Obama '08?

Yeah, that was before I heard about Nader.

I need to wait until he updates where he stands on issues, but if it's similar to his positions in 2000 and 2004, he'll be my choice.

Please keep us updated; I'm curious and interested. You may want to start a new thread on Nader.

A propos of nothing, these are the Google text ads that appear for me with this thread now:

Liberal or Conservative
What is God's political position? Which party would He vote for?
www.RealTruth.org/Vote

Antichrist revealed and
the truth about the CatholicChurch after Vatican II, prophecy, videos
www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com

Jane's Montessori Academy
Columbus Ohio Montessori preschool Open Houses on Feb 24 & Mar 16
JanesAcademy.com


(I've been getting the Antichrist for ages now, whereever I go. The Ohio one must be a secret message to Soz..)

Done!
http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=3112943#3112943

Cool.

Hillary Clinton Mocks Barack Obama During Campaign Rally
Huffington Post | February 24, 2008 03:31 PM

Hillary Clinton's campaign is on its last legs after suffering a string of defeats to her rival Barack Obama. Clinton made the decision to go negative in an effort to halt Obama's rising momentum. Today, Clinton was at a campaign rally in Providence, Rhode Island, and she mocked Obama and his message of hope and change in a very theatrical, over-the-top manner.

Watch the video from CNN below, and tell HuffPost whether you think Clinton's line of attack against Obama will help or hurt her campaign: link

Eek.

Interesting comments there.

By the way as I read more I see some icky ones so in case icky ones have taken over by the time someone else reads the comments, this is the sort of comment I had in mind when I said "interesting":

With where Clinton's campaign is right now, if it hurts her campaign would it really matter?

I've been using that word, "desperation," to describe Hillary for awhile now.

Really? I've been using, "scary google-eyed bobble-headed troll."

Bad Kicky!

Nah, you're right too, kicky. They both fit her "shoes."

"Up until now" is what I found interesting. The person could have been lying, of course, but I've read so much about how most Democrats like both candidates, that they really don't know who they'll vote for until they get in the booth, etc. Things had already started to shift -- more people thought that Hillary was being unfair to Obama than vice versa in exit polls from WI I think it was, for example. But I really don't think this helps her with anyone but the extreme partisans.

And again, I'm really not writing her off yet, so that's why I think it's noteworthy.

Unless Obama phucks up somewhere, Clinton is over. There is too much momentum right now in Obama's favor and the sheep will follow the leader without ever knowing that they're being led off of a cliff.

She's toast.

FWIW,
I have made my choice when the primary vote happens here.

Since the candidate I wanted didnt run (Evan Bayh-D. IN) I will support Obama in the KY primary.
That does NOT mean I will support him in the general election, but given the choice between Obama and Hillary, I prefer Obama.

That is the position I think alot of uncommited voters are in.
Its not that I prefer Obama over McCain, it is that I prefer Obama over Hillary.

Op-Ed Columnist
The Audacity of Hopelessness
comments (710)
Sign In to E-Mail or Save This
Print
Share
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Newsvine
Permalink


By FRANK RICH
Published: February 24, 2008
WHEN people one day look back at the remarkable implosion of the Hillary Clinton campaign, they may notice that it both began and ended in the long dark shadow of Iraq.

Skip to next paragraph

Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times
Frank Rich

Go to Columnist Page »
Enlarge This Image

Barry Blitt
Readers' Comments
Share your thoughts on this Op-Ed column.
Read All Comments (710) »
It's not just that her candidacy's central premise ?- the priceless value of "experience" ?- was fatally poisoned from the start by her still ill-explained vote to authorize the fiasco. Senator Clinton then compounded that 2002 misjudgment by pursuing a 2008 campaign strategy that uncannily mimicked the disastrous Bush Iraq war plan. After promising a cakewalk to the nomination ?- "It will be me," Mrs. Clinton told Katie Couric in November ?- she was routed by an insurgency.

The Clinton camp was certain that its moneyed arsenal of political shock-and-awe would take out Barack Hussein Obama in a flash. The race would "be over by Feb. 5," Mrs. Clinton assured George Stephanopoulos just before New Year's. But once the Obama forces outwitted her, leaving her mission unaccomplished on Super Tuesday, there was no contingency plan. She had neither the boots on the ground nor the money to recoup.

That's why she has been losing battle after battle by double digits in every corner of the country ever since. And no matter how much bad stuff happened, she kept to the Bush playbook, stubbornly clinging to her own Rumsfeld, her chief strategist, Mark Penn. Like his prototype, Mr. Penn is bigger on loyalty and arrogance than strategic brilliance. But he's actually not even all that loyal. Mr. Penn, whose operation has billed several million dollars in fees to the Clinton campaign so far, has never given up his day job as chief executive of the public relations behemoth Burson-Marsteller. His top client there, Microsoft, is simultaneously engaged in a demanding campaign of its own to acquire Yahoo.

Clinton fans don't see their standard-bearer's troubles this way. In their view, their highly substantive candidate was unfairly undone by a lightweight showboat who got a free ride from an often misogynist press and from naïve young people who lap up messianic language as if it were Jim Jones's Kool-Aid. Or as Mrs. Clinton frames it, Senator Obama is all about empty words while she is all about action and hard work.

But it's the Clinton strategists, not the Obama voters, who drank the Kool-Aid. The Obama campaign is not a vaporous cult; it's a lean and mean political machine that gets the job done. The Clinton camp has been the slacker in this race, more words than action, and its candidate's message, for all its purported high-mindedness, was and is self-immolating.

The key to Hillary's loss.

Thanks for letting us know, mysteryman. I'm always interested in what people end up deciding and and why.

Much of what Obama says be believes are almost the same things that Bayh believes.

Of course, my support for Bayh came from more then just his beliefs, it also came from having actually met the man and actually talking to him.
Bayh is the kind of man that will look you in the eye when he talks to you, he remembers your name, and he listens.

He also has that unique "something" that really cant be defined , but when I explain it most people understand it.
He is an honest man, and when he shakes your hand there is a man behind it, not a politician.

Even thought I dont agree with most of what Evan Bayh supported or what he would like to accomplish, it was all the little things, the things that really cant be defined, that caused me to support him.
If he had run, I would have spent every penny i had to support him.

Now while I have never met Obama, he seems to have many of those same qualities.

Cool.

Meanwhile, so much going on in Columbus! Phone banks galore, debate-watching parties, "Soap for Hope" on February 29th (write "YES WE CAN!" with soap on inside of back car window), "Wear your Obama T-Shirt Day" on March 1st, and on and on. Just read someplace about how Clinton was happy to get 1,000 responses to a call for volunteers throughout Obama, while a single meeting in Columbus (I mentioned it here, was too late in the day for me to go) attracted 500 volunteers on 24 hours' notice. We'll see how it all translates...

My crystal ball tells me that all this activity translates into a Obama win on March 4th.