I Think JRE Will Win Iowa (0.00 / 0)

From the way the crowds are for him and the way all of JRE supporters are I think most people know the national polls are a lot of crap.  JRE does better in Ohio against all repugs than Hillary or Obama.  If that ain't telling what is?  When voters go to the polls they are going to be thinking about the baggage Hillary has and how Obama has a real big uphill battle to win in Ohio or Florida, or New Hampshire.  Hillary is having trouble agaist Romney, McCain, and Guiliani in New Hampshire in the head to head polls.  I think it is the head to head polls against the rpugs is what is really telling the story of who is the most electable.

---

by: spanky2007 @ Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 14:43:12 PM CDT

The thing I can't get over with Edwards (0.00 / 0)

Not only did he vote for the AUMF for Iraq, he was a co-sponsor of the bill. The one record we have of his judgment on foreign policy is disastrous. I still have not heard a good explanation for how we are supposed to understand this decision.

Now, Hillary obviously voted for the AUMF as well, and feels no need to walk back from it. But her overall experience in foreign affairs allows me, at least, to feel like I understand what her foreign policy might look like, and I can live with that. I have no such assurances from Edwards.

Obama has the best looking foreign policy instincts of the three, but his campaign is a wreck.

It's a dilemma.

---

by: Ron @ Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 14:58:34 PM CDT

How about this.... (0.00 / 0)

I made a mistake.

  JRE

One thing we don't hear is Mr. Decider ever saying that. Nor The Hill...Obama figures he don't have to say it since he wasn't required to vote but if you look at his vote on the censuring of MoveOn.org he will not admit that was a mistake.

People make mistakes.

Repulicans, 'Bush Dogs' and Riechwing buttholes quite simply...

Won't admit it.

And frankly I'd say those same categories of 'folks' are very, very unwilling to understand the simple fact that....

People make mistakes.

Progressives learn from them.

Don't agree?

Read about FDR.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

---

by: ACitizen @ Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 15:20:20 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

POLLS (0.00 / 0)

Their is hidden racisim and sexisim in this country and it is hidden in the polls.

I think both Clinton and Obama will have to have at least a 5 pt lead in the poll's in-order to win.

It is un-fortunate, but true.

I am a Obama supporter FYI

---

by: BDM @ Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 16:07:40 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I had figured that out..... (0.00 / 0)

.....and I do not disagree with your assertion about racism and sexism affecting the election.

But it wasn't all that long ago that a woman or a black as President was simply unthinkable.

The problem now is:

What if the woman or black person are actually 'Bush Dog' types such as:

Colin Powell..

Condi-Lies-a-Lot....

On the 'Democrat' Party side:

DiFi

Boxer

Gender and race are no guarantors of a progressive policy as my examples show. And....

That's actually a good thing.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

---

by: ACitizen @ Sat Sep 22, 2007 at 01:26:13 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Obama's foreign policy instincts... (0.00 / 0)

I don't know exactly what Obama's foreign policy instincts are.
I felt that his bellicose statement about Iran was not what we need right now.
We need someone to calm the waters - not fan the flames.

---

by: lentinel @ Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 19:51:00 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

The candidate distinguishing himself on the issues (0.00 / 0)

The candidate distinguishing himself on the issues in Iowa is Richardson.  David Yepsen, regarded as the premier political reporter in Iowa, praised Richardson for giving the best speech:

Richardson gave the best overall speech of the day. He was forceful. He was specific. He gave good sound bites. It's clear the New Mexico governor is getting better on the stump as the campaign wears on. If one of the top three contenders stumbles, Richardson's in a position to move up.

Yepsen has been noting Richardson has an opening to do well in Iowa's caucus.  In his August 30 column, Yepsen wrote:

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson's uptick in the 2008 Democratic presidential campaign was visible here Tuesday night at a town meeting he held at Coe College.  About 200 people showed up on a steamy summer evening to spend close to two hours listening to what he said was the "short version" of his stump speech - it still went 35 minutes - and then posing questions to him.

In Iowa, Richardson has moved from 1 percent support in the state to a middle tier all his own. That's more movement than any other Democratic candidate has seen this year. . .

Edwards' populism sounds increasingly angry, and voters don't elect angry people to the presidency. Edwards has seen a clear lead in Iowa shrink to a statistical tie with Clinton and Obama.

Also, many Iowa Democrats are worried about Clinton's electability. She has moved up in Iowa surveys as she debates well and addresses the issue, but the question hasn't gone away and remains her single biggest impediment to the nomination.

Obama is vexed by questions about his lack of experience. He also has upset some Democratic constituency groups by blowing off a number of Iowa events and debates because he doesn't want to be seen with his rivals. . . .

All of which gives Richardson an opening. A growing number of activists believe he puts together an impressive package. He notes in his stump speech that Clinton talks about experience, and Obama talks about change, "and with me you get both."

A large part of Richardson's success in the early states can be attributed to his crystal clear plan on the number one issue in the campaign, the Iraq war.  Last night at the Democratic debate in Davenport, Iowa, Judy Woodruff asked the candidates if they were elected how many U.S. troops would remain in Iraq after their first year in office.

Biden said it depends on how Bush leaves Iraq.  Edwards agreed with Biden, claiming "it's impossible to say."  Clinton echoed Biden's view, vaguely offering "a reasonable and prudent plan" to get our troops out.  Dodd objected to speaking about 2010 and said Congress should not wait that long to act.

Only Richardson provided a direct and unambiguous answer: 

Zero troops! . . .  Without getting our troops out you can not have a political settlement. . . . I would take all of our troops out.  We need to end this war now.

Here is the video of the most significant exchange to date in the debates among the candidates in the race for the Democratic Presidential nomination:

---

by: Stephen Cassidy @ Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 16:44:50 PM CDT

remix (0.00 / 0)

We can all read Stephen's full case for the day at
http://www.mydd.com/...

Having been at the Steak Fry, I can say that Richardson absolutely did not give the best speech.  My parents watched on TV, and the went out of their way to comment how bad his speech was.  Yes, he hits a lot of policy points, but he has no transitions or connective tissue at all in his speeches.  He's not a storyteller, and its' easy to get lost in the quick transitions between points.  I bet it works for sound bites, but it's not compelling.

http://www.actblue.com/page/asaslist

---

by: asahopkins @ Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 19:22:35 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Richardson (0.00 / 0)

Yepsen is projecting what he wants people to believe. He likes Richardson because Richardson is a conservative Democrat much like Yepsen himself.

---

by: adamterando @ Sat Sep 22, 2007 at 14:24:19 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Residual forces in Iraq... (0.00 / 0)

I can't get with the rationale offered that we have to leave troops in Iraq so that we can protect our embassy.

That would, in my opinion, be a very appropriate job for a commercial business.
Hire security guards.

The dems are mostly putting forth this mantra - which is straight from the Bush playbook - that we have to have troops in Iraq.

---

by: lentinel @ Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 20:02:13 PM CDT

Security guards (0.00 / 0)

Bush did hire security guards.  That is what Blackwater is and they are totally out of control.  Because they were hired inititally to guard the embassy they do not have to follow Dept. of Defense rules (like the other contractors) and they refuse to follow Iraqi rules.  They have been ordered out by Iraq and refuse to go.

The contractor thugs cost two or three times what the Marines do and don't perform as well.  Contractors were giving the overall orders at ASbu Gharib, not the military.

---

by: David Kowalski @ Sat Sep 22, 2007 at 09:53:49 AM CDT

[ Parent ]