DISQUS

Benny · 2 years ago

Interesting Chase Considering that two separate focus groups by Fox News and CNN thought Edwards won the debate and put him as a number one choice.

http://blog.johnedwa...

Also, Chris Woods at Bleeding Heartland declared Edwards the winner as well. http://www.bleedingh...

freedom fighter · 2 years ago

Wow.... how convenient. All of a sudden Edwards organization has gotten WEAKER in ONE WEEK after being strong for months! I thought he just opened up 10 offices this week. Man Iowans are sure fickle.

desmoinesdem · 2 years ago

I have to agree with Benny I don't see Edwards as losing supporters to Obama. He declined a bit over the summer, but there's no evidence that he has been losing lately. On the contrary, I think he has solidified his position and will get a lot of momentum coming out of yesterday's debate.

feral cat · 2 years ago

Not what I saw in Indianola last night I was at a Town Meeting in Indianola with a standing room  only crowd.  Edwards and Elizabeth were there.  He answered tough questions.  The undecided people I talked to were totally going to caucus for him.  One woman said "He doesn't try to please with his answers...Sometimes he disagrees with you.  His answers to difficult issues were simply put and he made them easy to understand...I will caucus for him." she said to a Swedish TV.  "And he told him he could get around all this bickering." 

An old Teamster was there and asked if he would strengthen the  Labor Relations board so that union organizers weren't fired like they were in the 1980's. 


He answered the difficult question of immigration forcefully and with clarity. 


He wrangled on health care with a Kucinich supporter who walked away grudging admitting Edwards was good and Elizabeth was great.


A farm kid just wanted to know about the 2nd Ammendment and walked away saying "I'm for him". 


This was a broad spectrum of people.  And they said they saw a president.

Inquirer · 2 years ago

power rankings No one can blame Mrs. Clinton for a reluctance to involve her campaign in the drug wars that are tearing at the very fabric of America as we speak. Who would have known prior to this week how advanced is the drug culture in America. Consider: William Sheehan, a distinguished and much respected leader in New Hampshire with years of public service to his credit, raised some perfectly valid concerns about Barack Obama's cocaine use. For his trouble he was mercilessly villainized while Obama, the real villain, won fulsome praise in an outpouring that must have stunned those in the front lines of the war on drugs as well as those Americans who see drugs as a mortal danger to the very edifice that is America. I wouldn't be the least surprised to learn that those who rushed so quickly to Obama's defense were drug users themselves and thus were defending their own interests as well as what they perceived to be his.

No, Mr. Sheehan is not the villain here nor is the Clinton camp. Barack Obama is the one who broke the law and who sets the bad example through his use of cocaine and other illegal drugs. The fact that Obama escaped arrest and went on to become a Presidential candidate indeed is a peculiar matter for celebration and easily takes its place as one of the great ironies of our times. The fact that his cocaine use attracted so many defenders so quickly and across so broad a spectrum is a matter of great shame for our country and indeed constitutes nothing less than a strident wake-up call as to how deep and insidious the drug culture has become in America. The fact that today Barack Obama, a leading candidate for President of the United States finds himself the adored leader and rallying point of the drug culture in our nation can only be considered a matter of the gravest practical concern.

Were Obama as honest and candid as many of his apologists claim he is, he would truly come clean with America and answer the many, many questions that his cocaine use raises in the minds of the many who must be stunned to learn of the extent the drug wars have enveloped our American society at all levels. And these many Americans certainly might be forgiven for an abundance of skepticism and even disdain for those who have fallen so far as to consider cocaine use by a Presidential candidate or anyone else "no big deal," and in fact a congratulatory matter that sweeps across America from the penthouses of New York City to the orange groves of California.

No, sir, Mr. Sheehan did a favor for all of us who love and remain ever willing to defend an America that is strong, upright, clean and bright and wholesome, a grand favor indeed in opening our eyes to how far our nation has fallen and how difficult is our task now of cleaning it up and restoring it and setting it upon the right path once again.  We didn't know, Mr. Sheehan. We just didn't know.

Open-eyed Illinoisan · 2 years ago

I can blame Mrs. Clinton Let's remember the checkered past of a youthful G.W.Bush - now our sitting two-term President.  How much looking the other way is America willing to do?  Obviously, the answer is plenty.

The mere fact that a child can fall to peer-pressure, but overcome self-defeating behaviors is part of America's story. Senator Obama has been honest about early indiscretion and owned up to the wrongness of his acts.  Further, he's taken his success story to young people to serve as an example of his life better lived in public service.  I see no residual "fault" on the part of our Senator for being honest and leading others to better choices.

I can blame Mrs. Clinton (as you call her) for repeatedly stooping to mud-slinging tactics.  Her attempts to pull her competition down when she's out of options to lift her rankings up speaks volumes as to who is the weaker candidate.

CK · 2 years ago

Edwards and Standing Room Edwards has NO game outside of Iowa-none. A standing room only for Edwards is not impressive-he just picks smaller rooms than Clinton and Obama. Not only that, but supporters of Edwards are bordering on inflammatory in their phone-calling and door-knocking-telling Obama supporters that they should switch because America is not ready for a Black president and that Edwards is the only candidate to win in the South. Really? Remember 2004?

conscienceofdemocracy · 2 years ago

Hillary Clinton Now Leads In Iowa After Last Debate Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton now leads in Iowa, and Senator John Edwards overtakes Senator Barack Obama after the last debate among the Democratic presidential candidates, last Thursday, in Johnston, Iowa.

The latest Iowa State University poll released Friday, shows:

Hillary - 31%

Edwards - 24%


Obama - 20%

http://www.huliq.com...

FOX News Poll: Clinton Maintains Lead in New Hampshire

Friday, December 14, 2007


http://www.foxnews.c...

 

-Lee · 2 years ago

ISU Poll is from Dec. 3 That Iowa State University poll is almost 2 weeks old... It was published December 3, 2007.

-Lee

Katherine · 2 years ago

Are Iowans really voting for hope and dope? Yikes!

factcheck · 2 years ago

Iowa State Poll That ISU poll was taken between November 6th and November 18th. Just because they released it today doesn't mean Hillary is winning.  On the contrary, it means she was up (according to that poll) in early to mid November. We already knew that.

Obama is winning now. Check the dates on your polls before you make wild claims - especially since Edwards and Obama came out of the debate in a much stronger position based on their performances according to multiple *unbiased* sources.

Lynn · 2 years ago

The higher road.... As a Christian I believe honesty is a virtue that should be met with forgiveness.  Senator Obama took the right path over 20 years ago when he dedicated his life to public service as a community organizer, a State and US Senator. This country has an opportunity to cast a vote in favor of change in Washington.  If elected President, I believe he will bring transparency back to Washington.  Obama 08

American007 · 2 years ago

Let it go... He did drugs, he admitted it and he's sorry. I'm a Hillary supporter and even I admire his honesty on this. It beats Bill's "smoked, but didn't inhale" sillyness. It only makes us look like bullies when we rake him over the coals on this.

Second, I believe Ron Paul has by far got a lock on the drug culture with his implied "legalize everything" message.

I agree with your ranking of Obama on top. I'm not sure if I'd  switch Edwards and Hillary around or not. I think both campaigns are in a funk, and I'm not sure who's predicament is worse. Strategically, I like Hillary for second, since she gets nearly all of the second-choice Richardson support. I also like her larger organization which means more resources going into the last minute push. I guess I'd have said Hillary over Edwards, but barely.

It's all going to come down to which of us (Edwards or Clinton) gets their mojo back first...

Melchiz68 · 2 years ago

Question? As a casual reader and one who has not heard much about the Obama drug use story, after reading your post I get the impression that Mr Obama is actively using cocaine, is he? And let me add this: if he is not and the cocaine use was part of his past, should he not be able to live past that and go on to do great things with his life, even becoming president of the United States of America? 

IowaVoter · 2 years ago

Inquirer??? Inquirer, I can tell from your muddy comments about long-dead info on Baracks teenage drug use (wow, what a foreign concept) that you're obviously a current (or, as recent news indicates, a soon-to-be-dismissed) Clinton staffer.

Kris · 2 years ago

John Edwards What people fail to remember is that John Edwards was absolutely on the WRONG side of a great many votes, not just the Iraq war vote. I liked him as a VP candidate, but now that he's running for president, these things just can't be overlooked or underemphasized. Sure, he's Mr. Populist now, but I have a nagging feeling that he's become a bit of a poser, locking in on a subject that he thinks will get him elected. He's frankly had appalling judgement on a lot of issues and votes. Of all the candidates, this man has absolutely the least amount of experience. Other than one turn as senator, what are his qualifications for the presidency?

I just don't get it.

dennis dean · 2 years ago

Obama Tops Democratic Power Rankings, Clinton Takes Third Call me a cynic, skeptic or whatever, but there's something about the Obama hysteria I find discomforting. How is it possible that a black person (okay, half-black), with less than 3 years national political experience, be propelled by the media to a top dog, the guy to watch, in the Democratic primaries!

After letting my paranoia run wild, I came up with some plausible answers: (i) Republicans and a Republican nominee would rather run against Obama, knowing fully well that no Southern state would ever vote for a non-Caucasian for president (people seem to have forgotten the recent Ford "incident", with the white female - after that ad. was aired, it went downhill for Ford, who lost that election. In the case of Obama, they would use his white mother - Jim Crow's mysiogynist - and his Black African, not African-American, father's Muslim religion to pound him to pulp in the campaigns); (ii) Obama is blinded by the crowds that he really believes America, white America, will vote for a Black person to be their president; (iii) most of the Obama enthusiasts are Republican plants, put there to divert media attention and coverage of candidates who will beat any of the Republican presidential hopefuls out there. I mean candidates like John Edwards, Chris Dodd, Joe Biden, and even Hillary. Because the less media coverage of the other Democratic candidates, the less nationally-known they are...!!

Why else is the media reporting and talking more about Obama's large crowds, Oprah's bonding up with Obama, and almost nothing on John Edwards health care plans, taxes, his stance on the Iraq war; or nary a pip about Chris Dodd, Joe Biden or Bill Richardson's speech or campaign. It's all about Obama and Hillary 24/7. Two candidates the media and Republicans know a Republican candidate could easily swiftboat into the loser's corner in a presidential election!

Former Rep. Ford and Howard Dean's experience in 2006 and 2004 respectively, have taught me to be cynical and skeptical of media-hyped candidates; especially one that happens to be, like me, a person of color.

I like Obama, but I don't think he stands a ghost of a chance winning a presidential race against a white male Republican candidate. His skin color, his father's background and religion, and the fact that his mother's white are factors Republicans will use to neutralize him in the South. Republicans know this, as do the media. But mum is the word, and the charade continues to be played in the newspaper articles and op. eds and on TV and the radio....While fox noise cannot get enough of Edwards and Clinton attacks, Obama on the other hand, baring the comedic play on his name and that he's a Muslim, is rarely mentioned or attacked like the other Democratic candidates.....That says a lot, doesn't it? 

Dan McGinn · 2 years ago

The Caucus Are Not Tonight, So Take A Look At Chris Dodd! I was speaking with a former Democratic State Deputy Chair this week. He is a District Court Judge now so the Iowa Supreme Court will not let him caucus. (That's an issue for another day). However, he told me that Iowans commitments in the weeks before the caucus tend to be soft and that their minds are usually made up, at the earliest, a week or two before the caucuses, if not on the night of the caucus itself. These polls usually don't impress the committed caucus goers. The success ON CAUCUS NIGHT of Jimmy Carter and John Kerry are proof that my judge friend is wise.

These early polls are a better reflection of familiarity and media attention, rather than commitment. Actually, a better way to look at this is to ask why the three so-called front runners, Obama, Clinton and Edwards, haven't been able to muster up larger percentages due to all of the media coverage they have received?

I have been stumping for Chris Dodd. Iowans are just starting to learn about Chris Dodd, and the timing is good becauce were are nearing the stage where caucus goers are starting to make up their minds. He just started running state wide ads on television and radio that caucus goers will observe and be impressed with.

Dodd's network is in place. This article notes that he has a talented staff, and he does, all over the state. Additionally he has the support of the firefighters who are starting to rev up their engines.

Democrats want to nominate a candidate that can win the election. The three front runners all have flaws in this area. Obama has the "inexperienced" tag, Clinton has high negatives and has had poor debate performances which will provide ad clips for the Republicans next fall if she is nominated, and Edwards, who has been stumping in Iowa for four years, has little to show for the effort as well as a poor performance in the last election in delivering southern states, which a southern candidate should do. (Edwards even lost his home state of North Carolina).

Democrats need to recognize and nominate a candidate that Americans will vote for next November. Chris Dodd is the candidate who can win. His accomplishments are impressive during his time in Washington: Dodd was a peace negotiator in Northern Ireland and Central America, ending wars there. Dodd authored and fought for the passage of the Family and Medical Leave Act which has helped over 50,000,000 Americans. The Combating Autism Act, the passage of the first child care legislation since WWII, The work he has done for Head Start, are just  a few of his accomplishments that have changed this country for the better. This doesn't even mention the work he has done in Washington during the campaign season to restore Habeas Corpus and restore our Constition. He has done it by reaching across the isle to find common ground with opponents. That is what Americans want to see in their president, a person who can deliver results and avoid bi-partisan posturing for the good of our nation.

The top three candidates talk about "change". Talk is cheap. Chris Dodd has made a career out of making changes to improve our nation. Dodd has the experience to make the changes needed to get our country on the right path. Democrats need to nominate a candidate with experience making changes, which is what Americans voters are looking for rather than mere promise makers who may not deliver. Experience making change counts. Dodd has a record of getting the job done. That's why and I am going to caucus for Chris Dodd at the Democratic caucuses here in Council Bluffs.

Eyzwidopn · 2 years ago

Why it's possible "Call me a cynic, skeptic or whatever, but there's something about the Obama hysteria I find discomforting. How is it possible that a black person (okay, half-black), with less than 3 years national political experience, be propelled by the media to a top dog, the guy to watch, in the Democratic primaries! - by: dennis dean"

In response to your post, at critical times in our nations history, "conventional thinking" and the "status quo" have been successfully challenged to bring about necessary, ground-breaking change and advancement.  We are at such a time again.  So what you're witnessing, the ever-growing groundswell of support, enthusiasm, inspiration, and belief in Obama's ability to lead and bring this country together to restore our unified greatness at home and abroad, is real and will prevail... despite any narrow-minded thinking that's wedded to the ghosts of the past.