by Artificial Intelligence, Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 03:17:46 AM EST
by American1989, Fri Oct 05, 2007 at 03:29:24 PM EDT
I am a Hillary supporter and have no intention of changing sides. However, I am growing wary to see Hillary not visit Iowa as often as others; if she won't campaign there as much as Edwards or Obama, how are people going to vote for her?
I also think that Obama is doing a very good job in terms of organization and enthusiasm and I am surprised to see his campaign not perturbed after all the poll numbers not increase nationally in his favor. These national numbers will not matter at all once the caucuses are over on that cold January night.
The latest Newsweek poll shows that RV in Iowa favor Hillary, but LV favor Obama; likely voters are those that are going to matter.
Then, it will be Obama out of the floodgates, Hillary's front-runner status will be diminished and all those independents in NH will come out and vote for him.
Obama has 31 field offices in Iowa, way more than Hillary and their plan to get college students and possibly high school seniors seems that it might work; it didn't work for Dean, but Obama is NO Dean. That is for sure.
by coonsey, Fri Sep 14, 2007 at 07:27:32 PM EDT
Keith Olbermann on Countdown MSNBC does something every once in awhile that's very interesting. He goes back in recent history, since 9/11, and shows clips of something that was said or done through out the process of our War on Terror, War in Afghanistan and War in Iraq. Yes they are three different stories even though the Bush administration has tried their best to bunch them all together over the past few years because they fear the truth being told in our history books.
Anyway, I wish I could show you just one of those clips, they are so very telling of how this administration as munipulated the media, the story and the American people.
by Big Tent Democrat, Sat Sep 08, 2007 at 06:57:10 AM EDT
WaPo has a deceptive title on Bill Richardson's Op Ed piece. They call it "Why We Should Leave Iraq Now." It should be called "Watch Richardson Try To Exploit 'Differences' on 2009 Iraq Policy and NOT Talk About Leaving Iraq Now." Read the first three grafs of the piece:
Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards have suggested that there is little difference among us on Iraq. This is not true: I am the only leading Democratic candidate committed to getting all our troops out and doing so quickly.
In the most recent debate, I asked the other candidates how many troops they would leave in Iraq and for what purposes. I got no answers. The American people need answers. If we elect a president who thinks that troops should stay in Iraq for years, they will stay for years -- a tragic mistake.
Clinton, Obama and Edwards reflect the inside-the-Beltway thinking that a complete withdrawal of all American forces somehow would be "irresponsible." On the contrary, the facts suggest that a rapid, complete withdrawal -- not a drawn-out, Vietnam-like process -- would be the most responsible and effective course of action.
The fact that there is a Congressional debate in Congress NOW on Iraq does not enter Richardson's thinking in the least. I do not know about you, but I truly detest what Richardson is doing here, selfishly trying to make political hay for himself at the expense of the real issue NOW - the Congressional debate on Iraq. Richardson is my least favorite candidate right now.
by Big Tent Democrat, Thu Aug 30, 2007 at 11:04:11 AM EDT
Unlike Chris Bowers, who seems to be unable to think of anything but the 2008 Election, I can not applaud Bill Richardson's nonsensical and selfish release on Iraq:
All the major Democratic candidates say they are eager to end this war, and they all say they don't believe there is a military solution in Iraq. Why, then, do they maintain that we must leave an indefinite number of troops behind for an indeterminate amount of time to work hopelessly towards a military solution everyone says doesn't exist?
It is time to get a straight answer from all the other candidates: how many troops would you leave behind? For how long?
We can help make sure we get the clear answers we deserve. Sign our petition asking Univision, the sponsors of the next Democratic candidates' debate on September 9th, to get an answer from each candidate: how many troops would you leave behind? For how long?
Like Bowers, Richardson has NOTHING to say about getting out of Iraq now. With President Bush seeking more Iraq funding, with the Iraq Report coming due in September, with a real chance now to fight for an end date to the Iraq Debacle, THIS is what Richardson and Bowers think we need to be talking about?
Booooooo! Richardson! Booooooooo, Bowers! They prove what I have been saying, the horserace seems to be what the Netroots can be about. Issues NOW? Iraq Now? Clearly not. This is disheartening, depressing and infuriating. I have long thought poorly of Richardson the candidate and this confirms everything I have been thinking.