years ago and taken over the firm!!!!

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

jerry/corpus christi texas — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:46:37 GMT

Jerry/Corpus Cristi....
Speaking of cards, the Repubicrooks seem to be playing with a deck full of JOKERS.

A.Brocco, Albuquerque,NM (Sent Wednesday, January 16, 2008 10:43 AM)

Does that mean the Clinton's are all out of spades to play????

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Rus, OC, CA — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:53:37 GMT

MSNBC didn't do voters in NV or around the US any favor by kicking Kucinich out of the debate. They sure showed us what they think of a well informed electorate (informed of only what they want us to know).

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

a citizen, NJ — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 19:05:12 GMT

It is very clear what needs to be done in this country. Anyone can "see" that. That's a no brainer! The issue is HOW you get the things done! It takes knowledge, skill, and experience, etc. to accomplish. Go, Hillary!

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Wendy Washington, DC — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 19:05:59 GMT

Wow.....I feel as though I'm in the Twilight Zone.....all this praise for Hillary Clinton's prize winning performance and disses for Obama. I sort of wonder if me, my mom, and my bf watched the same debate together that you all did. I'm not out to change minds cuz a voter's right to her opinion is sacred in this country of ours, but these were my impressions:

John Edwards: VERY impressed here, and I'll admit it. I may be an Obama fan in general but Edwards sparkled last night. I always found him a bit repetetive and insincere, but last night he sounded focused, passionate about the issues, and excited about expressing his nuanances in a civil way. For the first time since I began watching these debates, I found myself thinking that if Edwards was the nominee, I'd work hard for his campaign this general election. So I'm not trying to be biased. My bf, who is also an Obama fan, agreed with me that Edwards won this debate and will get respect in Nevada.

Barrack Obama: Admittedly, I like him, but I'd haveta give him the silver here. People said that he seemed bumbling, but I personally like a candidate who appears to think about each answer as he speaks rather than giving the same glazed campaign spin lines. I admit that Obama may have appeared less focused than Hillary when he talked about paper shuffling, but I agree with his point. Vision and accountability and teamwork matter way more to me than who keeps a tidier desk. Also, I thought that Obama appeared the most honest. He point blank admitted when he thought an idea was unachievable rather than sucking up to the electorate and gave each view careful consideration. He was gracious in his dealing with the race issue and his comments on Clinton. Finally, I prefer Obama's ecconomic plan (and Edwards for that matter) to Clinton's. Clinton is soooooo focused on bailing out homeowners but never addresses the truly poor, who can't afford to purchase homes in the FIRST place, as the men do in their plans. Obama, you were good, but John was excellent.

Hillary Clinton: I admit that I am not a fan, but I thought that Hillary was the weakest. This is not spin just my opinion. Hillary spoke clearly without stumbling but never seemed to answer questions as completely as Obama did. And I'll admit it: I think her constant little "subtle" jabs at the other two made her appear quite petty. Most of all, however, I was disgusted by her comments on terror. I lived through 8 years of Bush already thank you. No more fear! I will say this though, I thought Hillary's performance was far superior to her New Hampshire debut. Still not up to scratch with Edwards or Obama though. And as I said, I felt ignored by her ecconomic plan.

And so, I respectfully submit my thoughts, my fellow dems. :)

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

--NSMsnbc — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 19:11:26 GMT

Dom, Penn
I finally get your final sentence. You would NEVER compare me to Chris Matthews, but with the vein of you comments I gathered that you actually were making that comparison. Your NEVER was sarcastic. My mistake, I thought you were actually responding with substance to my post, when you were, in fact, delivering a personal attack against me. My bad, I apologize for not realizing that previously.

Hey, I'm fine with that comparison. I think Mr. Matthews is a smart man and I do admire him. Do I agree with everything he says? Of course not, but then again, I don't have to. Although, I honestly don't see too much of myself in Chris Matthews, we're pretty different people.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

T. Hill — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 19:15:40 GMT

Why is no one in the media talking about how Edwards lied when he earlier said he talked to Musharraf after Bhuttos death then last night admitted he never really spoke to him?

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Greg M. - Utica, New York — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 19:15:45 GMT

I thought all three Democratic candidates did fine, but the petty, idiotic questions asked by Tim Russert and Brian Williams in the first half hour were more suited to Access Hollywood. There is a war that doesn't seem to have an end in sight, people are losing their homes due to the mortgage meltdown, 47 million Americans don't have health care, yet Mr. Russert and Mr. Williams can't ask enought "he said" "she said" personal gossip type questions. I believe there should be some dignity involved in these events...I can't imagine Jim Lehrer of PBS asking such sophomoric questions of three serious contenders for the office of President of the United States. As long as reporters keep asking small-minded questions, we'll keep getting small-minded presidents like the current occupant of the White House.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

a citizen, NJ — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 19:18:26 GMT

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Kris, Keizer, Oregon — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 19:19:15 GMT

I too am a CLinton supporter and the comment that we need more than a person with vision is right on the button. I like Obama, but he can have all of the vision he wants, but the reality is, our government is a giant big business that base is diverse and you can't make everyone happy. You do what is right for the whole body and sometimes it takes a deal or two to be made. It is not corrupt, it is good common sense to reach a goal that is in the best interest of the United States. So claiming you have a vision and you are the man to make change....HOW!! Because you say so. Hillary does have experience and the knowledge that it takes the people to request and fight for the changes and then our government to play its role to make it so. Just like her MLK comment.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Sandy Griffith — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 19:34:34 GMT

All three candidates did great last night!

With that being said, please don't be fooled by or feared into a knee-jerk reaction. Hillary is strong and competent, I'll give her that. But, her true talent is the ability to adjust herself to fit the moment in order to win. That worries me and I don't trust it. She has shown poor judgement throughout this campaign. Do not think for one second that her negative surrogates imparting all of that damaging rhetoric against Obama weren't expressing the tone that she truly feels. I do not like or appreciate her kind of politics. It is the same business as usual and that does not mean change. It means the same story in a different package. Those fear tactics, calculated moments, in the beginning agreeing to the Nevada caucus in the casinos but now instigating a lawsuit through the teacher's union to prevent it because the Culinary Union endorsed Obama, not making a public appology for BET Bob Johnson's foolish remark about Obama's actions THIRTY YEARS AGO and two other of her surrogates for saying the same thing and on and on...spells very poor judgement!

Obama is correct. The President of the United States needs to be a uniter, a visionary and a great leader. Hillary has embarrassingly shown herself to be calculating and divisive regardless of last night's "one day" truce.

I don't want to see anymore dirty politics. America needs to stop accepting childness in government in order to gain political points. We want freshness, broadness, wit, HONESTY, and sound judgement. Please give me a break about all the experience this woman has. None of these candidates has ever been the President of the United States and none of them has any idea what to expect once they get into the White House. But we certainly don't need to bring more smut and dishonesty into that chair. We have enough of that already.

Don't lose sight of the reality that so many of Hillary's actions throughout this campaign have been negative political strategizing not unlike the foul play Bush used against John McCain in South Carolina in 2000. This does not take us forward. It takes us backwards. Obama is what is best for this country. Not someone who will stoop so low when her perceived "entitlement" to the thrown is compromised. Remember, people are afraid and panic right now because of the economy. Last month it was the war. Next month it will be Global Warming again. And after that it will be some natural disaster that we didn't see coming. The news is deadly during times like this because all you hear and see is how the country is going to hell in a hand basket. This is the perfect stage for someone like Hillary who is using all this bad news to her advantage and unfortunately is trying to kill America's wish for true change in government. And the Republicans are absolutely loving this because if she wins the nomination they believe, and so do I, that they can defeat Hillary in the National race and keep the house. They know her. They have hoards of stuff on her. Obama, on the other hand, is clean and they have nothing on him. He would be much harder to defeat. Don't let Hillary's panic button strategy sway you in the wrong direction. It is the same stuff we have always seen and boy is the Clinton machine coming down hard. See through it and see through it clearly or else we are going to go through another 4 or 8 years of Republicans or a Democrat with dishonest tendancies. Obama is non-corrupt, clean, clear and has a true and honest vision of hope for this country. Vote wisely!

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

ndolan622, Las Vegas, NV — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 20:05:06 GMT

Clinton is indeed trying to use the 'fear' factor (does sound like Bush, doesn't it?) to increase her 'vote' margin. And, if you check the facts on her 'energy/oil company perks' comment, the oil companies ended up with a net tax Increase of $300 mil (or was it bil?)- I guess she didn't check.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Doles, Miami, FL — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 20:12:26 GMT

"['Obama and Clinton, in one of their sharpest distinctions of the night, offered starkly different visions of the presidency. Obama said he believes that the job is about ‘having a vision for where the country needs to go’ rather than ensuring the ‘paperwork is being shuffled effectively.’

Clinton said. ‘But I think you have to be able to manage and run the bureaucracy.’”]

--Finally, people and the campaigns are waking up to the true distinctions between the campaigns (because really isn't necessarily policy). These two candidates have flagrantly different styles and approaches to problems.

--I think the comparison between Barack Obama and George W. Bush and the style of government is a fair comparison. They are both men of ideals and visionary. But that is where they diverge. B.H. Obama seems to have an uncanny abilitiy to sift through the bureaucracy and make the wise policy decision--he actually uses his advisors as a strength. And that is where his wisdom and his judgment comes from. For me, that's a positive.

--Furthermore, drawing out the comparision, that would make Hillary Rodham Clinton more like Dick ... Dick ... ahhh ... Richard Cheney!!! Dick Cheney is the detail guy, he's the guy who can manage the bureaucracy. So the question is, would we be better off with Dick Cheney as President?

--On a final note, I am merely comparing leadership styles. It would be foolish to compare policy or judgment for either Clinton or Obama to Dick and George. "
--NSMsnbc (Sent Wednesday, January 16, 2008 11:18 AM
Wow! I thought no one got it. That's what happens every election year-any let their emotion get the better of themselves and elect people based on false pretense. Well, I guess people will have another four or eight years to complain.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

J. Jean — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 20:13:13 GMT

So much for the term "debate." Doesn't anyone know how truly to DEBATE anymore? Propositions? Counterpoints? Timed answers? Counter-propositions? Oh, well--the dumbing down continues even (especially?) with politics and news commentators.

Anyway, Clinton showed herself ready. Edward doesn't have a chance and though I voted for him in the last primary, he's just hanging around to be picked as Obama's VP. He can dream.....

Obama was as usual too vague. It's ironic--his website has some of the most detailed plans, and they sound really good. However, I wonder how much of those he really wrote?! He even has a great section for FARMERS (remember them, anyone?!)--but I rarely hear him discuss in detail domestic policy. I'm afraid that he's just too vague in his desire to be a visionary. Clinton's sharp on specifics.

Until the "debate" last night, I wasn't sure--Obama or Edwards (since I had preferred Richardson or Biden). But now I'm for Clinton.

Why am I not all that happy about it?

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Ellis B. Kingman, Az. — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 21:16:33 GMT

There she goes again, in trying to convince people she is the one who can best lead from day one Clinton said, "being the chief executive officer, I think you have to be able to manage and run the bureaucracy". Hello, just look at the way she has ran and managed her campaign so far and one would conclude otherwise. Clinton has continually apoligized for inappropriate actions by her staff, she has been forced to fire campaign managers over misdeeds while many others have been forced to resign and she has tried to spin inappropriate statements by Bill and herself. Have we not heard all this before," I did not have sex with that woman, it is all a right wing conspiracy, 'alone' does mean 'alone' if there are people in other rooms nearby, ' is' only applies to plural and oral gentital copulation is not a sexual act". If you ask me, the Clintons were the mentors of George Bush, they taught him one in power can get away with lying, manipulating, concealing and obstructing and remain in power. No more Clintons' or Bushies, give us real change...Edwards/Obama

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

bc Indiana — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 22:00:43 GMT

nice job MSNBC in barring Kucinich - does this make you FOX lite?

A very poor call, so you get my FOX epithet: "what do you expect from a pig but a grunt"

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

manny james — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 22:33:56 GMT

Great Job Dems!!!

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

manny james,Marietta Ga — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 22:39:04 GMT

African American Male who will be voting for Hillary..she won the debate hands down.We need a leader who will be ready from day one. When did exprience become "tabu". I challenge most of the people on this site to go out looking for employment without experience..Also, i like this blog because of the large amount of Repuggg. You guys guys crack me up..Give them hell Hill..

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Jeff Richardson, Los Angeles, CA — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 22:39:30 GMT

Last night highlighted the most glaring difference between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton: while Barack Obama is a genuine person who is ready to lead, Hillary Clinton is a phony aristocrat, ready to micromanage a bureaucracy (not to mention ready to pocket even more money from the pharmaceutical and healthcare lobbies.)

I can only hope and pray that the majority of the Democratic Party realizes that our best candidate is also the candidate best equipt to defeat the Republican nominee in November: Barack Obama.

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

lydia dallas,texas — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 22:51:22 GMT

it is a close tie between clinton and obama

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

David Johns, St. Louis, Mo — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 23:15:40 GMT

You eliminate Kucinich and Gravel, then report disapprovingly that the remaining candidates played nice at your farcical debate?

Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Mike, Chicago — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 23:44:33 GMT

wow, I am really shocked at many of these posts....mr obama what is your weakness......ummmm duuuhh I lose paper alot?!? Huh. Please tell me this was a good answer. I am still undecided (honestly) between obama and clinton but the debate was really not obama's best performance. He is certainly more qualified for stump speaches.