The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008

BEWARE NEW HAMPSHIRE!! I just caught the tail end of a story on ABC's 20/20 while preparing supper this evening. It seems that the dirty tricks of negative politics has begun in earnest up there in New Hampshire. From what I gathered once I really tuned in to the story, this involves phoney surveys where an unidentified caller phones and pretends to be taking a poll or survey while their actual intent is to "discretely" pass along a little information meant to smear an opposing candidate. In this case, the smear tactic is directed against Senator Obama (sorry, if they mentioned what the information was that's used to smear him, that was presented before I walked into the room in the middle of the story). This was actually part of a rather interesting story about how both parties employ teams of people whose sole job is to dig up dirt on other candidates (including those within their own party) I guess in case the people are threatening to elect someone other than the candidate the party really wants to run? Most of the report revolved around dirty tricks used during the past couple elections by Bush and his supporters but I thought this one current bit of news was worth sharing. According to 20/20 the obvious source of the phoney calls is . . you guessed it . . HRC.

I've been reading since last night that the Clinton team was "retooling" their strategy and were expected to go negative in New Hampshire. It certainly didn't take them very long. I was just questioning in an earlier post whether Hillary would at least have the nads to do so publicly if she chose to go DIRTY again, or if she would opt for more of the even more disgraceful secretive whispering campaign that has been going on behind people's back. I guess I got my answer to that question in short order also. I think we have had enough "scapegoating" from the Clinton Campaign. Maybe it's time to FIRE HILLARY this time!

Hillary Clinton could not even acknowledge a defeat gracefully. Well, she had a rude awakening in Iowa. Now, she is desperately
attacking DNC flagbearer.
The message in Iowa told Hillary Clinton- we are not ready for a female president and commander-in-chief, especially at war time. Mrs. Clinton, put on your seat belt, you are in for rough ride with string of defeats State by State. Enjoy it.
You cannot put your house in order, yet you want to lead. America and Americans are matured now. We know exactly what you gonna do way before you do it. America does not want a divider., and as you attack other candidates, we are watching you too. Thanks to our Barometric system.
You should reconsider running at this time, and maintain your mystic of "Former first lady status".

Did everyone watch the speeches last night after Obama won the Iowa Caucus? Hillary actually didn't look bad and I was slightly surprised by the tone of most of her speech; but did you get a good look at Bill?

Now make no mistake about this . . . I am not a Bill Clinton fan, but my immediate reaction when I saw him standing on stage behind Hillary was one of concern. He is human after all and so am I. I thought he looked in poor health, and that is something I wouldn't wish on anyone. All of the analysts (I was watching CNN) seized on the way Bill looked as soon as Hillary's speech concluded and they were all of the consensus that it was a look of absolute distress over the fact that "they' had lost (I don't recall the exact word they used but distress is at least a good paraphrase). If that's all the look was and he wasn't seriously ill or on his death bed or anything, then GOOD!

I, myself, was almost sickened last night to hear the way the pundits referred to the Clintons as if this race is about Bill as much as it is Hillary, whether that is really the case or not. Two quotes that I did jot down were, "don't ever count THE CLINTONS out" and "THE FIRST FAMILY OF DEMOCRATIC POLITICS". Excuse me while I go toss my cookies.

For those of you who think that an Obama win in Iowa means he is going to be your next president is deluding yourselves. America is a very racistic, elitist and bigotted country that it will be so out of your character to vote a black man into the highest position of the land.

If america wants change - it has got to come from your own souls and not dictated by an Obama. And the kind of change that Obama wants is probably not the kind that most white Americans will welcome.

I keep wondering if Obama can really change the national propensity of America to be bullies and dictators and unfair players in the international field? I do believe he will have a very difficult time so most of his promises will be empty because Americans are happy with the status quo.

The only way the Democrats can boot out the Republicans is if they vote for someone who will really give the Republican nominee a run for their money - and that is Hillary. The woman has cojones, something which Obama does not project.

nizhoniboy2006,

I heard a lot of Dr. King in Senator Obama's victory speech last night, those references were very obvious; but I'm glad you also saw visions of Bobby Kennedy, as I did. Bobby Kennedy may have been the last candidate (1968) to inspire the degree of hope and enthusiasm than reaches so many people from different segments of our great American society. God does indeed work in mysterious ways and he couldn't have picked a better time to send us a leader who promises hope for a brighter tomorrow. Many are quick to pooh pooh all of the talk about hope. Senator Obama talked last night about choosing Hope over Fear and Unity over Devisiveness as our path to realizing change and his words of wisdom are so simple that they manage to escape so many "deep thinkers". It doesn't matter who we elect President, as long as we have gridlock in Congress or a Congress bent on blocking every move the President tries to make, or vice versa. Senator Obama is the kind of man who can help bring Democrats, Republicans and Independents together to make government work for the American people once again. The only way that any man or woman can begin to effect such a change in our badly broken political system is to have the strong backing of a united American public behind him or her to force politicians to represent the people and do our bidding rather than putting the interests of their political party or some special interest group first. That is going to take exactly the type of inspirational leader that Barrack Obama is and that we haven't seen for 40 years (which I believe is a very significant number in the Bible if I remember?)!

Obama keeps saying the magic word CHANGE. It is so easy to say the word but I have not heard any specifics on what that change involves. If it is just to take out the Republican president and put in a Democratic one, that does not reassure me too much that there will be CHANGE. Sure there will be a new president but that can happen even if you put a homeless guy in the chair of the president. What exactly are these changes he plans for America and the Americans? CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE - that mantra does not mean anything if his speeches are so non-specific.

bbowlin,

Putting this as succinctly as I can, your sour grapes spinning of the reason for Senator Obama's historic victory in Iowa not only insults millions of Americans who Support Barrack Obama because HE IS THE BEST CANDIDATE; but you reveal your own petty ignorance at the same time. See you in Atlanta!

Goldie2,

I think we pretty much agree in principal, but I'd like to reframe your argument if I may. First of all, I choose to take a more positive approach and talk about why Barack Obama should be the Democratic nominee rather than why Hillary Clinton should NOT. While my intention is to reinforce your argument that Senator Obama is the Democratic Party's best hope to win the White House in November with this post, I'd first like to go on record as stating that the most important issue before us (IMO) is choosing the person who would be the best President for all the American people, and that is Barrack Obama!

Your two points about Obama not only being able to appeal to young voters and Independent voters and actually stir them to get out and participate in the Iowa caucus which is a much greater trick than inspiring them to the simpler task of going to the polls to cast a vote is accurate and extremely important. If Senator Kerry could have turned out these two groups of voters in 2004 we would have all been spared a second Bush term and Lord knows how different this country and this world might be today!

Perhaps the greatest shock of the night, if the CNN entrance polls were even close to accurate, was Senator Obama surpassing Hillary Clinton among women voters by 5%. Many women, understandably long for the opportunity to make history by finally electing a woman President and Hillary has unashamedly pandered to that particular portion of the electorate. I was astounded that Obama won the female vote in Iowa!

I believe that Senator Obama's appeal will exceed merely drawing in large numbers of Independent voters, which could pove crucial in the general election; I believe that a significant number of disgruntled Republicans who feel that the right wing evangelical dominated GOP no longer represents them will cross party lines and support Barack Obama. I think Senator Obama surprised a lot of people by winning some precincts and counties on the Nebraska border last night that analysts described as the home of the man who could well be the most conservative member of the entire US Congress.

Let us not forget that Senator Obama helped inspire over 100,000 more voters to caucus for Democrats last night than 4 years earlier. As a clear winner in Iowa, this speaks well to his ability to turn out the Democratic base, even though many segments of that base are barely represented in Iowa.

I believe that the African American vote is on the verge of turning this Primary season upside down. I do NOT believe that anyone should vote for any candidate because of their race, gender, religion, etc.; but I have not been able to understand why Senator Obama has not been polling much better among African American voters than he has and why they supported Hillary Clinton as strongly as they have. What some of the political analyst had to say on that subject last not makes a lot of sense to me and I found their views encouraging. The consensus was that many African Americans had bought into the Clinton propaganda that Senator Obama was "not electable" and for that reason were worried about "wasting their vote". The speculation is that last nights hiostoric victory by Obama will go a long way toward dispelling that myth and that another victory by Senator Obama in yet another predominantly "white state" could open the flood gates on support from the African American community that would come into play as soon as South Carolina and possibly send Obama on his way to an almost sure nomination. Where I think this carries weight for our current argument concerning his "electability" in a general election is that support from African Americans and an increased turnout from them along with others who have already so enthusiastically embraced Barack Obama could put states into play that might otherwise remain Republican strongholds. I think Ohio might well fall into that category as well as a handfull of Southern states where Democrats have not fared well recently. Speaking of putting other states in play for the Democrats, I personally wonder if Hillary could even carry her (carpetbagger) home state of New York if Rudy Giuliani gets the GOP nomination. Arkansas (her home state before NY) may not be a sure win for her whether Huckabee gets the nomination or not; and Republicans would have a much better chance of stealing Illinois if Hillary is the nominee rather than Senator Obama.

The last point I would like to share is the comment from the Chairman of the Republican National Committee. He appeared on CNN last night after they proclaimed Huckabee the GOP winner in Iowa very early in the contest. The Democrats were in a virtual 3 wau tie at the time of his comments and I'm not sure if there is any significance to the order in which he listed the 3 Democrats - Hillary Clinton, followed by Senator Obama and then John Edwards. He expressed his confidence that the GOP was ready to defeat any candidate the Democrats were likely to nominate regardless of who the eventual GOP nominee might be and then it was his comments revealing what the likely overall startegy against each candidate would be in a general election. He stated that the target with Hillary Clinton would be TRUST. Barack Obama would be targeted with EXPERIENCE. John Edwards would be targeted with HYPOCRACY. The last time that Republicans used experience against the Democratic nominee was the last time Democrats took the White House away from them, and they won't have an encumbant this time to make that a very strong argument at all. I think we have finally put the myth about Hillary being the most electable Democrat to bed for all but the most hard core Hillary supporters who simply refuse to keep an open mind on the subject.

Plain and simple - OPRAH, who is watched and loved by millions, and highly visible in the press helped win the Iowa caucus for Obama. He has no experience, domestic or foreign.

I expect much different results from the New Hampshire caucus. And, in Atlanta. I cannot IMAGINE Obama will fair well in Atlanta.

PLAIN AND SIMPLE - OPRAH! DID IT!

If you let this or New Hampshire keep you from allowing the rest of the states to show what they want, then you shouldn't have started in the first place.

Congratulations to Senator Obama for a well-deserved victory. He's a first class individual who ran a first class campaign. I am a democrat, a black man, a Hillary supporter- and still not convinced Barak has what it takes to win. It's not his intelligence, temperment or determination I question- rather his ability to survive and fight back against the Republican attack dogs that have so far ignored him. Should the good Senator appear the likely party nominee he will be hit with a tsunami of accustation-rumor-innuendo that he can't yet imagine- and I'm afraid so many of his new supporters have no idea what's in store for their candidate!

Wow!!! Hillary and the Hokies both get their butts kicked on the same night!!!!

Gotta love it....!!!!

If Obama wins the nomination, I hope that Bloomberg makes a run for it so I can have a someone of substance to vote for instead of a rock star beknighted by the press.

harried hit it wright on. weare not ready for a black president and the south would never vote for him. posted by mary

The look on Mr. Clinton's face was worth a million dolars to me. I hope Evita stays in for more primarys so I can see that look again and again. Evita's face and demeaner was also enjoyable. The queen has been given a taste of her own medicine and she doesn't like it.

The empress and emperor have no clothes.

billary only got it partly right in her concession speach. She said "together we have presented a case for change". billary seems to be delusional she has voted with bush on just about everything,which is why this country is in the mess that it's in. It would be fine with me if she packed up his and her carpetbags and moved back to Arkansas. After all the clinton's are still agents of bilderberg.

Iowa never "put anyone in the White House", as several of us have stated. Taken less literally, your statement is still wrong, as Bush won Iowa in 2000.

This is not a one act play. It is a 31 act play. That's the number of primaries up to super Tuesday. Clinton's 20% plus lead in the country is not going to evaporate in the next thirty days. She's still probably going to win NH, particularly now that Huckabee's victory is going to mean far fewer Republican leaning independants crossing over, and after that she wins most everything with the possible exception of SC and IL. Amidst all the euphoria people should remember the last time IA put a non incumbent in the WH was Carter!

Clinton would lose in New Hampshire, it is not very difficult to predict. She should step down afterward. I hope tha she-herself has enough common sense to do it.
Other way, she-herself would face a lot of additional troubles. It is not difficult to predict either.

A hardy and sincere congratulations to Senator Obama. He's a VERY inspiring guy.

However, I live in New Hampshire and will be proudly casting my vote for Senator Clinton on Tuesday.

It is extremely premature to either celebrate a meaningful victory or a serious loss, as Iowa only represents just a mere entering in the yard where the begining line is still to be defined. Certainly, not Iowa, not New Hampshire, but THE EVENT ON FEBRUARY 5, 2008 IS THE REAL THING AS IT MARKS THE BEGINNING!

I would, therefore, advise that you save your tears of both joy and sorrow. Just hold on, please, because the decisive moment has not come, yet. Be calm!

If you look at the arguments of most of the Hillary supporters on this and other blogs, it's nothing but bitterness and fear. That's exactly what we don't need in this country or in this election.

The truth is that the policy proposals of all of the Democratic candidates are remarkably similar. It's just that people don't like Hillary much.

And did you see the look on Bill's face during her concession--I mean 3rd place "victory" speech? The man looked emotionally devastated, much more than at any time I've ever seen. I'm not sure why--maybe he had an air of entitlement just as Hillary did and was stunned to be reminded that the root of the word election is "choice" and that the voters really want to chose someone else. Maybe he's like a coach who can see his players letting the game slip away but but can't do anything about it. Perhaps most of all, he's a smart politician and can see the writing on the wall. He knows that things are going very badly and is mourning the increasingly likely loss of the co-presidency he had envisioned and longed for.

This could be "2000" all over again... with candidate George Bush and his great feel good down home rhetoric of "we need a change in Washington", as he was campaigning against the better qualified candidate Al Gore. We all know the results, and what has happened the last seven years. Well the American people won't be that gullible this time. Mr. Obama is a gifted orator, outstanding script, brilliant feel good rhetoric, great baritone voice for his delivery, but the rhetoric is all "feel good". Paul Krugman writes in the New York Times with his article on December 17th in his piece titled "Big Table Fantasies", that Mr. Obama is "naive". I agree. Hillary Clinton has a plan that can work, to make the changes we need in our Executive Branch from day #1, and we have to start then, not on day #2. From Iowa, there are 49 more states, and Hillary Clinton will be campaigning aggressively in each. I hope and believe all Americans will see that she is the best person to lead our Executive Department forward as President, not someone who is well meaning, but who's "feel good rhetoric" would be better suited to that of a Talk Show Host or Game Show Host on Network T.V.

Yes, we need a change in Washington; but this time we have to get it right.... we need someone who has a well thought out plan, and someone who has a plan to implement it. Hillary Clinton has such a plan and is ready. Thank you.

Rock on Mr. Obama!

Our nation is addicted to fear and anger, and this amazing man has the integrity, wisdom, and courage to get our nation's focus on what is truly important- a better future for everyone. His message and method are one and the same- when you stop focusing on our differences and start focusing on what brings us all together, everyone benefits. That's what it's all about.
Here's a black man who just won a state that is 95% white. Here's a democrat who has earned the respect (and votes!)of independents and republicans. He has the ability to inspire and attract veteran and first time voters alike.

Peace, hope, and possibility. You go bro!

Derek Munson

I hate to rain on the Obama supporter's Iowa parade, but this Iowa win means nothing other than it's going to be a spirited race for the nomination. Right now, Clinton has more than three times the number of Super Delegates in comparison to Obama. This win might actually do more harm than good. Maybe now the media will pay more attention to Obama's track record then we'll really see what happens.

We all want Bush, the destroyer of our Constitution and international standing, OUT. Why is it necessary to use such invective about some of the Democratic candidates? Obama is not my first choice but I congratulate him and think his win is an undeniable victory for America. I am hoping that in the end we wind up with a candidate who wants to reverse Bush's policies but one who can win in November. Until then, can't we be civil to each other--regardless of which Democrat we support? I plan to work very very hard for whoever becomes our nominee.

I would believe that Hillary is ready to lead on "Day 1" if she took some initiative and kick that no good cheating hound dog scene stealing bald-face lier of a man she calls dumb a-- to the curb.

Rather than an empowered person, Hillary seems to be nothing more than a political wife who is running for President because it is part of the deal she negotiated with her husband as part of the price for sticking with him when he couldn't keep it in his pants for the eight years he was in the White House.

To think that a Hillary Clinton Presidency will bring anything other than constant partisan attacks and white house intrigue requires the willful suspension of disbelief.

This country deserves better. Obama offers a better future for America.

big media trumpeted clinton as the inevitable winner then spent the last few months trouncing her. big media won iowa for obama. then again, iowans are, well, just weird. on to NH with hillary clinton. a REAL primary. i trust NH to correct this idiocy of an obama presidency and set the right course for the nation. H. CLINTON 4 PRESIDENT!!

I dislike all politicians, because they are all, by definition, fake since they must appeal to so many different people.

Nevertheless, I think it's way too early for people to be calling shots on the Democratic nomination. Personally, I think Obama has a great personality cult PR department. If you look at pictures of him, he tends to be pictured with the camera placed below him, and his torso dominating the upper half of the images. It's this very grandiose, Messiah-esque representation. He does the same with his speeches and politics. It's all words. Can he shut down the corporations? Unfortunately not. Just like George Bush couldn't kill Social Security. Or Hillary couldn't get socialist healthcare during Bill's administration.

Come on people - let's be real. I would love to see radical change, but politics in this country is far from people-driven. It's money-driven and big Inc's are there to pour the money and decide on a candidate.

Do we need another newbie who has a great PR team, but knows squat about running the country? I don't think so.

Experience DOES matter. I think Hillary is smarter, heck of a lot more experienced and knows how to work within the system to effect change. Obama can say all he wants, but the president doesn't rule the country. How will he get his radical, new ideas through the congress? He just won't. And at the end of an Obama presidency, we'll be stuck with a bunch of Obama's bills that never made it past the Congress.

As for Hillary, we all know that she is a diehard liberal. She just can't say it. She must pretend that she believes in God and all that crap. I support her 100% because even though she is fake (which she must be, like all politicians), I think it's very clear who she is deep down. Why independents dislike her? I think it's because independents tend to be uninvolved with politics, and without a personal cause. They swing either way and they fall for the USA Today media portrayals. Those relentless Da Vinci-style portraits of Obama photoshoped to add a glare to his eyes and an invisible aura that says "I'm the Messiah". And as I said, Obama has a great PR campaign going on. He is young, attractive, well spoken. Plus Oprah's backing (in my opinion primarily because of race) doesn't hurt. I mean what Oprah says is the law to millions of housewives, and other women who work from home and have the time to watch her every day.

Enough.

Go Hillary! You're my girl.

I agree the neocons are salivating over the prospect of destroying Obama and putting another Republican in the White House, something they need to keep the Iraq war going.

But I think the emphasis on race does America an injustice. They will destroy him with an onslaught over his drug use, muslim heritage, lack of national defense experience, and make him out as a terrorist nation sympathizer. Forget the real facts, I'm talking about swift boating here.

The ones who would entertain racist statements about him wouldn't be voting Democratic anyway, doesn't matter who our candidate is. The Rush Limbaugh crowd is neocon core supporters, and we need to move on with the other two thirds of the country and solve the problems they selfishly dumped on us.

But what more could you expect from people like them?

rd

So where's the WaPo article about the NEO-CON part of the IOWA caucus?

WaPo seems to have a particular interest in seeing Obama get nominated. Why's that?

How come no interest in Huckabee's bludgeoning of Mitt! Or McCain's IOWA write off? And Rudolf, is he still with us?

Obama is a genuine decent man who is campaigning like Reagan did years ago. Posted by: ardano
__________________________________

Another NEO-CON that's rooting for Obama?
Why? What is it about Barack Obama that resonates with NEO-CONS?
The only way the Democrats lose this election is if they are fools enough to run a Black man for president in this racist country! That's what ya'll figure, right!
Obama is decent like Reagan,,, PLEASE!

I am rolling my sleeves up and working for the Obama campaign. I will not stand aside and watch history unfold when I could actually help make it happen. When leaders talk about hope and unity, they inspire the people. I AM ONE INSPIRED AMERICAN CITIZEN.

Posted by: mesfr
_________________________________

Wow, if you would have been in IOWA tonight your one vote could have raised Barack from 38% to 39%.

a couple of fact about tonight...
63% did not vote for obama
67% did not vote for clinton
67% did not vote for edwards
50% were first time voters
50% of those voted for obama
40% voted for clinton
10% voted for others
11% of iowans participated combined dem/rep
3% of iowans voted for obama
2% of iowans voted for clinton and edwards
16 delegates for obama
15 for edwards
14 for clinton
america did not vote
a very small segment of america voted
lets wait until feb 5th when at least half of the voters vote
then we can say for sure who is ahead
history has many many people who did not become president even though they won the first states

This is the first time I have been inspired by any political candidate for president. Tears rolled down my eyes when I realized that I was witnessing history. No one should underestimate the power of the American people and their sense of justice. Finally, we will have someone who would be a strong role model for our kids, someone who actually earned his grades by working hard. Obama looks so dignified and so uniting; such a visionary leader who brings the best in his country.

I am rolling my sleeves up and working for the Obama campaign. I will not stand aside and watch history unfold when I could actually help make it happen. When leaders talk about hope and unity, they inspire the people. I AM ONE INSPIRED AMERICAN CITIZEN.

The methods in Iowa favor candidates with minority supporters who are passionate enough to deal with the process. Iowa losses didn't stop Bill Clinton, George HW Bush, or Ronald Reagan. In fact since Nixon's time only 2 nonincumbents won Iowa and became president. I'm glad for Barak and Huckabee though as Iowa does a good job of making people evaluate the smaller candidates that are elevated by its results. Juggernauts are no fun.

Facts are a terrible matter to face,Shillary. Obama won handily over both you and Edwards in the Iowa Demo Caucus. His message of hope and change trumped your status quo and experience matters message; and his message of hope and change trumped Edwards angry populist message.

In short, the Iowa Demo caucus is just the tip of the iceberg for you. Obama demonstrated to our party that it was still possible to attract independents, and yes, even some Republicans with the right message. A feat you are incapable of achieving.

The Clinton/Bush dynasties are coming to a close as a sorry chapter that gave us polarizing politics, evasive answers, triangulation and placing our great nation in the worst domestic/international crisis in its history.

We rational Demos want to close that page and follow Obama, a candidate who is a true agent of change, inspirational, articulate and creative. You won't go away quietly, and we know that your occasional spouse, Slick Willy, will frantically attemp to revive your campaign in New Hampshire. but Obama has ignited an exciting political movement with a life of its own. Be prepared to move over and make room for younger and more committed Demos to lead our party. Forrest Gerard

I'm not the least bit interested in shining lights on hills speeches. It's content free crap. I'm interested in solutions, an agenda, and a plan to go into action as soon as Bush clears out of the White House.

I've followed Hillary's policies and plans for years now and she has the ideas I want to see put into action, not inane symbolisms. Call me a policy wank, whatever, or just a realist I guess.

I think many of the Obama supporters have no idea what it's like for their man to end up like Dukakis or McGovern, but he would by the time the Republicans got done with him.

I used to be young and naive too.

rd

OBAMA & EDWARDS represent the legitimate progressive alternative to HILLARY CLINTON. The IOWA CAUCUSES were a REPUDIATION of the CLINTONS. More than 70% of the caucus vote went against Hillary. Hillary's air of invinceability will further erode in New Hampshire. Once Clinton is neutralized then Edwards & Obama can have a legitimate debate about the future of America. This is WAKEUP CALL to the Democratic Party Establishment and the powerful interests that have tried to help Hillary buy the nomination. Make no mistake, this campaign will get UGLY. Hillary's only hope is to undermine and suppress voter turnout and attempt to drive up Obama & Edwards negatives. Accept the reality HILLARY IS A LOSER. America does not want Hillary and neither do grassroots Democrats, progressives and Independents.

The people who are cheering over Obama's victory in Iowa are the republicans.I listen all the right wing nuts radio show and they keep saying how Obama is such a great guy,he used drugs when he was younger who cares,his muslim background is such a great asset and as soon as he becomes the nominee the republican smear machine will go after him in full motion.I bet they'll find someone who bought drug from Obama, they'll find a cousin from his father side who is muslim that a have a connection with the terrorists and so and so.Don't forget that the republicans were thrilled when Kerry won the nomination.They were good enough to portray a war hero like Kerry(who volunteer to go to Vietnam) as a military hater.They can't smear Hillary, everything 's been thrown at her, no surprises.It's time for the democrats to wake up and to vote with their minds and not with their hearts, republicans do it better that's why they won 7 out of 10 times.What a great night for Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.

Bye, Bye! You are not your husband and we don't like you. Have fun in retirement...

I meant Bob Kerrey not John Kerrey in my previous post.

Please Hillary drop out of the race after New hampshire, we democrats need to unite our country for a landslide victory in november that we know Obama can bring us. He brought in independents and disillusioned republicans into the caucus.
That is the kind of coalition that can bring affordable healthcare to all and bring our troops back home from Iraq. Please Hillary if you're listening ghive it up after new hampshire. It's over.

As one from Illinois, I have been watching Barak Obama rise for many years. You just knew something was special about him way back when. As a lifelong Democrat I was worried sick that Hillary would be nominated. The Republicans HATE her and would move heaven and earth to defeat her. Now it looks like my dreams have come true. Barak Obama is poised to stand for a future. Real, goosebump inducing, hope for change to this mess of murderous and traitorous action by the thieves who have stolen our country. Go Barak. I'm donating today and buying a bumper sticker tomorrow.

"We want a new direction, we want change", the Iowans have spoken. May the rest of the nation recognize the historical significance, wisdom, and courage shown this day in Iowa. It is a great day in America.

The obituary of Hillary is rather premature. Go back and read all the headlines about her husband. Amazingly, they are almost similar. Bill won his first primary in Georgia. I believe that Hillary will wrap things up on Super Tuesday. Then the real race will begin.

3rd Place??? Hillary is dead in the water... FU!

It appears that the first call Hillary made was to Norman Hsu to tell him that a pardon is now off the table. Then she called John Kerrey to tell him that she is going to flip flop on the cabinet post she had promised him. Then she called Bill to tell him that he will be sleeping on the couch from now on.

Kudos to Mr.Barack Class Obama for his first win.

The best news out of Iowa was that the Democratic Party resoundingly rejected torture; Hillary Clinton got just 29 percent of the caucus vote.

As Milan Kundera wrote: "The struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting."

See: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2007/09/28/2007-09-28_hillary_flipflop_on_torture_inspired_aft.html;

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2007/09/30/cnns-kurtz-sees-media-lust-hillary-does-full-ginsburg-flip-flop-tortu;

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0907/Hillary_and_torture_audio_version.html

I thought Joe Biden was the classiest candidate the Democratic Party has had in a while, but since he is no longer an option, I think it is important for the party to rally around Obama and save financial resources for the fight this fall.

Martin Edwin Andersen
Churchton, Maryland

Democrats want change... change from what? GEORGE BUSH! I'm sorry, Obama has been a JUNIOR senator for THREE years, one of which has been his year-long run for Iowa. He is NOT QUALIFIED. And, if he does win the nomination, this Democrat will be staying home... or hoping a unity party will run so I can vote for them. Let Michigan and Florida seat their delegates - it would shut up all of the Obama supporters. In any case, don't count Hillary out, folks - she still won more supporters than Kerry did in 2004 in Iowa - and she can go the distance.

I saw Barack Obama's speech tonight after winning Iowa and I have to admit that I saw in him Martin Luther King, Jr., and Robert F. Kennedy. Ronald Reagan may have been the "Shining City on the Hill" for the Republicans, but Obama is the "Shining Light of Hope" for the world. My prayers and blessings are with Barack Obama and all those who believe in a United States of America.

Notwithstanding all the analysis that is taking place about whether Hillary can "recover" by winning New Hampshire, I hope this important set of facts is not lost: Bob Kerrey "endorsed" Clinton, but sent an "apology letter" to Obama that sounded like a far more passionate endorsement of him than his actual endorsement. Mike Huckabee practically endorsed Obama on Leno last night. The newscasters on MSNBC were so visibly moved by Obama's speech tonight that I really had to laugh. But most importantly: Kucinich and Richardson, and now we are hearing, Biden and even Edwards have indicated that if they drop out of the race, they will throw their support to Obama.

I will admit that I'm a proud Obama supporter, and have been since the beginning, so my take is no doubt biasd. That being said, however, can the Clinton campaign possibly be so driven by personal ambition that it would try to eke out a victory for the Democratic nomination even though it is increasingly clear that she will not win a national election?

She can level criticism after criticism about Obama's lack of "readiness to lead" -- but the truth is in what we see happening: He really does unite people. From both sides of the aisle, even from his opponents, he garners support. If that's not proof of leadership ability, I don't know what is.

So much for the candidate running on the "experience" ticket when her only claim to experience is having slept next to a president (and it is questionable how much of even that experience she has had).

Does the Iowa caucus prove anything in the larger picture?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1431

.

wake up people Hillary finished THIRD. With all the advantages of money, name recognition and a former President campaigning for her, Hillary Clinton finished third. Obama is a genuine decent man who is campaigning like Reagan did years ago. His message resonates. Hillary's message does not. Even the liberal media senses that "a torch has been passed." Heck, Hillary finished behind Edwards who was a shameful campaigner talking negative at every turn. This means something and should not be dismissed by clinton campaign spin. Look for the Clinton's to run 24/7 in NH...Including Bill

I wish Obama all the best and I hope he wins the nomination. With Obama I actually have a candidate that I can believe in. Hillary Clinton not taking a decisive stand against the LTTE terrorist organization in Sri Lanka (one of the most heinous terrorist groups in the world) is what did it for me.

http://www.asiantribune.com/index.php?q=node/8699

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! so sad for queen hillary....

Taken in perspective, the Iowa vote is mere cosmetic. Democrats need to think, not feel, our way through these primaries. We must be cognitive, not reactionary. We must elect the candidate who we know will be the best president. Our futures depend upon it.

So much for Evita's inevitability. Her candidacy is nothing more than an end run around the Constitution. In the next Congress, we need to rewrite the 22nd Amendment to also bar spouses of two-term presidents. No one back then thought anyone would be so brazen or a party so bereft of leadership.

the hag got her but beat bad.

Hillary would be a much better president.

We've got to stop givng Obama a free ride and letting the Republicans throw
more mud at Hillary than any candidate in recent history.

Hillary's proposals are much better.

Obama's speeches are content free.

Hillary would be a much better hands-on President.

We need a President that can tackle the most difficult issues we face
and understand them in detail.

We've had enough of "big picture guys" that delegate everything that matters.

Its too easy for them to make big mistakes.

Hillary would be very good at the job of being President.

We need a competent President.

America's being destroyed by the current incompetent one.

http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/editorblog/019
Huckabee May be the God Squad Flavor of the Month, But Two Mothers Say He is Responsible for Their Daughters Being Killed
Submitted by mark karlin on Mon, 12/10/2007 - 7:00am. EditorBlog
BUZZFLASH EDITOR'S BLOG

Mark Karlin, Editor and Publisher, BuzzFlash.com

December 10, 2007

In the growing Internet and mainstream press coverage over Mike Huckabee's role in the release of a convicted rapist who went on to kill two young women, Huckabee is relying on the usual pat answer of GOP politicians who claim "to be close to the Lord"; they are not responsible for their actions because they are doing God's work.

BuzzFlash covered the main points of Huckabee's role in the Clinton-hater orchestrated paroling of Wayne DuMond in its most recent BuzzFlash GOP Hypocrite of the Week.

But getting lost in the coverage is a startling accusation from the mothers of the two daughters who were killed by DuMond, a dangerous, vicious rapist and then killer who was championed by persons obsessed with believing Clinton was the Anti-Christ.

According to the Kansas City Star, the grieving families hold the former Governor accountable for his actions.

Their message is simply this: You bear a large part of the responsibility for these murders. You were informed that DuMond would continue his streak of violence, and yet you came to his defense.

To be more specific here are what the Missouri moms who lost their daughters to brutal murders had to say to the Kansas City Star (DuMond had moved from Arkansas to Missouri):

The mothers say Huckabee is responsible, at least in part, for the release of DuMond, who died in a Missouri prison in 2005.

"What a fool," Lois Davidson, (Carol) Shields' mother, said of Huckabee. "Thinking he could rule the country when he couldn't even do a good job as governor of Arkansas."

Janet Williams, (Sara) Andrasek's mother, said: "Wayne DuMond should have never been on the streets in Missouri. ... When politics are involved, people get hurt, and Sara and Carol Shields paid the ultimate price with their lives."

Davidson and Williams said they're particularly angry because Huckabee has never called them to apologize or explain his part in the DuMond case.

No, instead of apologizing, Huckabee has adopted the typical strategy of the phony religious right: he has made himself into a victim.

Yes, despite the headline of the Kansas City Star article, ""Murdered women's mothers blame Huckabee for his part in killer's release," Huckabee is making himself out to be the one who is being hurt by the deaths of these two women.

According to a December 6 CNN interview, Huckabee is deftly accusing the grieving moms of "politicizing" the murders that wouldn't have happened if he had kept DuMond in jail, as many professionals and past victims of DuMond had urged him:

Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee said it was "heartbreaking" that the deaths of women killed by a convicted rapist who was released from prison after Huckabee supported his parole had become politicized.

On Wednesday, the mother of the woman the convict later murdered pledged to campaign against the former Arkansas governor.

"There are families who are truly, understandably and reasonably, grief stricken," Huckabee told CNN. "And for people to now politicize these deaths and to try to make a political case out of it rather than to simply understand that a system failed and that we ought to extend our grief and heartfelt sorrow to these families, I just regret politics is reduced to that."

Notice how skillfully Huckabee, ever the slick preacher, appears to be expressing sympathy with the mothers on the one hand, while making himself out to be the victim of a political attack. Sorry, Mike, this is about two girls who were killed because you cast your lot with a group of preachers, lynch mob members, and a Rupert Murdoch journalist who, in a fit of rabid hysteria, went to bat to release a violent criminal.

In an unusual move for a Governor, Huckabee even wrote DuMond while he was in jail telling him of Huckabee's personal interest in paroling him.

"In 1996, Huckabee, during his first term as Arkansas governor, expressed support for the parole of DuMond in a letter to him," according to CNN. "Huckabee on Sunday confirmed to CNN he had sent the letter to DuMond."
Huckabee uses the preacher's cloth to make him immune from his sins and his role in causing a murderer to go free in order to gain political advantage with a GOP mob of Clinton haters (who for bizarre reasons believed that Bill Clinton had "framed" DuMond, but it's such a crazed assertion we won't even go there because there is no there there.)

Like Bush, Huckabee puts on the mantle of being a victim, when two young women are dead because of his actions.

This is not about two murders being politicized: it is about Mike Huckabee being so opportunistic that he put the lives of women at stake by releasing an unreformed rapist.

He gambled with the lives of Americans and lost.

Now he wants us to feel sorry for him.

According to CNN, Huckabee received information fully informing him of DuMond's horrifying danger. "I feel that if he is released it is only a matter of time before he commits another crime and fear that he will not leave a witness to testify against him the next time," one victim wrote. She described how DuMond had raped her at knifepoint.

America has had enough of men who hide behind God instead of accepting responsibility as individuals for their actions.

Huckabee is just another such huckster.

So listen up Democrats in California and New York and those other big states... Obama won democrats but also won huge from independents and this is why Clinton should not be our nominee. Independents support Obama and we need independents to win in November. Independents despise Clinton and she may just well lose in November. And the young people.... they came out to vote. They will come out for Obama in November. Don't make us lose to a Republican because you can't see that Clinton's negatives really will harm us.

This victory is proof that Obama is the most likely to win and the most able to lead.

More importantly Democrats should not deceive themselves into thinking that Huckabee will be an easy candidate to defeat. People thought that about Reagan in 1980. This is a huge mistake.

The governor theory is very important here. Governors or former VPs have been winners since JFK (and that was a questionable election, "Chicago") and before that 1920.

The Republican operatives know this (I spoke to someone who worked in Rove's office).

Obama is the closest the Democrats have to a governor (ie, not Washingtonian). Richardson and the others are second rate campaigners.

I am looking for an Obama-Richardson ticket with Biden as Secretary of State, with a platform on ready to go on how we will get out of the mess GWB as put us into. Honest answers are what the American people will respond to. If we look at who won tonight, they are the honest ones (not phoney Mitt or fake laugh Hillary or used car salesman Edwards).

Finally, if Bloomberg enters the race, all bets are off as he would be the best candidate running.

Too much triangulation did Hillary in. Especially on the war in Iraq. She was wrong on that, never admitted it and she is now paying a heavy price. The invasion of Iraq was a violation of international law. It made matters worse. The whole world knows that. Too bad Hillary never figured it out.

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.