I was only glancing here and there at the debates. Never seemed that interesting to me. Hillary - Boring, kept quibbling over all of those "raise your hand" questions. Ok abstract questions are stupid, but you're trying to combat that whole "hillary is a b****" image, so just play along. Typical Hillary, you either like her or you dont. Dodd - didn't really do anything special to distinguish himself. Maybe I just missed all of his answers. Gravel - The guy always revists old questions (granted Wolf was a dick so I dont blame him) Nice to see him call out people here and there. Obama - God damn it, answer the bloody question. I swear to god, he has john kerry syndrome and just eloquently talks and just goes off on his own for a while. If a mom wants to know why her kid can't choose the VA facility of his choice, stop talking about the VA's wonderful prescription drug program. And then when Wolf basically sums it all up and actually states your whole paragraph in a sentence, you take two more sentences to agree with his summation. Take a page from Biden and just b**** about an issue. In your case it should be Iraq since apparently you keep saying you knew this was going to happen from day 1. Biden - Well he was loud and forceful so he caught my attention. To the casual observer he sounded forceful and powerful. To those who know more about him, he's just a phony. Consequently, I'm not sure what to make of the Darfur thing. Richardson - My personal favorite, I'm biased, I think he has a good combo of experience and leadership to draw from. But I didn't really pay attention to him today. But I've heard him enough to like him. Kucinich - Gravel's my new fave far left candidate. Your wife's hot though so credit where credit is deserved. So maybe I like you more after quickly evaluating that fact.
I must not've been watching the same debate y'all were. I thought Dodd was solid and well-spoken; he clearly knows what he's talking about and it's a shame he's so marginalized. Meanwhile, I thought Richardson, who I like a lot, continued to fail to distinguish himself. Hillary was good, and funny at times; Edwards tried hard to differentiate himself from the other frontrunners. Biden was definitely forceful, but one wonders if he crossed that blurry line that divides passion from the 'anger' that American voters seem to dislike so much. Obama does need to wrap up his sentences a little more quickly. I thought his "you're four-and-a-half years late leading on this, John" was very pointed, and Edwards' response, which was basically "you're right," was the best he could do under the circumstances.
Okay, I think we may have both the necessary and sufficient reason why Hillary Clinton shouldn't be allowed to be president: her campaign song is by Celine Dion. Truly too horrifying to comtemplate. -- Josh Marshall
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/lRwizmuCnOw"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/lRwizmuCnOw" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>
you can select anyone, this isn't going any worse, we already have the worst presidnet of all times in our history.
<iframe src ="http://static.hillaryclinton.com/feature/song/video/video.aspx" width="511px" height="311px" frameborder="0"></iframe> i saw a jane fonda quote today, where she described hillary as "just a mouthpiece for the patriarchy, with skirt and a vagina."
Democrats set to make gains in 70 districts in 08. -- Democratic memo predicts additional 2008 gains By Klaus Marre June 19, 2007 Democrats are well positioned to expand their majority in Congress next year, according to a survey of battleground districts released Tuesday. “The electoral situation could not be better, particularly in the battleground districts where 2008 looks like a repeat of 2006,” read a memo from Democracy Corps, a think tank founded by James Carville and pollster Stan Greenberg. Despite favorable conditions for Democrats, the group warns that the Iraq war, which is a negative for Republicans, also obscures progress Congress is making in other areas. “Surprisingly, half [of those surveyed] know a rise in the minimum wage has become law; there is awareness that Democrats have engaged with the President on Iraq and stem cells. Everything else is invisible,” the memo said. The survey, conducted by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research, polled 1,600 people in 70 districts. It found that Democrats are ahead by an average of 9 points in these battleground districts. If Democrats wants to capitalize on the current political climate, however, they must continue to fight the administration on Iraq but also not lose sight of domestic issues, according to the memo. http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/democratic-memo-predicts-additional-2008-gains-2007-06-19.html
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/JAvZVq3lAfI"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/JAvZVq3lAfI" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object> "i would prefer something my husband hasn't received a lap dance to..."
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2007/07/bill_richardson_slowly_but_sur_1.html?nav=rss_blog [rquoter]Bill Richardson: Slowly But Surely Much of the attention today will be focused on the detailed financial reports filed by the Big Three in the Democratic field -- Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards. With the focus on the "top tier" New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson may be overlooked. But Richardson is as well-positioned financially as he could possibly have hoped for when he announced his candidacy for president earlier this year. Between April 1 and June 30, Richardson raised $7.1 million, bringing his year-to-date fundraising total to more than $13 million. Richardson, like Obama, raised more money in the second quarter of the year than in the first. Richardson spent roughly five million in the second quarter and ended June with a very solid $7.1 million on hand. His biggest expenditure -- $1.3 million -- went to the production of television ads and purchase of air time, a necessity given the fact that Richardson is far less well known to Democratic primary voters than Clinton, Obama and Edwards. Seeking to show that the ads, the first flight of which we raved about earlier this year, have worked, Richardson's campaign released a poll of the "likeliest" of Iowa caucus-goers that showed Edwards leading with 31 percent followed by Clinton at 23 percent, Richardson at 18 percent and Obama at 16 percent. (Among "likely" caucus goers in the Richardson poll, Edwards led with 31 percent followed by Clinton at 24 percent, Obama at 17 percent and Richardson at 13 percent.) A collection of other independent polling in Iowa seems to show a positive trend line for Richardson, although the independent polls are not as rosy as the governor's own surveys. Organizationally, Richardson is in surprisingly good shape in Iowa. He has 11 field offices in the state just one less than Clinton and four fewer than Edwards. (Obama has a whopping 28 field offices.) And, according to washingtonpost.com's "Campaign Tracker" -- bookmark it if you haven't already done so -- Richardson has done 25 events in the Hawkeye State since the start of the year. Expect Richardson to attempt to gain more traction in the coming weeks with his plan to remove all American troops from Iraq by the end of this year. That agressive position is sure to play well with Democratic base both nationally and in Iowa, where anti-war sentiment runs high. The CNN/YouTube debate set for next Monday provides Richardson a real opportunity to break through, a chance he has missed in the televised debates up until now. To date, Richardson has appeared uncomfortable on stage and uncertain of the format. A stronger-than-expected performance would play into a story line that Richardson is slowly but surely moving upwards toward the top tier. It would also help squash (or at least quiet) talk that Richardson is simply too unpredictable to be taken seriously as a candidate for president. Richardson continues to build the kind of candidacy -- both financially and organizationally -- that will allow him to be a serious presence in the first four caucus and primary states. He remains far behind Clinton and Obama in fundraising and there seems little reason to expect that he will be able to compete with those two candidates when it comes to money. But, Richardson is doing everything he needs to do to ensure that if the race takes an unforeseen turn, be it a stumble by a frontrunner or some other unpredictable event, he is in position to take advantage of it.[/rquoter]
Way to go Bill! (Richardson that is). Now if he can get some sexy Latina to do a "Richardson Girl" video for him...
