OMG, The Pres race is now a Democratic free-for-all

[TayTay]

The person who survives SuperTuesday wins. Or the staff that survives what is going to be the most insane political event of our time will win.

Wow, what a year! Who designed SuperTuesday and why are they trying to kill our candidates? (LOL)

Any thoughts on the Pres race?

[ProSense]

1. I have a thought!

:rofl:

[Luftmensch067]

2. LOL!

Sometimes that seems the only possible reaction!!!

[MBS]

3. I inserted some of my thoughts here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=273x144175#144446

and, also, maybe I said this elsewhere, but I'll add here:

Maureen Dowd had some pertinent comments on HRC (her usual snark, but not off the mark either) in today's NYT (won't post link),and also in an earlier column (can't remember date, but about a week or so ago), when she referred to the three major Dem candidates as "three lawyers married to lawyers who talk too much" (bingo!;-)) and, more seriously, ended her column noting that BOTH HRC and
Barack are hobbled by a sense of entitlement/cockiness. She's right: neither Hillary nor Barack has earned the right to a coronation.

Speaking personally (and the last time I'll mention it here, and I'll spare this forum the details of the reasons), I'll be voting for Obama Feb 5. But Barack NEEDS to have a challenge in this race. So, nervous as I am about the outcome, I think this is good for him, and for the voters. For various reasons, most of which had nothing to do with him, and much more to do with good luck, Obama had no serious challenge in his Senate primary, and , basically , no challenger at all in the general election. Really, in his short political career he's NEVER faced what JK has had to face, so many times: a duel of wits and strategy and strength, a race to the finish, a FIGHT. (Not to mention the fact that he's never put his life on the line the way JK has, in VIetnam, a nd that I could never imagine him doing the PanMass Challenge. . :). ..but I digress). The bottom line is that Obama has to earn his victory . To some extent, he needs his cockiness knocked around a bit . And, to win, he's going to have to deepen his message beyond "hope" and "change". (Also, he's GOT to stop dissing baby boomers, but then that's personal for me. I also happen to think it's stupid strategy: surely there's a way to send the message of change without dismissing the long, worthy , and -- hey, it has to be said-- SUCCESSFUL efforts of an entire generation. And I'd personally appreciate it if he would give Gore and Kerry the respect they deserve. And FWIW, Bill's mention of Obama's voting record on Iraq is appropriate, and Barack sets himself up for that every time he sets himself up as Mr. Prescience and Mr. Purity on Iraq just because of one good speech he gave, two years before he had to vote on the issue)

Again (see the link above), JK is the very model for me of what needs to be done. JK remains for me the very definition of guts, determination, integrity, and inner strength. A class act, from stem to stern

[ProSense]

6. Insert Kerry

Yeah, Hillary won the same way Kerry . NOT! She went in had an emotional moment, dispatched an angry Bill, distributed misleading e-mail and viola!

[Inuca]

8. You said so many things I wanted to say

that I do not have much to add :-). At this point, I STRONGLY prefer Obama to the other two. And at the risk of offending Edwards supporters (please, don't!), I think that if Edwards really meant many of the things he claims to be passionate about, he would drop out after SC, depending of course on how things would go for him there and in NV. But the way it looks now, it is a two person race, and he is not likely to be more than a spoiler.

Going back to yesterday's results: I am disappointed, but I 100% agree that Obama NEEDS to show he knows and is able to fight. His de-facto coronation in the media was ridiculous and extremely premature. "Cockiness" kept popping up in mind too these last few days after IA whenever I saw and heard him. I do hope he will look deep inside and find an inner core of true strength and conviction that will help him better and more substantively articulate his message. I hope from the bottom of my heart that 1. he will be able to do it, and 2. that there is a real "there" there (I am still not sure, but I think there is).

Also: I profoundly dislike lynch mobs, and that's what HRC was submitted to in the media after IA. Much as I dislike her, I do not think he deserves to be crushed and utterly humiliated. So from a human fairness standpoint (as if that matters in politics...), I am glad she won yesterday (and no, I would not have voted for her if I were in NH, as the media story seems to suggest so many women did). That said, I hope she does not get too many other chances to fix her bruised ego.

One last thought: I interpreted the IA results, the seemingly utter defeat of "experience" by "change" as a need so many have to be CLEANSED. The last several years (primarily the last 7, but actually MUCH longer than that), have left me, and I am sure many, many others, with a feeling of being dirtied in so many ways. Obama's hopeful message, powerfully and eloquently delivered, but still fuzzy on the specifics, is like running outside and letting yourself be drenched in a strong spring shower. It does not solve your problems, but it surely as hell feels good, and it may energize you and give you the inner strength to actually tackle your real problems as well. We shall see whether in the end we shall get the invigorating spring rain or the equivalent of a stuffy smoky room where (some) solutions are sometimes found...

[ProSense]

10. I agree with this

Also: I profoundly dislike lynch mobs, and that's what HRC was submitted to in the media after IA.

Still, I believe with all my heart that the moment was designed to inspire the outcome (maybe I'm too cynical). Maureen Dowd, who I cannot stand, is going to ensure that this episode benefits Clinton even more.

[Inuca]

11. I was not refering only

to the :cry: episode, that I tend to believe was genuine (she is human after all, was bruised, and dead-tired), but I am not sure. We shall see how the "I found my voice" (great line, by the way) will work out in the days to come.

[ProSense]

13. Here's what McAwful had to say

about the moment.

[Inuca]

15. I saw that post of yours

right AFTER I posted my comment here :-).

[whometense]

17. About the "two person race" thing -

Tim Grieve had an interesting take this morning: http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2008/01/09/edwards/index.html

...Until Tuesday, the Clinton campaign has argued that Barack Obama and John Edwards were engaged in some kind of unfair, two-against-one fight against her. The campaign has decried the "politics of pile on," Bill Clinton has complained that "the boys" were ganging up on his wife, and Hillary Clinton herself argued in New Hampshire that Edwards and Obama had aligned themselves in "a buddy system" against her.

Take Edwards out of the equation, and it's hard to run on that kind of victim narrative. More important, if you take Edwards out of the equation, our money says the stunning but narrow victory Clinton won in New Hampshire becomes something that looks a lot more like the defeat that almost everyone was expecting. Clinton beat Obama by about 8,000 votes in New Hampshire. Edwards, finishing third, drew about 48,000. Assuming that Clinton is right in arguing that Obama and Edwards are aligned against her -- and also assuming that race isn't the controlling factor here -- doesn't it stand to reason that an overwhelming majority of Edwards' supporters would have voted for Obama rather than for Clinton if Edwards hadn't been in the race?

Edwards says he isn't going anywhere, and his campaign is looking ahead to South Carolina, the state where he was born and where he won in 2004. "Up until now, one-half of 1 percent of the country has voted," Edwards said last night in Manchester. "Ninety-nine percent plus have not voted, and we need to hear from them."

That's certainly a fair argument. But as long as he's in, the man who has finished behind Obama twice may be keeping Clinton more competitive than she otherwise would be. Maybe that's OK by him, but it suggests that the Clinton campaign should be cautious about pretending that he's already gone.
― Tim Grieve

[karynnj]

12. I agree with everything you say - as ususal

I also prefer Obama of the three, but it is really the result of process of elimination. His speeches have been awesome and his life story matches and record in Illinois and the Senate matches his words. But, it is good that he will be tested in a longer campaign. He really hasn't had the tests that JK did, but neither has HRC.

In 2000, at least one Democrat deferred to HRC and I think she was unopposed. Like Obama, her first GOP competitor, collapsed of his own doing - pitting her against a week candidate. This last time, her opponent was a former mayor of Yonkers, whose name I never heard before he ran. Her campaign has gone into rabid attack dog mod at every moment that seemed a setback, even when she was ahead. Though the "emotional moment" is now cast as having helped her, my sense is that is a one shot deal. I doubt it will happen again. I really disliked the dishonesty shown Saturday. Invoking that he voted for the Patriot Act after he spoke against it was ridiculous. He voted for a revised bill - as did she. I thought she was effective in invoking S-CHIP as an example of her change. (Glad to see the media doing the same fact checks as last year - not.)

The NYT editorial was pretty good and some of their points are the same. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/09/opinion/09wed1.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

My only concern with the madness that some people created of the primaries is that even people not on DU boards will find all three candidates annoying, negative and will start believing everything said by the other two of each. I also am sick and tired of the sexism card. I never thought that as a woman, who worked in a technical field starting in 1972, I would be told that I was just against HRC because she is a woman. I would vote in an instant for a woman who had the personality and integrity as John Kerry. I hope that the Clinton people here realize that accusing me and others of that - simply leads to a detailed post on the problems I have with HRC being the candidate.

[whometense]

18. Amen.

I would vote in an instant for a woman who had the personality and integrity as John Kerry.

Me too. It's not the gender, it's the candidate.

[rox63]

4. I think it's great that there's a tight race

Whoever our nominee is this time, they will have to fight their way to the top. Considering how nasty the repugs will be in the GE, I think it's good experience. I'm supporting Obama, but I will vote for whatever Dem candidate gets the nomination.

They must all be exhausted and hoarse today. I hope they all able got a good night's sleep last night. It may be a long time before they get another chance.

[Mass]

5. My first reaction, because this result came first

http://chimesatmidnight.blogspot.com/2008/01/gopocalypse-now_08.html

GOPocalypse Now...
Hold it....just a moment, let me savor....yesss!!!
ROMNEY IS DEFEATED!!!!

For the Democratic results, I cannot say that I am happy with it, but I am not surprised, as I posted in the other thread, and it has a few silver linings.

First, the fact that the pundits are all totally wrong. If anything, yesterday, I was feeling sorry for Hillary because of the media. This has not changed my views, but I think it may have changed some women's votes, just to shut these idiots up.

And, more importantly, as others have said, it means that our nominee will have a chance to prepare for a fight before this thing is over, so he will know what his weaknesses and strengths are. Unfortunately, it will not be nice as an election is never nice. But we cannot expect the Republican candidate to be nice to our nominee, so it is good to have a repetition.

[whometense]

7. I liked Al Giordano's wrap-up

http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=164

The good news is that Nevada now gets its mojo back, and South Carolina will decide the momentum going into Tsunami Tuesday. Rural voters and blacks and Hispanics win. All candidates must compete in both states now.

And Chris Matthews, for all his faults, is right: This now becomes an apocalyptic battle between the insurgents and the insiders.

It’s on.

As for me, in keeping with my New Year's Resolution to speak ill of no dems, I have nothing to say. Except that my first thought last night was the same one others here have commented on. Gee - could it be that JK was actually an excellent candidate who a lot of people felt comfortable supporting?

[ProSense]

9. OT: Here is some interesting

trivia.

[sandnsea]

14. People flummox me

They looked at that 2 second "choking up", by a woman who hasn't done that in her 35 years experience on the public stage, and bought it??? Well allrighty then.

Some polls had McCain and Romney pretty close. I think men went and voted for McCain because the Repub vote was 57% male. I guess women felt sorry for Hillary, baffling as it is to me. And the kids didn't show, they were only 18% this time where they were 23% in Iowa.

So that's what I continue to know, people baffle me.

And people loved John Kerry.

[whometense]

16. "And people loved John Kerry."

I'm not holding my breath waiting for the chin-waggers to acknowledge it, but for me, that is the clearest result of the voting so far. People loved and trusted John Kerry, and didn't need to look any further.

Not so this year.

[ProSense]

19. Here's an interesting piece on

bipartisanship.

[beachmom]

20. I was disappointed, but on reflection, I think it was a good thing.

Let's find the candidate who DIGS DEEP to win it. Hillary did seem to dig deep to win NH, although I am not sure how authentic her emotional moment was (who knows?). I am interested in seeing Obama dig deep -- come on, Senator, what are you made of? I think of Kerry being on that stage with Weld in 1996, and on a death penalty question saying, "I know something about killing" -- now THAT is a candidate digging deep. Saying something honestly, something that may hurt, to show that you are the person you say you are and will fight for your constituents with core principles. It doesn't have to involve crying (lol), but it needs to show a part of him that we haven't seen before. Also, more Michelle Obama, please!

I think the Obama campaign needs to point out that Hillary hasn't been in a real competitive race either. She coasted both times (after Guiliani dropped out in '00). Although her opponents were better than Keyes, they didn't have a chance in that blue state. THIS is her first competitive race, just like it is Obama's.

And, Edwards needs to drop out. Otherwise, he is coronating Hillary for president -- does he want that on his conscience?

[Inuca]

27. Yes, yes, and yes

on all three points you are making.

Also: I did not know about the Kerry answer you quoted, thanks.

[cadmium]

36. agree -- I dont think

at this point that Edwards has any more of a conscience than Nader unfortunately.

[TayTay]

21. Some fun blog posts

Best headline of the day for a post: http://www.grist.org/news/2008/01/08/clinton/index.html

Best overall use of humor in a post: http://www.oliverwillis.com/archives/2008/01/09/and-now-the-official-theme-son/

Any more?


BTW, Sen. Clinton won Manchester and Nashua NH. These were both cities that Sen. Kerry won in 2004. Sen. Kerry spent a lot of time in NH and won the backing of then Mayor Baines. This was very significant.



Ahm, Mayor Baines lost his reelection bid in 2005 to Republican Frank Guinta who was reelected last year. This means that the Dem machine in Manchester, NH controlled Dem turnout. That favored Sen. Clinton.

[Island Blue]

22. I have thoughts

but I'd best not express them on family friendly DU. :rofl:

Seriously though, I'm leaning one way but as I've said before my primary vote will have not real impact on the matter since I won't be able to cast it until May. (This year that may be a blessing.) I'm curious to see what will unfold in the next days on the Democratic side. Should be interesting. I'm petrified to see what will unfold on the Republican side.

[Mass]

23. NH PRIMAY: How The Mainstream Press and the Blogosphere Got it So Wrong

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chaz-proulx/nh-primay-how-the-mainst_b_80621.html

NH PRIMAY: How The Mainstream Press and the Blogosphere Got it So Wrong

Posted January 9, 2008 | 04:14 AM (EST)
Read More: Ariana Huffington, Chaz Proulx, NH Primary, Offthebus, Breaking Off The Bus News

stumbleupon :NH PRIMAY: How The Mainstream Press and the Blogosphere Got it So Wrong digg: NH PRIMAY: How The Mainstream Press and the Blogosphere Got it So Wrong reddit: NH PRIMAY: How The Mainstream Press and the Blogosphere Got it So Wrong del.icio.us: NH PRIMAY: How The Mainstream Press and the Blogosphere Got it So Wrong

...

I'm sure I sound like Mr. Know-it-All, but it was predictable really.

...

The fact of the matter is this: UNH Polls have been so far off the mark in the past that campaigns I've been deeply involved in simply ignore them as bad data. The alternative in NH is a trade secret that I'm not revealing other than to give credit to a group very bright prep school students who somehow end up with accurate numbers.

You may think I'm making too much of this, but If you've ever been burned by a bad poll and the resultant bad press that goes with it you don't forget it. Losing precious campaign time to damage control is no joke.
...

All of which leads to this simple point. A national audience would have no way to know that the polls were essentially meaningless and that most of the news generated by the polls was meaningless too.

...
The Clinton campaign in New Hampshire was headed up by former Democratic Party Executive Director Nick Clemons. Nick ran John Kerry's win over my guy Howard Dean four years ago.

As well known NH political activist Bob Bruce pointed out to me on Sunday, "Nick Clemons doesn't lose elections."

Bob was right. The mainstream media and the blogosphere were wrong.

Some interesting insights, particularly concerning the polls. It is true that polls have often been very wrong in NH, particularly when people change their mind at the last minute. It is also true that how the Democratic machine could have lost that much power in NH was difficult to believe: Remember Gore and Bradley.

I would not say that I did not believe Obama would win. I did, but I was highly skeptical of the large margins announced by the news.

[kerrygoddess]

24. I'm glad it's a real race

I watched that brief interview with JK the other day and he said he wanted to see it play it. I think it should. I have post about what happened last night here - http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/01/09/inside-clintons-nh-win-the-women-and-whouley/

[politicasista]

25. Seeing it play out is a smart move

Though I am leaning towards a candidate, I am glad the race is competitive.

[Luftmensch067]

26. I can't help wondering if the writer's strike is playing into this!

I know that sounds frivolous, but I really feel like the media are filling the space left in primetime TV with the Ultimate Reality Show and that voters are responding in kind. I actually think voters in both Iowa and NH are more serious-minded than that, but I think it's hard not to see the race this way to some extent in the absence of our usual nonstop TV diet.

Even the spacing of the primaries throughout this month lends that air of suspense that people have gotten used to with elimination shows like Survivor!

[TayTay]

28. I was wondering the same thing.

This really is the Greatest Show on Earth. I guess people are tuning in.

"Dirty, Sexy Money" + "Survivor" + "Heroes" + "American Gladiator"

Wow, I'd buy that for a dollar!

[Luftmensch067]

31. LOL! Great lineup there...

Must See TV! (except I'm stickin' to C-SPAN :-))

[kerrygoddess]

29. Huh?

The media is giving the same amount of coverage this year as they gave in '04. The only difference I see this time out is we have a lot more bloggers on the ground with the traveling press.

[Luftmensch067]

30. I don't think it's the amount of coverage I'm perceiving

It's more the way they're framing it and selling it. And, again, it could just be that I'm noticing it more without so much background noise (the usual primetime stuff!)

[TayTay]

32. I think it's a bigger story this time out.

If that is even possible.

It's because it's a wide open race for both Party's. That is bound to generate huge, huge press and tv. The voters are responding. There has been, so far,record turnout.

[politicasista]

33. I wanted to post some good thoughts out "there"

But nobody likes me I guess. :hide:

[Inuca]

34. We all do!!

It's insanity to the 10th degree out "there".

[politicasista]

35. True

I guess being a civil DUer out "there" is almost as popular as rabies. :shrug: