First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

jaycee, Ventura, California — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:08:58 GMT

I’m feeling badly for all our young people who have responded so energetically to Barack’s message that we can change the quality of our political conversation. We can, but not in the course of a single election. We have the bad luck to face a candidate in our own party that epitomizes everything we’ve come to hate over the past few decades. The question now is how to deal with it strategically and still be able to look in the mirror when it’s over. If our superdelegates continue to act like lily-livered gutless wonders it’s a question we will have to answer.

We’re having this debate in my own household. I’m of the opinion that you can’t stand still with your eyes on the horizon while someone is kneecapping you for seven weeks. You’ll only wind up a pygmy. The Hilarity McClinton campaign is cynically using the idealistic impulses of Barack’s supporters against them. Attack by repeating empty assertions over and over and then when he responds asking “but what about the politics of hope?” Despicable.

You can hear the disappointment from a number of Barack’s young supporters whenever he talks about responding in kind. Look kids, if you make it that easy for these cynics to peel you off they’ll just keep doing it. They’ll say anything they think will work because they don’t share your vision. They’re determined to get their girl into office and everything and everyone else be damned. So, how do you fight someone who exploits decency as weakness without losing your soul?

You can be sure there are plenty of veterans in Barack’s campaign that are begging their candidate right now to turn them loose. Hilarity is asking for it with this ludicrous claim that she is fully vetted while Barack is not. Problem is she’s asking for a strategic reason, because she knows there is no other way to come out on top now except to drag both campaigns into the mud. She’s lost this election on merit already, so she has to go old school, even against her own party. They have no long term strategy anymore; they’re just making it up as they go along.

I agree that Barack himself needs to try and stay on the high road as much as possible, but he can’t ignore what they are doing either. Never underestimate the supreme gullibility of fifteen percent or so of the voting public. They’ll swear up and down they hate negative campaigning and then turn around and respond to the most ridiculous smears and unsupported empty assertions you can imagine. We just saw it happen. Trouble is there are enough of these mushy-headed voters to swing elections, so we can’t just cede them to a candidate willing to say anything. The sad truth is that the political high road usually ends in a cul-de-sac.

We also have a large number of potential Barack supporters, particularly in my generation, that want to make sure a nominee is willing to stand up and fight back when necessary, or they won’t feel comfortable heading into the fall campaign. These are the people Hilarity is working on now. I’m not sure how many of Barack’s younger supporters are familiar with this ‘tough liberal’ strain in the party, but they will be critical to winning this fight. Of course, you’re not supposed to trash your own party and cozy up to the Republican nominee to demonstrate your toughness. She’s way out of bounds now, but they just don’t care anymore.

Ideally you have surrogates not directly connected with the campaign do the heavier lifting, as Bill Bradley was doing the other day. That hasn’t been happening nearly enough, and I’m not quite sure why. It may be that the campaign is afraid of turning off the best and brightest among us. Now that a third of our superdelegate rescue squad seems to have gone missing in action at the worst conceivable moment, this won’t be pretty.

I know many of you don’t have the stomach for this gutter warfare, and I hope you never do. You may want to just look away for awhile and we’ll see you in September. I hope. As for me, my eviscerating pen has been laying right here on the desk this whole time, and I’m ready to pick it up. Superdelegates, where are you? Your party is about to self-destruct and you’re freezing up on us like so many deer caught in the headlights. Only you can call off the carnage now. Right now! MOVE!!!!!

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Julie "Rodham" Cleese, Lead, Co. — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:12:50 GMT

Barack should just resign from the campaign today. There is no way he can withstand the Clinton political machine. If Hillary cannot win at the ballot box, she'll take the entire primary elections to court. What we're going to see is a huge court fight over Michigan and Flordia delegates, lawsuits about "quetionable" votes in other states with cheery picked recounts in certain districts (sound familiar?). Obama should just pack in it now for the good of the Democratic party.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Kym — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:15:14 GMT

Am I the only one that thinks that allowing Florida and Michagan a doover is absolutely retarded? I don't care if 1.7 million people came out to vote, those 1.7 million people knew that there were no delegates and how do you account for the rationale people who stayed home because they knew that the delegates was not being counted? I am just saying...

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Ron Hussein — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:17:53 GMT

These stupid diversions the Clintons are pushing are more slickly placed into a narrative for the 24/7 news channels. Heaven forbid we slog through the details on how the Clinton camp was likely responsible for the Canadian fiasco, and how that bit of misinformation likely cost Obama critical votes in Ohio.

Nevermind the fact that Obama WON the TX Caucus, which, I believe gave him a net delegate win in TX, AND pushed him over the 'threshold' in the popular vote there, as well.

MSM isn't picking the stuff up that the blogs in the trenches are. Why isn't this being scrutinized a little bit more?
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/03/a_heartbeat_away.php

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

John M, Columbus, OH — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:18:02 GMT

Joe Vogel at the Huffington Post has an interesting perspective on all of this. He suggests that 1627 is the new "magic number". Since there are a total of 3253 pledged delegates, then the majority is 1627. Whoever reaches this number first is in essence, the majority holder from the people's perspective. The superdelegates would be hard-pressed to overturn the people's choice.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joe-vogel/1627-is-the-magic-number_b_90675.html

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Anne — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:49:37 GMT

When this campaign started I was genuinely excited. It was energizing to hear Obama speak of bringing change to Washington. Lord knows we need it. But the Clinton's, with their endless political strategizing, scheming, and underhanded tactics have once again turned me off. I don't care who becomes President. I don't care if they elect my neighbor's dog.

Thanks Clinton's for dousing the flame of hope.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Janice — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:53:02 GMT

The media has GIVEN Clinton control of the message more than anything that Clinton could do herself. Yes, it is the media!!!

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

WShier — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:53:09 GMT

This is a disgusting display of how crooked and corrupt American politics have become. We need a complete change, including getting rid of the Democratic Party.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Kimberly Meadows, Daytona Beach, Florida — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:54:42 GMT

H I L L A R Y C L I N T O N . C O M , of course. The next President of the United states and one of the greatest leaders we have ever had.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Rohn Jay Miller — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:54:44 GMT

Chuck:

Hey did any of you notice that last week Barack OBama won more delegates than Hillary Clinton? (193-192)

Doesn't it seem like it should be at least mentioned?

And, hey you could even add that Obama actually won more delegates in Texas than Hillary Clinton did! Wouldn't that make a credible news story?

Or are you on deadline to write something more about your friends at SNL, who rightfully should get more mention in the press than the landslide in Wyoming?

What, do they start giving you guys nitrous mid-way through the campaign?

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

JohnnyU, WA State — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:54:58 GMT

Barack is and will remain the frontrunner. He has won the Democratic primary. But the party doesn't have the leadership to call it at that and so Hillary is allowed to continue on this suicidal path taking down everything in her path, Barack, the party & herself, and clearing the way for President McCain.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Georee, Dallas, TX — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:58:26 GMT

Senator Hilary Clinton is the most secretive and divisive politician in America. “The Clinton campaign has publicly admitted that the only way they can still win this election is by tearing Barack Obama down. They have called their attacks the “kitchen sink strategy,” and Senator Clinton herself has referred to it as “the fun part” of the campaign. The result has been a constant barrage of attacks about Senator Obama’s record that they know full well aren’t true. And yet they repeat them, over and over again, day after day, in an attempt to deceive the American people just so that they can win this election.”
“Washington [Hilary Clinton] has played too much politics with the issue of war. It’s what got us into Iraq in the first place. It’s why so many brave Americans have lost their lives. And it’s why the real Commander-in-Chief test in this election isn’t about some TV ad, it’s about whether the American people will be able to trust in the judgment and the honesty of their next President.”

Their “kitchen and sink strategy” will not work this time in Pennsylvania and any other place.

Let Americans go to USA Today and Washington Times to see what the
Clintons are up to:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-03-06-clinton-library-foia_N.htm?loc=intersti
tialskip

http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080307/NATION/15653289/1001

Why is press not pursuing the story? The media should pursue the story so that Senator Clinton will be fully vetted.

George

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:58:43 GMT

If Hillary steals this nomination, there will be no longer be a Democratic Party. Don't think for a minute that the super delegates can prevent 2000 Obama delegates from walking out of the convention if the Clintons continue their thrust with or without the help of the mainstream media (including SNL). This is not a threat, merely a prediction: The misbehavior of the Clintons will cause seismic shifts in the political landscape and the spawning of a real third party will manifest.
Obama '08

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

JB, NC — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:59:02 GMT

Your analysis about who wins which states is so right on! Primary Season is contests BETWEEN DEMOCRATIC COMPETITORS! But the General Election is a contest BETWEEN TWO OPPONENTS - ONE DEMOCRAT and ONE REPUBLICAN! To try to equate the two does not make sense. The Democrats will come together in November to OPPOSE John McCain in traditional BLUE DEMOCRATIC STATES like NY, CA, MA, NJ, MD, MN, etc. no matter WHICH candidate won these in the Primaries. If people think Obama can't win NY in November over McCain then we really are in a heap of trouble! But, the difference is that Obama has pulled in many Independents and GOP people. He has a better chance, therefore, of winning some of these Purple States like Missouri and Iowa - and Red States like Virginia and Colorado and Kansas. And on Friday the all-powerful Democratic head of Philly's "Committee" - Rep. Bob Brady - made this exact point. He said EITHER DEMOCRATIC COMPETITOR will EASILY win PA in November over our OPPONENT MCCAIN! But he said Democrats are FAMILY - these Primaries are family "squabbles" - BUT in NOVEMBER, the DEMOCRATIC FAMILY will COME TOGETHER AGAINST OUR GOP OPPONENT MCCAIN! So everyone KNOWS Obama will win the BLUE DEMOCRATIC STATES like NY, NJ, MA, and CA - but he can also EXPAND the appeal to bring in Independent and GOP voters in PURPLE and RED STATES for a victory over McCain in November!

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

bill, okla — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:01:47 GMT

I want to urge every Obama supporter, in particular those who have voted for him to e-mail the DNC. We want a fair election. Re-do's by Florida and Michigan should be paid for by Florida and Michigan if they are held again. Tell the committee you'll not vote in November if Mrs. Clinton underhandedly is given the nomination. I don't want McCain but want a fair election process more. Clinton cannot win the nomination without negating the majority of voters.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

RGO, California — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:01:59 GMT

Thank you Hillary Clinton for not giving up. Because of you, every vote in every state counts. For the first time in decades, the primary election is finally meaningful to EVERYONE .. the way it should be. A few years ago, our governor was the policitian a la mode with no real experience and everybody voted for hm. Look where our state is today in total economic chaos. I refuse to support another politician a la mode ... Go Hillary

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Deborah Cushing Oklahoma — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:02:24 GMT

I agree wholeheartedly about negative campaigning. Hillary points out Obama's duplicity and it is negative campaigning. Obama's spokesperson calls Hillary a Monster and it is not negative campaigning. Duplicity is something which needs to be considered as to whether a candidate will actually fight for what they are claiming. Being a monster has never before been brought into the decision making process as far as I know.

I agree that Obama is taking the high road. Calling her a MONSTER is much better than doing the sexist thing and calling the _itch word. Add that to Michelle Obama saying she wanted to scratch Bill Clinton's eyes out and this is turning into a strange campaign.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

twocanpete — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:02:33 GMT

http://twocanpete.blogspot.com
HRC and the Democratic Power-Elites are Persistent if nothing else. If they can’t steal the election with the super delegates they’ll take it by whatever means necessary. I almost felt sorry for all the true believers who voted in the Democratic primary only to find that thousands of their votes could be nullified by a party boss or a well connected snot nosed college kid. Now after it appears that Obama would actually take the super delegate race the party bigwigs plan to change the rules again and let two scofflaw states vote after they were told they couldn’t. It’s crying shame.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Patrick, Detroit, MI — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:03:20 GMT

Obama is the front runner but the Clinton clan has roots like an oak. SNL is to the Clintons as FOX is to Bush/McWar.

Obama is getting nipped and nibbled to death. The Clintons' aren't even concerned with Hillary's image now. They're just BENT on tanking his.

Who is the frontrunner? They only try to tackle you if you have the ball. Obama has it firmly in hand and the Clintons have no prob fouling the heck out of him to fumble.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

iowan — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:04:14 GMT

It's really not Obama who is having a hard time 'withstanding the Clinton machine' or 'fighting back'. I think he's wise to ignore her (still).

Mrs. Clinton does not understand that people not only like Obama (meaning his politics, style, and substance), but also that, as would no doubt be doubly reinforced in November, the country is rejecting and repudiating HER (meaning her politics, judgment, integrity, style, and substance). If she keeps trying to shove herself down our throats (which is what her negativity is), she will continue to get the same treatment from voters. I am of the opinion that there is nothing she can do, long term, to convince voters that she is somehow magically trustworthy, or even 'experienced' in ways that set her aside from any one of maybe 500 other American political leaders.

Short term, can she and her stooges (you've gotta admire a guy like Carville who stays with it, though you can see he hardly can--but the rest: Lanny Davis? Gimme a break) keep doling out the 'gotchas'? Seems like thin gruel. And, if the journalists are not willing to really dig in, follow the money, etc, we will keep seeing, short term, these 'spin moves' and will eventually get sick of them again. So, should Obama join in? No. He shouldn't have to do the work for the rest of us.

A few fundamental questions:

1. Who owns Hillary Clinton?
2. What do each candidate's life choices tell us about them? (No, not just legislative accomplishments...if that were the standard NO member of congress over the past 20 years deserves consideration)
3. When it comes down to 'us' or 'her', which way will Clinton jump? Not a close call here.

Obama has won and should stick with what got him here. Cries for 'fighting back' or 'toughness' on his part (not yours, mine, or the slumbering press) are just bait which has no reason to be taken. He is winning (start noting this about Texas, by the way).

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Steve, Towson, MD — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:05:20 GMT

Still not reporting of voter fraud in Texas and Ohio? Why is First Read ignoring this story? Still not reporting the Canada Connection? Why is NAFTA-gate still big news in Canada? Maybe because they see plans afoot to influence our election. No one would ever suspect sweet and silent Canada. They have their agenda, too, and it's time US media stopped sleeping through this election as they did in 2002-03!

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

AG — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:05:30 GMT

With all due respect, I think it shows concerns on Clinton's part that she needs to reach out to Obama and float the notion among teh general public that she can neutralize Obama by offering him her VP slot, while Obama flat-out says he will not be a candidate for VP. I know the Clintons would like the media and the public to think that they control the message right now but I not necessarily think that is the case. And give Obama credit for winning Wyoming (handily) and for hopefully winning Mississippi tomorrow -- he derseves it. Lastly, remember that the SNL skit had Hillary Clinton advising PRESIDENT OBAMA, not the other way around.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Nicole, Chicago — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:05:30 GMT

That's really rich Julie "Rodham"! How dare you say that Obama should quit when he's WINNING!!! People who support Hillary have bought into the most manipulative campaign ever. She might as well be running to be McCain's veep with all the ammo she is giving them to use against Obama. She is the one who is tearing apart the democratic party! Quit now Hillary!

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Essen, Chantilly, VA — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:06:19 GMT

For months now, MSNBC has been an extended wing of the Obama campaign machine. It is too bad that you feel frustrated when SNL turns up for Clinton.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Disgusted in Monroe, Louisiana — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:07:17 GMT

HRC reminds me of George W. Bush in that both will do ANYTHING to win. I guess that is why American politics have been dominated by these two families since 1988!! This notion of allowing Florida and Michigan to have a "re-do" will certainly set a terrible precedent. It will result in complete chaos in future elections because why should ANY state follow the rules if the penalty will later be retracted and the state will be allowed to vote at the end of the day? HRC is pushing for this because it is the ONLY way that she can take the lead in the popular vote and this would pave the way for the politico superdels to feel "OK" about putting her over the top. If Obama hangs onto the lead, the superdels will be apprehensive about " going against the will of the people", so we have to make sure that he loses that lead. It looks as if once again the state of Florida will play a critical role in allowing someone to "steal" the election. I thought that 2000 was bad enough. I really don't blame Florida though because we will always have this type of chaos with politicians like George W and HRC because they will literally do ANYTHING to win.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Janet, Manchester, NH — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:07:28 GMT

Julie...I find your blog interesting. Why should Obama pack it in when he is in the lead? He has more delegates, more popular votes, and has won more states. What logic are you using? It sounds like the irrational, delusional Clinton logic that also says that Obama should take the VP job. The Clinton supporters need to know that Obama is in this for the long haul. He has and will fight the good fight. The Clinton machine is responsible for the division in the Democratic party...no one disputes that fact. If by some chance Clinton steals this election she will not be elected President. The young voters will not vote, the Independents will vote for McCain, and the anti-Clinton Democrats will do one or the other. It is obvious to the casual observer that the Clintons are in this race for the Clintons alone. The don't care about the American people. If they did Hillary would stop lying and start running an honest campaign. Of course, she knows that if she does that she would lose because Barack Obama is more qualified than she is, has more experience, and actually has integrity. I'm so sorry you drank the Clinton Kool Aid.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Eric, Williamsburg VA — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:07:32 GMT

Regarding the "Mulligan Primaries" of Michigan and Florida... it seems like it would be unfair to move towards a mail-in primary as that is not the way the first was conducted, which would favor Clinton. It seems unfair for a caucus for the same reason, as it would favor Obama. With the entire discussion focusing on how the PEOPLE of Florida and Michigan should be heard, it only seems fair to allow do-overs in these two states to allow the PEOPLE to be heard, but to disallow the Superdelegates from those two states to cast their votes. This in my opinion would be the fairest way to conduct these do-overs. Clinton (and her superdelegate supporters from FL and MI) would be happy that they would have two more states to win (most likely) especially with the popular vote. This seems like the onyl fair way to do it...

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Stacy, Virginia — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:07:40 GMT

I hope Obama agrees to just seat the Florida delegates as they are and then they can split Michigan 50/50. He will still be winning. It will end the wait and he will look even more of a concilitator.
The Clinton's do not want the votes there....they want the Superdelegates to not do anything until they can scramble like crabs in a bucket.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

TEXAS -THE LONE STAR STATE — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:07:41 GMT

OBAMA IS NOT,NOT,NOT ELECTABLE IN NOVEMBER.....
===========================================
MILLIONS OF INDEPENDENTS WILL VOTE REPUBLICAN IF OBAMA IS ON THE TICKET
==================================================
R E M E M B E R M E..........
================================

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

jeanie o, saint inigoes, md — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:07:57 GMT

Julie "Rodham" Cleese - couldn't disagree with you more. Hillary is REALLY turning off some lifetime democrats, myself included. If she is the candidate, rest assured, I'm staying home - in all good conscience, I cannot, and will not vote for more of the same. She is the one destroying the party and thanks in part to her nastiness I changed parties.

BTW - I'm one of those over 50 white women she is so convinced are firmly on her side.

PS - Bill can take a flying leap too while I'm at it.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

john w. St. Louis, MO — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:08:15 GMT

and that's OK with you, Julie?

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

wapitig8r — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:08:36 GMT

Why should Barack resign when Hillary is the one destroying the party? That makes about as much sense as Billary for president.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Eric, NY, NY — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:08:49 GMT

Barack Obama should just quit. If he has not been able to deliver a knock out punch to Hillary by now how the heck could he possibly beat McCain?

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

emmy — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:08:59 GMT

Obama has divided the democratic party..what they set out to do..i believe Oprah and Obama got together,conjured a plan to start a movement and people fell for this..this is a presidential race not American Idol..this Obama needs to pullout for the good of the country

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Donna Richardson, Antioch, TN — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:10:53 GMT

Has anyone noticed that the people coming out for Obama are Kennedy, Kerry, Hart, Dodd all tried to win the presidential election but did not. Doesn't that say something about Obama's endorsements?

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

RENEA,PLYMOUTH,MI — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:11:37 GMT

HILLARY CALLS OBAMA A EMPTY SUIT,YET THEY AGREE ON MOST OF THE ISSUES.SO MY QUESTION IS DOES THIS MAKE HILLARY A EMPTY PANTSUIT?

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

jodi from jerzee — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:12:28 GMT

Julie from "Rodham",

You should just pack up your keyboard and find somewhere else to post that nonsense! The only person who needs to leave the scene is Hillary crooked Clinton. Just because Obama is doing his best to stay above the fray and not reduce himself to ignorant tactics, doesn't mean he can't hold his own. I think the Clintons are only ruining themselves and further dividing the Democratic party. If this witch someohow steals the nomination, the Republicans will surely win in November. Mark my word!

OBAMA '08!!!!!!!!!

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Kip Dondlinger, Overland Park, KS — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:13:15 GMT

"the media can only cover what the campaigns deliver"

This quote from the above article is a sad commentary on the state of the U.S. news media. The media is lazy and only covers the things that they are spoon fed by the campaigns.

Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Victoria Riess...you should be better than this. How about doing some real reporting this week instead of just repeating empty Clinton rhetoric.

Obama in '08!

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

HT — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:14:07 GMT

I don't think the Democratic party has any control over this election.The mud slinging began many months ago---the only difference is the media and Obama treskies were slinging the mud---and having a darned good time.Now Obama is feeling a little heat and does not seem to handle it well---hence his statement that Hillary was for torture.Not a very good lie.Personally I have been turned off by the whole election and the blah,blah,blah---this vote counts,this vote does not count.Whatever will be will be---in other words my dears I don't give a damned.No more media blabbering will take my time or attention---it is all garbage.The greaybeards already know who the nominee will be.An hour or 2 caucus has left too many out of the process.I worked on the election in MI and it was very crowded and we were very busy as so many came to vote,and it was a snowstorm day.Absente ballots were at an all time high.I am angry that Obama wants to disenfranchise our votes--but I understand why he doesn't--for the same reason he took his name off the ballot.So many of you from all different states have also said FL and MI should not count---reminds me of that saying when then they came for the jews I said nothing ,etc.-----when they deny you your vote who will be there for you?

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Michiel Rockford, IL — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:14:21 GMT

The idea that voters in the DEMOCRATIC party could be discounted by that same party in inconceivable to me. I am a lifelong democrat, and I firmly believe every vote should count. The Democratic party must find a way for Florida and Michigan to be included and representative of the voters.

I received this article from a jewish friend and would like to know if this is something the media has investigated.

Obama Dodges Farrakhan Issue

Ronald Kessler

March 5, 2008

It’s one thing for Barack Obama to have a minister, friend, and sounding board who supports and admires Louis Farrakhan and whose church gave him an award.

It’s another thing for Obama to dissemble about it.

That’s what Obama did recently when he told Jewish leaders in Cleveland, “An award was given to Farrakhan for his work on behalf of ex-offenders, completely unrelated to his controversial statements.”

In fact, the award, named for Obama’s minister Jeremiah Wright Jr., was given for “lifetime achievement” and for Farrakhan’s “influence on the African-American community.” The presentation of the award last December and the accompanying article in Trumpet, Wright’s Trinity United Church of Christ magazine, never mentioned ex-offenders.

On the contrary, the article in the November/December issue of Trumpet begins by calling Farrakhan — who refers to Jews as bloodsuckers and whites as blue-eyed devils — an “icon.” It ends by saying that he “truly epitomized greatness.”

The article quotes Wright heaping praise on Farrakhan, whom he helped in organizing the Million Man March in Washington in 1995. Wright lauded Farrakhan as one of the giants of the African-American religious experience in the 20th and 21st centuries.

“When Minister Farrakhan speaks, black America listens,” Wright said. “His depth on analysis [sic] when it comes to the racial ills of this nation is astounding and eye-opening. He brings a perspective that is helpful and honest.”

Hailing Farrakhan’s “integrity and honesty,” Wright went on to say, “His love for Africa and African-American people has made him an unforgettable force, a catalyst for change, and a religious leader who is sincere about his faith and his purpose.”

Obama has said he found religion through Wright in the 1980s and consulted him before deciding to run for president. He prayed privately with Wright before announcing his candidacy last year.

After Newsmax broke the story of the award to Farrakhan on Jan. 14, Obama issued a statement purportedly addressing the issue. However, Obama ignored the main point: that his minister and friend had spoken adoringly of Farrakhan and that Wright’s church was behind the award to the Nation of Islam leader.

Instead, Obama adroitly said, “I decry racism and anti-Semitism in every form and strongly condemn the anti-Semitic statements made by Minister Farrakhan. I assume that Trumpet magazine made its own decision to honor Farrakhan based on his efforts to rehabilitate ex-offenders, but it is not a decision with which I agree.”

In fact, not only is Trumpet owned and produced by Wright’s church out of the church’s offices, Wright’s daughters serve as publisher and executive editor.

Entranced by Obama, the media largely ignored the story.

Having gotten away with sidestepping Wright’s adoring comments about Farrakhan, Obama went further on Feb. 24 when he spoke to Jewish leaders in Cleveland. This time he flatly said that the award was because of Farrakhan’s work with ex-offenders. To date, no news outlet has pointed out that Obama’s claim is false.

While Tim Russert asked Obama during the last Democratic debate about Farrakhan’s support of him, he never pressed him about his relationship to Wright. In his comments to Jewish leaders in Cleveland, Obama continued to tiptoe around Wright and what he stands for. As in the past, without specifying how he disagrees, Obama said he does not “necessarily” share Wright’s views, which include blaming America for the 9/11 attacks because of what the minister calls its racist and violent policies.

Obama told the Jewish leaders that the award to Farrakhan “showed a lack of sensitivity to the Jewish community.”

That is an understatement.

If John McCain’s minister, friend, and sounding board gave an award to white nationalist David Duke, would Obama have said the gesture showed “insensitivity” to blacks, or would he have issued a searing condemnation expressing outrage?

Obama went on to explain away Wright’s anti-Zionist statements as being rooted in his anger over the Jewish state’s support for South Africa under its previous policy of apartheid. As with his claim that the award to Farrakhan was made because of his work with ex-offenders, Obama made that up out of thin air. Wright’s statements denouncing Israel have not been qualified in any way.

Wright has equated Zionism with racism and has compared Israel with South Africa under apartheid.

“The Israelis have illegally occupied Palestinian territories for over 40 years now,” Wright has said. “Divestment has now hit the table again as a strategy to wake the business community and wake up Americans concerning the injustice and the racism under which the Palestinians have lived because of Zionism.”

Those views run parallel to Farrakhan’s, who has said that there will be “no peace for Israel, because there can be no peace as long as that peace is based on lying, stealing, murder, and using God’s name to shield a wicked, unjust practice that is not in harmony with the will of God.”

Much as most of us would appreciate the symbolism of a black man ascending to the presidency, what we have in Barack Obama is a slippery politician whose closeness to Wright underscores his radical record. Aside from showing poor judgment, it is inconceivable that Obama could be so close to Wright for more than two decades and not share at least some of his views.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Dazed and Confused — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:14:49 GMT

Pretty much what it all comes down to is this: the only way Obama wins if if Michigan and Florida don't count. Indeed, if these two states had voted at the proper time, say on Super Tuesday, this thing would have been over a long time ago and Clinton would be the presumptive nominee. So, just how silly and biased has the press become? Well, the narrative is that Sen. Obama is noble and good for wanting to exclude Florida and Michigan and Sen. Clinton is evil and calculating for wanting to include them. Alice, it looks like we fell through the looking glass again!

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Sherri, Charleston WV — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:14:51 GMT

I agree with Tim Russert....if Hillary's saying out of one side of her mouth that Obama has no experience to be POTUS, but on the other side say he would make a geat vice president(one breath away from Oval Office, folks) then the HYPOCRACY has hit a new high mark. Ya cannot have it both ways madam. IF Hillary grabs the nomination, she'll be under tremendous pressure to name Obama as VP: Obama, when he wins the nod, is under no oblgation WHATSOEVER to name Hillary to his ticket-------she absolutely knows this and is trying to appease all the negativity she's generating right now. OBAMA 08

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Jeanne Beaumont, Wenham, MA — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:14:57 GMT

It's clear Clinton appeals to those who see themselves as the Victims of society. too bad about all those women who can't let go of their injuries long enough to understand that they won. To still feel so victimized is more a comment on them than the realities of the workplace. I'd be embarrassed to support her.
P.S. I had no idea SNL was so OLD! Of course, I haven't watched it in years because it hasn't been funny in years.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

MBM — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:15:38 GMT

Has Hillary experienced a mental episode this past week?
First, she lied outright to the people of Ohio about NAFTA. Don't think McCain won't exploit that. Also, how can the people of Pennsylvania trust her(or any of the rest of us)?
Then, she endorses McCain - several times. Does she really believe that 35 year experience bit she is promoting? That should really fly in the general election.
Finally, she demonstrated her complete lack of allegiance to the Democratic party and a total lack of integrity and ethics regarding her actions about the Michigan and Florida situations.
Oh, and what is this joining of forces to be on the same ticket? If you were Obama, would you want to be the one heartbeat between Hillary and the presidency? She is apparently so obsessed with becoming president that she is willing to subject her daughter and herself to continuing humiliation in front of the world.
Hillary is starting to become like Nixon.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

sabchi — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:16:06 GMT

Julie "Cheesehead", you've got to be kidding, right?!

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

C A, Tuscaloosa, AL — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:16:45 GMT

Who Is the Front Runner?

Kind of a dumb question is it not?

Obama is the front runner. He just won in Wyoming, will win in Mississippi, leads in both the pledged delegate count and popluar vote, will do well in PA and win most State primaries that follow. If Michigan and Florida have a do-over Obama will win or break even in Michigan and stay close or break even in Florida.

Obama will be the nominee of the Dem party. If the Dem party allows the Clintons to steal this nomination Obama voters by the thousands will abandon the party and shatter any chances of Hillary beating McCain in the General election. And you can take that to the bank. A movement has already begun to be sure that the Dem party gets this message.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Lisa — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:19:07 GMT

Perhaps Barack isn't responding to Clinton's Desperate and Dirty political tricks because he doesn't need to. Like you said Obama has "a nearly an insurmountable margin" of delegates. But the media is enjoying Clinton's show, as proved by the unncecessary reference to something as insignificant to the race as SNL, so they're keeping this foolishness going. It's a such a shame that well run political campaigns have resorted to this foolishness in order to entertain people because that's all it's accomplishing. Barack will be the Democratic nominee. Hillary needs to pull out and put her support behind him to increase the chances for a Democrate winning the Presidency. But it's unlikely that the Clinton's would do something classy and sensible like that.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

LUE — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:20:21 GMT

IDIOTS!!! HOW MANY OF YOU CANNOT SEE..HILLARY WON TX (A REPUBLICAN STATE) BECAUSE REPUBLICANS VOTED FOR HER TO BLOCK OBAMA. REPUBLICANS HAD NOTHING TO LOSE EXCEPT THE ELECTION IF THEY HAD PLAYED FAIR. CAN WE SAY POLITICS AS USUAL...AGAIN.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Ken Collins/ Wagoner, Oklahoma — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:20:35 GMT

HOG WASH !!
The Clintons should be forced out by the DNC after Sen. Obama wins MISSISSIPPI and Pennsylvania !!!

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

sabchi — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:20:39 GMT

Julie "Cheesehead", you've got to be kidding, right?!

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Nicholas: Minnesota — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:20:43 GMT

" ...and the commander-in-chief question."
--Ironically, in her 3 a.m. advertisement, Clinton used stock footage. In which one of the people actually supports Obama. Ha!

"Sure, it's outside the June 10 DNC deadline for holding delegate contests, but won't the DNC provide an exemption?"
--That's right! Punish them for breaking the rules on one side, by bending them on the other. Oh my goodness, what a debacle.

"Clinton will win a LARGE chunk of those supers, because she stuck by the two states in their feud with the DNC."
--I've kind of wondered if the votes in both FL and MI would reflect that fact. A re-vote would be one-issue politics, and that one issue would be non-substantiative.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Ron — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:21:45 GMT

Obama has to return to giving inspirational speeches. Hillary and her machine have succeeded in throwing him off message.Hillary is good at belittling people. Look out Monica if she becomes president.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Roberta L. /nyc — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:22:04 GMT

This: "If Hillary cannot win at the ballot box, she'll take the entire primary elections to court," is exactly why Obama should NOT quit. If Hillary takes the nomination from Obama in any way other than legitimately winning it through gaining delegates (which is unlikely) many, many voters will be disenfranchised. They will turn away from the Democratic party and refuse to vote for her.

In other words, she could steal the nomination, but she'd never win the election in the fall. Then again, if Mccain won, Hillary could run in 2012, so maybe she'd be willing to sacrifice the party for that chance. I wouldn't doubt it.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

KC — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:22:09 GMT

Julie Cleese, if Hillary does that then I think it will lose her a lot voters. She may win the Democratic nomination but turn off a lot of voters in the process. You can't steal the nomination you have to earn and she hasn't Barack has earned it with his popularity (whether people like it or not) even coming away from Texas with more Delegates than Hillary.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Skunky, Knoxville, TN — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:22:45 GMT

Hillary's experience is certainly showing through: backstabbing; Swiftboating; gutter politics; personal "glory" above party and national interests; if I can't win by the rules, I'll give the election to the Republicans; experience is what I say it is (is);only the elite should be given power.
She is performing a parody of her husbands "I did not have sex with that woman" line by saying, in so many words, I was really the co-President when my husband was in office.
Wake up America! How gullible can you be?

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Steve Moore, Minneapolis, MN — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:23:32 GMT

Why would the loser be picked as the winner? The person who should pack it in is the one who is negative, divisive and most importantly losing. So, the logic is that since Hillary is willing to do anything, even destroy the party, that Barack should give up? Typical Hillary logic: I'll destroy the party and blame the person who won. Now there's a person to look up to.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Dan Arnold, Richland, WA — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:24:17 GMT

I guess I don't know much about politics because I don't understand why, when every poll shows Obama would do better than Clinton in a general election against McCain, Obama is not the overwhelming choice for Democrats, especially for the super delegates.

The fact, as reported here, that he likely has longer 'coat tails' in Congressional races and that Republicans think they would have a better chance against Clinton, add fuel to this argument.

Clinton has higher negatives and Obama does better than she does with independents and moderate Republicans. I guess the reason I don't understand politics is that it has little to do with facts and objectivity.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Live Free or Die, NH — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:24:38 GMT

It is clear that the VOTERS will not decide the nominee.
Niether candidated will achieve the necessary # of pledged delegates to clinch it. We know this!
The remaining primary contests (and all those thus far, for that matter) will be, essentially, exercises in futility. The VOTERS WILL NOT DECIDE the nominee!
So, SUPERDELEGATES, WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR?!!! Don't tell us that you need more time to get to know the candidates. That's insulting to all the millions of ordinary people who ARE paying close attention to this race. If you, SUPERDELEGATES, haven't been paying attention, then you haven't been doing your jobs.
The outcome of this race will be a virtual tie. WE KNOW THIS!
We also know that you SUPERDELEGATES are supposed to vote your conscience. Well, do you have no conscience? Will your inaction be the cause of an increasingly negative and destructive race, giving campaign fodder for McCain to use against us?
It is clear that the outcome of this race is in your hands. THE TIME IS NOW, SUPERDELEGATES! Throw your support behind one or the other, and the voters (in the remaining contests) will ratify your decision. If not, then that's what the convention is for.
IT'S YOUR MOVE, SUPERDELEGATES! WE NEED YOU TO ACT!!!

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Bill, Santa Fe — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:26:15 GMT

Yup, Hillary Clinton sure attacked Obama when she made his advisor have that meeting with the Canadians to tell them Obama doesn't mean what he says about NAFTA. Plus I'm certain you must be right that the Clinton Machine set up Samantha Powers so she would say that Obama doesn't really mean what he says about Iraq. Then the Clinton controlled media had the nerve to expect that Obama would, like, answer more than eight questions. Let's not forget the Hillary Clinton attack dogs that are telling American citizens in Michigan and Florida that they should get to re-vote. What a bunch of kneecappers those Clinton's are!

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Live Free or Die, NH — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:26:34 GMT

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Chistine Bouchard, Derry,N.H. — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:27:27 GMT

I would hope for the sake of the future of this country we would not base the most important vote of our lives and our childrens future on some skit from all places SNL.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Kathy, Lansing Michigan — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:27:43 GMT

If Senator Obama has the delegate lead, he should be the nominee. What if the Obama supporters themselves decided to vote for Ralph Nader in the Fall if Sen. Clinton takes the nomination with her little state/small state argument? Then the party would have a measurement of the mutiny from the party and I doubt that she could beat Jonh McCain.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

lisa, weston, fl — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:27:42 GMT

Julie

I agree with you to a certain extent, but I don't believe its a reason for Obama to throw in the towel. I do believe that Clinton will cheat, lie and steal her way to the nomination. What kind of lessons are we showing the younger generation? The rules of Florida and Michigan were set before a single vote was casted in the primary, however, now that Hillary is losing, by what people call an insurmountable lead by Obama, she wants to change the rules in the middle of the game.

If Clinton was winning, this would not be an issue. As a woman, I used to respect and admire Hillary. I admire her tenacity in the face of adversity, however, this primary season has highlighted the real Hillary, and sorry to say, she is a MONSTER. If the DNC allows her to change the rules and steal the nomination, I am changing my party affliation to Independent and voting for NADER 08.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Lynn — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:28:14 GMT

If your going to mention that Clinton is getting "an incredible lift from SNL" you might as well throw in Obama getting a cover and endorsement from Rolling Stone magazine.

See what the Democratic race has come to? But we shouldn't be surprised, the Clinton's are the epitome of immorality. I am impressed by the class Obama has shown in the face of Clinton's last minute desperate attempts for the nomination.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

PT, Kannebunk, Maine — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:28:40 GMT

jaycee..... I agree with you. The surrogates need to be more assertive in responding to the things the Clinton campaign asserts.

The press should be a little more consciencious about being used as a vessel by the Clinton group. You can't be satisfied with just repeating things, but investigate things and see where things lead too!

HOPE isn't lost..... Obama 08'

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

john doe, los altos — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:28:41 GMT

LEADERSHIP IS NOT GIVEN. ITS TAKEN

Sometimes leadership is all about asserting your status. Hillary is very good at it. This is the weakness of Barack. If he cannot asset that he is the front runner in delegate count, in popular vote, in number of states - what can he assert on?

He has to shut her out of the narrative as well as media messaging. He cannot let her in.

If one were to hold a nation wide primary on the same day, he sure will win hands down as many of the caucus votes will turn in more popular votes - why does he not make that claim?

Why does he not make the claim that all democratic states will vote democrat and he will get more?

Why does he not make the claim, had Edwards not been there, he would have taken New Hampshire.

He should have had Edwards endorse him by March 4th - which would have helped him on March 4th.

The message is - he does not have to go negative - but he has to assert he is the leader.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Jesse, Burnsville, MN — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:28:57 GMT

I do not understand why so many females are still sticking with Hillary. She has done more to embarass your gender than one could imagine. She has tried to look like a tough woman, which is admirable. But then, when it is politically expedient, she all of a sudden becomes the woman as a victim.

As a male, I have an strong, independent-minded wife, which is what I love most about her. We both agree that Hillary's action have been detrimental to females all over the country who strive to be leaders. It is really sad that so many women just want a woman as President and couldn't give a darn about that person's mentality.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Alise, GA — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:29:13 GMT

The Trouble with a Personality Based Movement -

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/3/10/94353/3271

In Texas, Obamabots voted for Obama - and didn't vote for down ticket Dem races or local amendments.

More proof that Obama supports the Obamacrat Party - NOT the Democratic Party.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Pamela, Chicago, Il — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:30:35 GMT

I understand Sen. Clinton's pushing for a joint ticket, with Barack’s lead in the popular vote, his winning states she declared unwinable and the delegate math doing her no favors, she cannot make it back to the White House without him on the ticket. In order for real change to take hold, we need to part ways with the with the policies of the Bush Administration that Sen. Clinton has so closely aligned herself with. The last thing this country wants is a President and Vice President who disagree on the fundamental direction of the country.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Brandy, Fort Hood, TX — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:30:55 GMT

Are you kidding Julie? Would you ask a marathon runner who is in the LEAD to step aside for the second-place runner half-way through the race? Not only does your post have no point, but it displays the same kind of unrequited condescension of which the Clinton campaign seems to have limitless quantities. I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion that the anything-to-win, self-destructive kind of politics that Mrs. Clinton has displayed should in any way be rewarded. But let me explain this to you - not only is she losing pledged delegates by being ridiculously presumptuous, but she will lose countless super delegates as well.

In the general, she will not only appear shrill and cold, but deceitful unless she speeds up her disclosure of tax information and other records. The fact that the mainstream media has been so kind to her thus far (what other candidate would be given the same kind of support to continue after losing in every meaningful category), she should recognize as a blessing.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Jimbo, Mesa, AZ — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:31:23 GMT

To Julie "Rodham" Cleese, Lead, Co. Is that really the message we want to send to our youth. You can't win no matter what so just quit!

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

AP from IL — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:31:40 GMT

Obama shouldn't attack Clinton in a conventional sense. That is what she is baiting him to do. I personally think he should turn her into a joke because that is basically what she is. Or better yet, plant the seeds of doubt about her temperment, psycological and emotional fitness to be president.

It certainly appears to me that she is on a full bender right now. She is allowed to operate in an altered state of fantasy because of the media. They have become, for all practical purposes, her drug dealers, reinforcing the notion that perception trumps factual reality.

-It doesn't matter that Obama has won twice as many states as her, she won the BIG states! (Dems always win those states in the General and Obama will too.)
-MI and FL should count! (If they wanted to count why did they break the rules? Should we tell our children, "screw rules. They're not important"?)
-Hillary should be answering the 3:00 AM phone. (If you read the NYT today, it doesn't appear that she can answer her own campaign's phone. Obama has run a much tighter ship than she has.)
-Caucuses don't matter. (Is that because she wasn't able to foresee the importance of those delegates when she didn't wipe Obama out on Super Tuesday? Or maybe it's because the type of people who attend caucuses are generally better educated and better informed than the average voter who gets their political information from Saturday Night Live and viral emails.)
-Don't worry, kids. Obama might be my VP. (Dear God that is the worst of all. Obama playing third fiddle to Bill Clinton after all the insulting, racist, and condescending things he has said?)

You're on your own, old girl. After splitting the party and making a fool of yourself doing it, good luck in the general.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

lb, ne — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:32:03 GMT

Mr. Wolfson says:
“She thinks the way to manage effectively is to get a lot of smart people around who don’t agree and let them work out their differences creatively,” said Howard Wolfson, her communications director. “Let them hash through things, and as a result, you come up with the best process.” end quote

Shouldn't she release the list of the "really smart people" she's going to have on that 3am conference call?

Her method/personality/style/ seems to mimic our current failed president...I wonder, who will be her Brownie?

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Margaret, NYC — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:32:49 GMT

Latest from the Canadian government - Hillary did not contact them.
Only Obama did.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080307.wnaftagate0307/BNStory/National/home

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20080308.NAFTA08/TPStory/National

But don't look for this in the MSM - or for Obamabots to discontinue their lies about it.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

18 years rule — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:33:18 GMT

Hillary is a FIGHTER, American RIGHT now NEEDS a fighter. Vote with your conscious.
I think it's time for Obama put his ego aside. It will be great if he starts thinking Clinton-Obama ticket. First it’s good for Demos, second it's good for himself, and last it's good for American People. He is 46. If he can help Clinton to be a GOOD president, after 8 years, it will be his turn. At that time, he is only 54 with 8 years Washington Politics. He keeps saying he wants different Washington politics. But that's RISKY for American right now, EVEN IF he can deliver it. You have to KNOW IT before DESTROY IT. If you don't know it, you just simply can not destroy that old system, a 300 YEARS GUERRILLA.
Question: If you are not so sure you can destroy old system, how can you promise to voters you will bring new things and destroy old things? It just likes “Read My Lips”. It’s emptiness. People don’t get it.
My 13 year old son is for Obama. Those youths are naïve politically. So we end up with 18-28 years youths rule 58-68 years politicians. That’s the reality. But
THAT’S THE RISK AMERICAN SHALL NOT TAKE.
I bet Clinton will take the country back into right track in both economy and world image, and we will see bright light again. Then it will be also sure that Obama can follow Clinton to be First African-American President. At that time, HE WILL CERTAINLY HAVE MY VOTE.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Cathy Boyd, London, ON — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:33:46 GMT

Boo Hoo, Jaycee. Wasn't it Truman who said "if you can't stand the heat..get out of the kitchen." Perhaps Obama should get out of the kitchen.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Brent, MIchigan — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:33:56 GMT

I feel Obama is missing a big point. He has shown that by winning the smaller states, everyone's voice deserves to be heard. Clinton shows that the BIG voice is all that matters. I live in Michigan and want my voice heard. Our voices need to be heard.
Clinton, by running in MI and FL, against the direct orders of the NDP, has shown that she will do what she wants, not in the best interest of the entire process, but in her own agenda. How is this going to play out as our president? Personal loyalty to friendship and self-promotion over what is best advised by the people that know what is going on and the reprocussions of negligent acts needs to be left in the playground. It doesn't belong where you have the lives of millions of people in your hands.
This is not a debate, or a popularity contest! This is what is best for the country, The UNITED STATES of AMERICA! If you want self-promoting and to see yourself on TV as a media puppetmaster - move to LA and get into rehab. You want to be president - act like one. Direct your campaign as you would the country and let the people's voices be heard.
Ms. Clinton, you need to get a clear direction and control. We have nation media coverage here. Whether you say in TX, or OH, if it a cotradictory message, we hear it. Michigan has the busy boarder crossing in the US. We also have the highest job losses and financial hardship. Don't give us your Texas speach here.
Mr. Obama, you need to man up and get your voice heard loud and clear. Promote everyone's voice and you will hear good news from MI and FL.
Mr. McCain, enjoy the show. It must feel great to watch the opposition beat each other up for your benefit.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Alise, GA — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:34:09 GMT

I'm feeling very badly that so many Obamabots have been duped.
Sad.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

K"Hussein"J, Dallas, TX — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:35:00 GMT

Jaycee, that was a very thought-provoking posting. No, I do not want to see Sen. Obama stoop to McClinton's level- he has too much integrity for that, but I do think that he does have to dispel the lies, and point out facts regarding McClinton (the so-called "experience" that she touts, and her voting record while in the senate, etc.), which unfortunately has to be revealed by him because Americans have short selective memories with regard to McClinton's history. Also, besides the McClintons spouting these smears we have the MSM that fuels it. I had no idea how "in-the-McClinton's-pockets" the MSM was until the MSNBC reporter got suspended. Now, I've noticed that Faux News is more "fair and balanced" than MSNBC and CNN (Clinton News Network)put together. There is absolutely no place to go to see unbiased television news reporting. So far as the superdelegates go, I have just about lost all respect for them. They are playing a dangerous game, and the only ones who will lose in the end will be the Democrats and the American people. If they mess this up in the end, this is one Democrat who will become an Independent.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Pacheck, Huntington Beach, Ca. — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:35:51 GMT

In the eyes of the world we are not taken very seriously. We have a political system that even americans don't and can't understand. We attack a backwords country to plunder their resources and we end up going seriously into debt. Our internal news revolves around celebreties in rehab. Our president don't have a clue how much a gallon of gas costs and could care less because he is an oilman. The vice pres. gets drunk and shoots his bud in the face then all is forgiven and forgotten. The best candidates in the presidential race are forced to drop out and three substandard gameshow hosts pretend to battle for leader of the free world. It is no wonder that regular/normal people don't want to even get involved. Just trying to survive is all the reality they can deal with.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Edna — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 16:58:13 GMT

Now this “child in bed” news add is the true form plagiarism. Clinton buys this add and makes us all believe it is her own idea. She never stated that she bought this add which was actually created many years ago. This is another of the many good examples of the Clinton’s under handed mentality and actions projected onto Barack Obama.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Chris — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 16:59:39 GMT

"H I L L A R Y C L I N T O N . C O M , of course. The next President of the United states and one of the greatest leaders we have ever had. "

WHAT????

WOW!! And they call the Obama supporters DELUSIONAL?

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

John Mehan, San Francisco, CA — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 17:02:54 GMT

It appears that most of the super delegates are about the same age as the Clintons, and like the Clintons, are mired in the past. If they stick with the Clintons in spite of the Obama lead, as Hillary is urging them to do, what a traversty that would be!

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Liz, Asheville, NC — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 17:05:19 GMT

This whole election is getting too nasty, and the Clintons are at the heart of it. FL and MI knew their delegates wouldn't count long before the election and ALL candidates agreed to it. The rules cannot/should not be changed in mid-contest!!! Look at ALL the ways in this "First Read" that the Clintons spin the facts and the issues. We can call it Rovian, but the spinning began in earnest with the Clintons and Bill's lying about Monica, if you recall. If Gov. Crist of FL was so concerned about the votes of his Democratic citizens counting, he should have made some changes pre-primary. And what in the world is the NJ governor doing in the mix? The corrupt politicians are coming to the fore, the good ol' boys, the ones who play for themselves and NOT the people. I cannot understand why anyone would vote for more of this divisiveness. You don't think Hillary is divisive? Look at what is going on now. What do you think 4 years of her reign would do? The first commentor mentioned what this cat fight does for the young voters; I'm a 63-year-old woman and the nastiness is sickening me! Not only can Clinton NOT unite the country, she's splitting the Democratic Party! Yes, Hillary needs to be forced out by the Democratic Party or it's a sure win for McCain.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

suzy, san francisco — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 18:02:56 GMT

I find it so humorous that some of you think Hillary should quit.
The last time I looked, this country of ours is still a Democracy and we should pride ourselves on having a choice when so many countries don't.
This is a fair fight - it is a campaign. I will not say who I support, but I think Hillary is getting some what of a bad rap here.
SHE was NOT responsible for the NAFTA issue (which some will just not accept),
she is winning the big blue states (which is favorable in NOV),
she was NOT responsible for the fiasco in Fl and MI (that would be the DNC and FL Gov. - and quite suspicious to me that they may support Obama and that's why Dean won't seem to budge...)
She such throw in the towel after all the states have voted.
This race is so close, how can you ask someone to quit?
And we all know Hillary doesn't quit - which I admire for one.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Brenda, Cherry Hill, NJ — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 18:05:25 GMT

To the DOPE in Lead, CO. Why the hell should the leader resign? Can't you do math out there? Got a Rocky Mountain High, or LEAD for Brains. Take your Rodam and Jump from the highest peak.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

susan f — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 18:05:53 GMT

Yep 2008, a slam dunk for McCain and several of the democratic-held seats in the House and maybe a couple in the Senate. Then in 2010, both houses of Congress and the White House will be Republican controlled. Oh well.

Thanks, Hillary! Way to go, Chicky!

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Tshane, Big D — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 19:27:40 GMT

Suzy in SF is right. A lot of things can happen between now and the convention - I have a lot of angst about the "new" Obabma voter. It seems that they will NEVER support any other DEM canidate for Pres. and, in Tx, had trouble voting down ticket for other qualified canidates.

I have supported the Democratic Party, financially and morally, for many, many years. I was a volunteer at a cacus here in Texas. Obama campaign leaders told many Tx cacus go'ers that they would have to fight the Precinct Chairman to get a "fair" shake. Supporters came in - not wanting to participate in the process - but wanting to hijack it from the people that have been in the trenches - in bright red TX - most their lives. Barack says he is a different kind of canidate - some of the supporters I ran into and have read on these blogs don't seem different to me - just garden variety viciousness.

Most Super Delegates are long time party supporters and those of them who are still undecided should be listening to the rhetoric coming from "Obamacrats" and wonder who's side they really are on. Whose side they will be on in two years -- if they are not --they should be listening to those of us who have supported the party - in the darkness of Bush.

If Obama is the candidate selected at the convention - I will vote for him because I want to make a difference. If you want something to make a difference -- vote Democrat. If you want to change the world -- give your time and money to your LOCAL Democratic Party. Stop thinking everyone is out to get it over on you - roll up your sleeves and ask "How can I help?"

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Fred, Washington — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 19:35:15 GMT

I think American needs to be blessed.
Obama is the blesser. No question about it that he is God-sent. He is the next president of United States of America. God bless America

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

NanD, Las Vegas, NV — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 19:50:07 GMT

You want to know what I think? I think the MEDIA needs to stop all the BIASED reporting - and it is VERY obvious they are biased based upon the fact that all articles are slanted toward Hillary...as evidenced by the fact they have YET to report that Obama came out of Texas with more delegates than Clinton...I call that an Obama win!!! And yet, they have ignored that and persist in swaying sentiment toward Hillary. THEY do not elect our President...WE, the VOTERS, do!

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

REG; Chandler, AZ — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 19:51:01 GMT

I’m curious and would like to address a question to the women voters who are so loyal to and protective of Hillary Clinton, simply WHY? I’m really not trying to be a smart guy and do actually understand the value and agree with wanting feminine representation, and to include truly fair treatment for those women who run, yet should the loyalty be blind protection and include someone who simply doesn't deserve? There are qualities women process which are assets for public office, for both in their performance and in benefit for their constituents, but Hillary simply doesn’t demonstrate them. Maybe not a monster but just saying it is because she is tough and men just can’t accept that isn’t accurate either. Look at her history and you will see considerably more aggressive and combative outbursts then conciliatory or considerate gestures. She literally is far more divisive than she is a negotiator. The sensitivity, intuition and understanding that you might expect all seem to be consistently missing and then everything always seems to be just obstinately about her. Isn’t it reasonable that there is sound basis for the strong feelings, and yes even the dislike, of Senator Clinton? I really suspect that her personality, a strong sociopathic personality I might add (like GWB), has far more to do with it than her gender. I would really hate to see her defended for the feminist cause with the result being that we end up with the wrong candidate.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Noel, Hot Springs, AR — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 19:56:53 GMT

"The Obama folks will say it's the media's fault, but as we've said to others who blame the media for these perception swings -- the media can only cover what the campaigns deliver." Maybe Obama should say he will appont Chelsea Clinton head of the SEC since she is working for a hedge fund. That would get some attention.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

joe, chicago — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 19:57:49 GMT

WHAT an F-ING COPOUT!!! "The media can only cover what the campaigns deliver"???????????????

Are you serious?! Is this FOXNEWS?? Reporters can ask any question they want, and they can report that questions are being refused to be answered too!! Stop feeding us BS!

Are you letting Saturday Night Live run the newsroom now?

Is this some sort of apology for the Shuster comment? Why do you chase every stupid lead and pithy comment from wolfson for days without asking any hard questions to their camp? Cause she cried about it?? That's not journalism.

I want to know about those taxes...not on april 15th. there are years and years still hidden before 2007.

I want to know how you'll write for days at their request about rezko without ever even lobbing a whitewater question back.

I want to know why you haven't asked about favors for donations to the clinton library.

I want to know why you allow the clintons to continue to say they won texas (and say it yourselves) when it's become evident she did not.

I want to know why you'll rip into the Obama camp for days following the "monster" comment, but won't ask the clintons why for all their offensive and controversial comments they don't ask guilty parties to step down - or even distance themselves from those remarks.
Ask about Peter Paul or the hundreds of thousands of dollars donated from an anti-semetic filmmaker!!

Perhaps above all, why have you allowed the clinton campaign to make the argument they've "won the states (big) that matter" without completely ripping into them for discounting DOZENS of other states and millions of voters as unimportant and unnecessary!!

SHOW SOME BACKBONE PRESS!! BE JOURNALISTS, NOT TMZ.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Disgusted in Monroe, Louisiana — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 19:59:38 GMT

For those who say that Obama should not fight back, consider these eye popping statistics. Before the Billary Attacks, he had pulled within four points of her in Pennsylvania. In new pollling today, he is 15 points down. Before these attacks, he had enjoyed a double digit lead in North Carolina; today's polling shows that she is now within four points of him there. As one blogger previously said, she has bitten and nibbled at him ad nauseum and these statistics are proof that those attacks are working. Obama might be the frontrunner today, but unless something is done to minimize Clinton's attacks or put her on defense, he will not be the frontrunner this time tomorrow!! I know that some of his supporters are hopeful that a win in Mississippi will put him back on track, but let's face it, the win in Wyoming apparently did absolutely nothing to stop the bleeding since her wins on Juior Tuesday. I never looked at those primaries as Hillary having to win the two big states to stay in it, but rather I saw it as Obama having to win at least one of those big states and lose the other by no more than a nose to avoid being in big trouble. As an Obama supporter, I am sad to say that it looks like I was right.

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

REG; East Valley Phx. AZ — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 20:03:54 GMT

First thoughts: Who's the front-runner?

Beverly — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 20:50:43 GMT

Do they really believe wholeheartedly what they are doing is for the people of this country. If so then their DNA is that of pirates. Your strategy reminds me of a stolen election. The truth about Florida is most people only voted because of the property tax. Of course her Clinton name got her recognized vote. No one really knew much Obama. She has slandered a decent, bright, articulate, young, man who has brought hope and energy to this party. I’ve never seen so many people get this involved in a primary. And it’s not because of Hillary’s sea wave. Why is she can inject gender; but if Barack says first African-American then it’s racism. However, she can have her double standard.
A person, at least, a sensible, sincere, one will vote for whoever is the best suit for the job, and stop us from looking like, ugly, greedy, Americans, who pillage others and care nothing of our own. I am African-American but I won’t vote for Barack because he’s African-American. I’m also female and I won’t vote for Hillary because she’s a woman. More importantly, I won’t vote for her because she’ a lair and she’s fighting the wrong battle. She is for power and money; not the people. It would have been over for in Ohio and Texas had not she portrayed that young man as unable to answer a phone. On foreign what makes her more qualified? Has she done Madeline Albright’s or Condoleezza Rice’s job? She’s lying about her direct role in bringing peace to Northern Ireland according to Lord Trimble of Lisnagarvey, the Nobel Peace Prize winner and former First Minister of the province. Is that good for her resume? www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/08
She knows Barack Hussien Obama is not Muslim; when asked about his faith during an interview she replied “As far as I know he’s not;” just to throw suspicion in uneducated minds against Barack Hussien Obama. Her obsession about Tony Rezko and the notion he’s hiding something is nothing in comparison to her not being forthcoming with their tax returns or the Clinton Library papers. Don’t forget her and Bill’s link to Norman Hsu, the emir of Dubai, and NAFTA (which the Canadians admitted her camp did some hanky panky too).
Her fight is not a good fight; the image on a woman acting like a gangster on national T.V. yelling “Meet me it Ohio” especially, when she calculatingly used lies and innuendos about her NAFTA-gate. The Clintons have Whitewater. I see not sound judgment in her fight; because a real woman has integrity and compassion. Hillary has none. She is causing a useless financial burden on her supporters and division in the party. People are tired of her. I have lost admiration and respect for her.
Grow-up Hillary and stop pouting like a child. Or will it take a nation to raise you.