-
Website
http://iowaindependent.com/ -
Original page
http://iowaindependent.com/1725/obama-tops-final-democratic-power-rankings-edwards-and-clinton-tie-for-second -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
Hillary could take second if the women turn out for her and she holds on to her slight lead among older voters. But I've been saying all year she will finish no better than third. I think the second choices will favor Edwards and Obama.
I think Obama has been right on so many issues that most people don't realize that he is right - or willfully want to ignore what they see and know.
I think his age brings a new perspective to politics.
I think his stance on the Iraq war, GLBT rights, climate change, and healthcare are dead on.
I think his life choices and experience trump all other candidates.
We need a President that brings instant credibility back to America - for the whole world.
Obama is America's candidate.
GoObama!!
what was the final rankings last time in the democratic race?
if u didn't do a final ranking last time what was the consensus a week out?
Barack is the one leading candidate that has PROVEN that he can work with people to get important legislation passed.
Barack cares about the people and it's time he becomes president.
Let's vote in Barack -- we need real and positive change for our country.
Obama '08
First, you say that if the caucus were held tonight, Obama would earn a "narrow victory". I think you should at least cite what evidence you're using to back this up. Nearly every time I've seen polls over the last few days, they've alternated between all three candidates. I have yet to see a consistent stream of polls that show Obama with a victory, let alone a consistent stream of polls with a lead for anyone outside the margin of error.
Also, I think the crisis in Pakistan will hurt Obama and Edwards more than you let on. If this is a battle of change vs. experience as the media and the campaigns have made it out to be, people who are truly on the fence will shift toward what they percieve as the "experienced" candidate in the face of bad news abroad. And you can't say that that's a construct created just by the Hillary camp...those big signs behind Obama say CHANGE instead of HOPE now for a reason.
Also, if enough people shift to Biden to make him viable in enough precincts where he otherwise wouldn't have been, that locks out Obama (and Edwards to a lesser degree) from those vital ABC voters who might have padded their numbers had Biden not been viable.
That's my apolitical analysis of the situation. I have nothing against any of the candidates...I'm just trying to look at it with a completely independent point of view.
We deserve a candidate offering more than hope and John Edwards has consistently provided SUBSTANCE and comprehensive plans and solutions to move our country forward.
John Edwards will be a great President!
i dont know what!!!!!!
Based on polling data at Real Clear Politics Clinton is leading in the polls and if I'm reading their data right, the trending seems to be favoring her at least through 12/13/07. The results are within the margin of error currently, but if the trending is right, it may be breaking back Hillary's way. Furthermore, Obama is facing a serious challenge from Edwards, who appears to be making a surge and his numbers are drawing him closer to Obama. In our view, Edwards does not have a real shot at the nomination long term, both from an electability standpoint and a resource standpoint. A win or even a close third place run though will keep him in the game for a little longer, but ultimately his campaign is going to succumb to the liberal, left wing lack of depth and intellectual honesty in his campaign. We think Obama will manage to weather this late inning challenge and hold Edwards at bay to finish a near second to Clinton. However, in our view, the Clinton campaign should manage to edge Obama out with a win in excess of the margin of error. Political Season says Clinton wins by a 5-7% margin of victory.
It's going to take 2 presidents to clean up the mess this "president" left behind.
She is ready to step into the job and Obama is not.
She is the most electable candidate that the democrats have and I want to be sure we win the whitehouse.
A candidate with the name Barack Hussein Obama cannot win. Plus he only has 2 years experience in the senate, he'll never be able to win over a Republican candidate that has been a Govenor or long-time Senator.
Illinois and Iowa people grow up with similar values - raising kids, sending them to college, some coming back to work at family farm or in a family business.
Recently I learned of the loss of the Maytag factory in Iowa. John Edwards was comforting a person who had lost his job.
What are we going to do about the loss of American jobs, livable wages, health care for the poor and middle class - I believe in universal health care that is equal for all.
I believe that the the level of troops that we have deployed in Iraq makes us more vulnerable now to other nuclear powers.
I think that we need to elect John Edwards for President. I have seen him in California twice; he was one of three candidates that showed up for the First Presidential Forum on Global Warming. He left with the greatest applause.
Please give John Edwards a good look - I think that he remembers his roots,loves his family, and he will not fight for big business. John works hard to keep American jobs here .He will bring our troops home ASAP.
Vote for John Edwards.
Well, perhaps if the fixers of your state's early media horse-race had not connived to cut Kucinich out of the deabte there then he would have spent more time in Iowa kissing babies, shucking feed corn, and shooting at captive birds.
"The Nation", America's most widely read magazine of progressive opinion, has just endorsed Dennis Kucinich - cutting through the smokescreen of mercenary support bought for the other candidates by wads of corporate cash and hours of baseless "journalistic" advocacy in the corporate MSM. This endorsement is explained in the magazine as being based on the logic and coherence of the relative platforms and prescriptions expressed by each candidate - and on these bases Dennis appears to have won an easy decision.
Hillary and Obama lead on nothing. They both have avoided the most pressing and controversial votes that have come to the senate floor during the campaign, and shirk their responsibilitites to speak out meaningfully on the issues that alarm the entire country. Please have the wisdom and integrity to weigh this fact against their scripted arrivals and grinning reparte at one homey diner per town across your entire state.
Ken Duerksen
Oxford, Ohio
Obama's strengths including sound judgment tempered with intelligence, a sense of balance and justice are admirable qualities, not readily seen in the other candidates. In stark contrast to the cookie-cutter-type answers most politicians give Obama's are measured and thoughtful. Patience and reasoned logic indicates someone who is responsive rather than reactive. The current administration's reactive policies proved ineffective and dangerous. And after 7 years of that the nation is more than ready for change.
Experience is not an end to itself. Although Obama has plenty of experience it is his judgment that makes him stand out from the rest of the contenders. Instead of using military power Obama is more apt to utilize a host of tools available that actually solve problems rather than create more. What a welcomed change.
A commitment to competent governance necessitates objective reality. Pure politics, ideology, and/or party loyalty create false narratives. Those claiming to care about people without acting on are paying lipservice. However organizing poor neighbourhoods, taking on genocide in Darfur, opposing military action in Iraq are proof Obama is a man who acts on his convictions.
Furthermore not only does he appear to understand the complexity of issues that challenge the nation requires someone with communication, negotiation and diplomacy skills, Obama has those skills. Equally important with his sincere desire and yearning to lead the country in a different direction Obama can and will do so successfully given the opportunity.
Insofar as Hillary's "experience":
Extensive research including "an interview with Mrs. Clinton, conversations with 35 Clinton administration officials and a review of books about her White House years" establish Healy's credentials. Healy's research supports the argument that being a First Lady does not qualify as "experience." Indeed it
"... suggest[s] that she was more of a sounding board than a policy maker, who learned through osmosis rather than decision-making, and who grew gradually more comfortable with the use of military power."
http://www.nytimes.c...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"This article entitled "37 Bills That Barack Obama Has Written or Co-Sponsored in Just 2 Years in the US Senate!" showed up on the website DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND way back in January. Very good reading.
"This link (http://www.democrati...)
"takes its information from Obama's own Senate website.
"SO if somebody really wanted to know about him, I am sure they could just do the research.
"Obama has shown great strength in the U.S. Senate.
http://www.huffingto...
"Obama has been one of the authors of the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act (S. 2180) and
"co-sponsored The Congressional Ethics Enforcement Commission Act (S. 2259),
"The Curtailing Lobbyist Effectiveness through Advance Notification, Updates, and Posting Act (The CLEAN UP Act) (S. 2179),
"The Transparency and Integrity in Earmarks Act (S. 2261),
"the Medicare Informed Choice Act (S. 1841),
"the Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act (S. 1151),
"the Combat Meth Act (S. 103) which provides more money for fighting methamphetamines,
"Dru's Law (S. 792) which creates a nationwide sex offender database and extension of Violence Against Women Act (S. 1197).
"Obama has successfully pressured Environmental Protections Agency to change to issue rules for home remodeling and renovation "that could prevent 28,000 lead-related illnesses each year, resulting in an annual net economic benefit of more than $4 billion."
"Senator Obama introduced the Lead Free Toys Act (S. 2048), requiring the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) to ban any children's product containing lead (before it all blew up a few months ago, which shows his vision and foresight).
"He introduced the Genomics and Personalized Medicine Act of 2006 (S. 3822).
"Senator Obama successfully passed legislation in the Senate to force the Pentagon to work towards an efficient electronic medical records system that will help ensure better care for our nation's troops, helped pass legislation that requires all soldiers to be assessed for Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) after they return from deployments,
"introduced the Spent Nuclear Fuel Tracking and Accountability Act (S. 1194).
"He authored the Sheltering All Veterans Everywhere Act (SAVE Act) (S. 1180),
"introduced the Homes for Heroes Act (S. 3475), which would expand access to long-term affordable housing for homeless veterans by setting aside $225 million to purchase, and introduced an amendment that became law providing food services to wounded veterans receiving physical therapy or rehabilitation services at military hospitals.
"Previously, service members receiving physical therapy or rehabilitation services in a medical hospital for more than 90 days were required to pay for their meals.
"Senator Obama passed an amendment to ensure that all service members returning from Iraq are properly screened for Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and introduced the Lane Evans Veterans Health and Benefits Improvement Act (S. 3988) which would help veterans transition from the DOD health system to the VA system.
"All of this in a matter of 3 years, not including everything he did in my home state of Illinois as a state legislator. If the next president can get as much done in 3 years as Obama has, I say we will be in great shape. He is the right person for the right job at the right time, and he should be our candidate."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So those claiming not to know what Obama stands for, do now. I suggest further checking out the links provided.
Too often people complain before doing their homework.
It will be sad to have someone who doesn't run their household become the person that people want to run the government. What I believe the Democrats have failed to realize is that if Hillary becomes the candidate, many of us will inevitably use our vote to support the Republican candidate. There is that much clear and undeniable belief that she is not the one.
Electable - well, if you only look at Democratic voters maybe.
http://www.allydswor...
Clinton picked the owner of a large-scale livestock operation who has promoted national corporate agriculture interests to be her co-chair for "Rural Americans for Hillary."
That's Joy Philippi, who owns a fourth-generation Nebraska family farm with 2,000 hogs.
Philippi is the recent past president of the National Pork Producers Council.
"That's the poster organization for corporate agriculture," said Klicker, who owns about 120 acres in rural Bloomfield and raises about 130 cows and calves.
Klicker said because Clinton picked Philippi, he doesn't believe the candidate when she says she will champion small farms if she's elected president.
He doesn't believe her, even though she started and ended a campaign speech in Denison Thursday by saying she'll "pay attention" to and "worry" about family farms.
I'm just very disappointed that Hillary would turn her back on us like this," said Klicker, who in unsure who he'll caucus for but is leaning toward Democrat Joe Biden. "She says she'll do one thing, yet when you surround yourself with people who are against the rest of us, we can't expect anything good to happen on family farm issues."
-snip
Hillary is a slimy politician without the charm of Bill, the brains of Biden, the vision of Obama and the heart of John Edwards. If Obama or Edwards doesn't win, I hope Biden comes through.
Now on a writen by another news article they say that Edwards in leading in to race.
So everyone seems to be trying to get democrats to vote for their choice...
Klicker said because Clinton picked Philippi, "he doesn't believe" the candidate when she says she will champion small farms if she's elected president.
Anyone can say they don't believe something about someone no matter what is "actually the facts are".
Republicans and their corporate owned news media is calling Kucicinh a nut because he said he saw an UFO.
Well Airplane pliots, army personal, Astronauts and even the repblicans all time hero "REAGAN" stated he had seem an UFO on two or more times.
I don't see the news media making statement about how much of a "NUT" actor Reagan was....
The voters do this decision making through the prism of their own daily lives and by judging in some cases with up close and direct personal contact.
This is an awesome responsibility which they take very seriously not only for Iowa but the rest of us who can only decide based upon what the media does or does not choose to reveal to us.
In the end,I believe Iowa will make the right choice. Personally,I would want them to choose John Edwards.
give so very much of their time to educate themselves, to then cast a deep, heatfelt vote. It must not be an easy process for them. We, who follow them owe our gratitude;
but, we must be very careful to, after taking Iowa's suggestion, educate ourselves, and quitely make our OWN decision.
UNLIKE Steve, I personally hope AND believe Iowa's choice
will be Barack Obama.
The polls taken are usually determined by less then a 1,000 persons and these polls can be bias as h... depending on who is contacted for their numbers and results.
This article was determined by this person making this statement::
"" But if the caucuses were held tonight, this is how """we think"" they would turn out""
You are making the statement that Obama would have a better chance of winning and just where do you get your "facts" which makes this statement correct.. There are going to be person against Obama as well as there are against Hillary.
They problem with democrats is that they are so easily manipulated by RNC propaganda and the right wing corporate controlled news media's BS.
If you wish to get rid of this dictatorship we had for the last 7 years, so no matter who wins the democratic primary, swallow your pride and make sure you vote for the democratic candidate, so the propaganda being spreaded by the RNC doesn't work to stop democrats from voting and voting for the democratic candidate. If democrats don't vote democratic and the republicans win the white house for 4 more years, the republican dictatorship will be completed for a permanent control over our country which Cheney has set in place in the last 7 years.
I like Edwards or Kucicinh but I will vote for the winner of the democratic primary election no matter who it is, in spite of the deceit and BS spread around by persons wanting the democrats to lose the presidency in 2008.
Kucinich has most of the values that democrats and independents said they wish for, so why are his numbers down?
Is it because of the blasting by the news media and the lack of including him in some of the debates like Iowa has done.
Anyway I hope democrats have enough sense to vote for the democratic candidate in the general election no matter who it might be.
A no vote in the general election is the republican's dream.
Obama said he would leave the troops in Iraq for at least 5 more years and if I am not mistaking, said he would make the bases in Iraq permanent.
As for his policies on health care want is the difference between Obama's and Hillary's.
For one thing they all are saying that Americans would be forced to pay for health insurance, no matter if they can not pay for it.
Why do you believe Americans do not have health insurance now.
So if one has the actual facts of each candidate's policies, please post the info. so everyone can see what their policies are..
Where are these candidate's policies and the info. which people are cutting other candidates with, they have none.
Shame this democratic election is being debated on lack of true info. and facts..
The main difference between Obama's and Hillary's health care plans is that Hillary wants universal healthcare, meaning everybody will be forced to buy healthcare, while Obama is focusing on universal access - he will not make buying a plan mandatory because he believes the problem is that health care is unaffordable for many Americans, not that people do not want health insurance.
The experience Rumsfeld, Cheney, and others Bush surrounded himself with got us where we are today! Americans lost confidence in Bush and his cabinet because they lack intelligent reasoning and have been less than truthful to the electorate. Likewise Clinton's lack of candor leaves little to be desired. Americans want a president who is forthcoming and someone they can trust.
Although Obama has plenty of experience it is his judgment that makes him stand out from the rest of the contenders. Instead of using military power Barack Obama has the intelligence, patience and reasoned logic to draw on a host of tools available that can actually solve problems rather than create more.
Judgment cannot be overemphasized.
Hillary is smart, her intelligence and other admirable qualities make her a viable candidate. She demonstrates an air of confidence which is a strength. She claims to be the most experienced, but to what ends?
Experience is a false narrative without success. Perhaps Hillary knows her way around the annals of government, but so did Rumsfeld and Cheney. Obviously they never learned from their experiences. That alone ought to give one pause.
And what about Hillary Clinton's judgment? Even if she has the experience it has not translated into wise decision making or sound judgment in several incidences: her foreign policy is very similar to Bush's. Take Iraq and Iran as example. Her full support of waging war and continuing the occupation of Iraq is troubling.
At this crucial time when we need change innovative, creative thinking is needed more than ever. Hillary is probably the least who has demonstrated that quality. She has not made bold and tough choices nor is she a political risk-taker.
Equally important I do not doubt Hillary has a lot going for her, but we may want to also take into consideration that when Bill was president the far right made so much noise against him it made it difficult to maneuver. I believe Bill Clinton did a lot of positive things for this country he also made a lot of decisions that were not healthy. Take NAFTA, GATT and other policies for instance. At no fault of his, the far right made every issue into a huge battle.
Going into this election, there is no doubt in my mind they will not hesitate to replay that scenario. The damage it did to the country will further deepen. While she is not entirely to blame, Hillary is fodder for that kind of negativity. That is an important factor we ought to consider, too.
Obama is no greenhorn. He represents "change" rather than more of the same. Moreover he will not be as polarizing.
If you believe justice is a strength and the rule of law matters, accountability and transparency are vital components for a healthy democracy, and that sound judgment, reasoned logic, intelligence tempered with forethought and foresight reflect the qualities of a leader, support Obama.
Obama is uniquely qualified and prepared to lead the country as President of the United States.
I trust him to lead and move the country forward in a different direction
Last but not least do we really want another Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton?
(2)He is a Flip Flopper - he has apologized for EVERY major vote he cast in the senate (Iraq, bankruptcy legislation, No Child Left Behind, trade with China, etc.). If they got Kerry on one flip flop - how about 4, 5 or 6 flip flops with Edwards?
(3)He's been campaigning in Iowa for 4 YEARS and in most polls he is still in 3rd place. He should OWN Iowa by a decisive lead.
(4)Outside of Iowa, he usually polls a distant 3rd behind Clinton and Obama on average, at between 12% to 15% (sometimes 18%), which is a TERRIBLE showing for our 2004 VP candidate, considering his competition is (a) a virtual unknown, and (b)the most polarizing woman in America (50% won't vote for her).
(5)He's taking public financing - so he can't compete effectively for the DEM nomination (beyond the first few states) against Hillary and Obama with their fundraising (especially on Super Tuesday). That's why Hillary sent President Clinton onto Charlie Rose to pump up Edwards, as he simultaneously bashed Obama. They see Obama as more of a long term threat because he has as much money as they do, is very popular, and he can go the distance against Hillary to fight for the nomination, but Edwards (being broke) can't. Although the Clintons want to win Iowa, they're afraid she'll lose, so if they can't win Iowa they want to at least stop Obama from winning there in order to weaken him. Then, if Edwards wins Iowa, they'll just turn the guns on him in NH and later states to take him out like they've been trying to do with Obama. For them, a 3rd place Iowa finish to Edwards is better than a 2nd place finish to Obama. Given that the Clinton camp has been trying to kneecap Obama for the last month, it should be a RED FLAG to anyone when Bill Clinton goes on Charlie Rose and talks about an Edwards win in Iowa as though it doesn't bother them.
Basically, an Iowa win for Edwards just makes it more likely that Clinton will get the nomination. If Clinton gets the nomination with 50% of the country saying they won't vote for her under any circumstances, it's likely that democrats could lose in November. She might win, but she's got a much shorter playing field if half the country has already turned its back on her candidacy, and her nomination will galvanize the republicans like nothing else. It's what they're waiting for - they have 2 decades of dirt on the Clintons to air in the general election.