Watch the first, say 50 seconds of this video, I was just cracking up.
Hahaha, that was awesome :D. Scary when listening to the other candidates speak, but go, Ron Paul. Did I mention his views on dealing with terrorism make me happy?
There's definitely areas where Ron Paul and I would likely disagree (I'm more for some amount of gun control than he is), but man, if he could miraculously win the Republican nomination, that would be great.
As for that article about Rove giving advice to Obama, while I agree that it wouldn't hurt the guy to be more assertive, at the same time, I kinda like the fact that he isn't picking at Clinton every single second. He shouldn't have to. Instead, I say he should just stick to talking about his campaign and why he's the best person for the job. He can respond to criticisms from Clinton, and point out where she's wrong in what she says about him as well as why she's wrong, but that's all. He doesn't need to do any "belittling" of any kind, he doesn't need to call her out on her "victim" thing. Let her handle that problem. If the public gets tired of anything Hilary is doing, they'll let her know in their own way.
I'm still planning on voting Democrat or independent next year. I just think that Ron is the least frightening of the Republican candidates-he has beliefs that would endear him to the Democrats as well as beliefs that would endear him to the Republicans, so out of everybody available, that would make him the best choice for the nomination.
Maybe he's been sucked in by the media push for Obama.
So let me get this straight. Obama looks forward to the Republicans running against Hillary?
Bringing up Democrats who voted for the war is a perfectly legitimate thing. Hillary voted for it, Edwards voted for it, Kerry voted for it. Obama didn't, he opposed the war from the beginning. Of all the front-runners he's the only innocent one.
POLL: Clinton Fends Off Obama in N.H. With More Committed Support
Clinton Holding Off Obama in New Hampshire
ANALYSIS by GARY LANGER
Dec. 5, 2007 —
Hillary Clinton is holding off Barack Obama in New Hampshire with a single-digit but seemingly solid lead, scoring more committed and enthusiastic support, higher trust to handle pressing issues and broad margins on leadership, experience and electability.
Obama is challenging Clinton in Iowa, and this ABC News/Washington Post poll puts him potentially within striking distance in New Hampshire as well. But some of the underlying currents boosting Obama in Iowa are less powerful here, with Clinton's support more settled.
Among likely voters in the Democratic primary, Clinton has 35 percent support, Obama 29 percent, John Edwards 17 percent and Bill Richardson 10 percent, with others in the low single digits. That compares to a 30-26 percent Obama-Clinton race in Iowa in an ABC/Post poll there two weeks ago.
Clinton's lead in New Hampshire inches up in lower-turnout scenarios, suggesting her support is more reliable. Moreover, among those who've definitely decided on their candidate, she leads Obama by a wide 43-28 percent; and among the most enthusiastic likely voters she leads him by 45-24 percent. There's no such difference in Iowa.
Looking at the flipside, changeability, among the one in four likely voters who say there's a good chance they may change their minds, 23 percent currently support Clinton, 36 percent Obama. That suggests he's more vulnerable to reconsideration.
At the same time Obama is taking full advantage of Clinton's weaknesses. A perceived lack of forthrightness continues to dog her; 41 percent in New Hampshire say Clinton's not willing enough to say what she really thinks, twice as many as say that about her chief competitors. And among those people, hardly any -- just 7 percent -- support her, while 41 percent support Obama.
Additionally, a majority of likely voters in the state seek "a new direction and new ideas" -- a page from Obama's playbook -- rather than strength and experience. And "new direction" voters favor Obama over Clinton by 44 percent to 19 percent. Those who place more value on strength and experience, by contrast, are with Clinton by nearly 6-1.
Obama's lead among "new direction" voters is similar to what it is in the same group in Iowa (and that group is about the same size). But Clinton's advantage among "strength and experience" voters is much bigger in New Hampshire; that theme's stronger resonance in the Granite State is key to her lead.
For all this, a total of 51 percent of Democratic likely voters in New Hampshire say they still might change their minds -- fewer than the 61 percent who say so in the Republican race, but still indicating substantial room to move.
Additionally, 27 percent say they may take the results of the Iowa caucuses, five days before the New Hampshire primary, into account, although fewer than half of them say they'll give it much weight.
GROUPS -- Obama's running competitively with Clinton among men, younger likely voters and political independents; she owes her advantage to women (particularly single women), older voters (particularly senior citizens) and mainline Democrats.
Clinton's better standing among Democrats (41 percent support, and a 15-point lead over Obama) as opposed to independents (27 percent, to Obama's 31) is notable. Again, there's no such difference in Iowa, a much lower-turnout event. In New Hampshire, Obama's helped by the fact that an unusually large number of independents participate (46 percent in this poll are registered independents, about their share in the 2004 primary). But in other states, where primary voting is limited to party registrants, Clinton could gain.
To address weaknesses among population groups, Clinton may look at married men, among whom she has just 24 percent support; the most highly educated voters, 23 percent; and, as noted, younger adults. She's supported by 27 percent of likely voters under age 40, compared with 44 percent of those 65 and older. The patterns are similar in national ABC/Post polling.
Clinton's advantage among women also shows up in the 19 percent of likely voters who say the fact that she'd be the first woman president makes them more likely to support her. Women are twice as likely as men to say so, 24 percent vs. 12 percent, rising to 32 percent of single women (which includes divorced and widowed women as well as those never married). It's also higher among Democrats vs. independents, among older people and among liberals vs. moderates.
ATTRIBUTES -- In terms of attributes, Obama easily trumps Clinton as the candidate who's the "most inspiring," leads her on honesty and trustworthiness (a Clinton weakness nationally and in Iowa as well) and challenges her on empathy. The two run evenly on the question of who would do most to bring needed change to Washington.
But, as noted, Clinton comes back very strongly on her other attributes -- electability, experience (on which Obama is quite weak) and strong leadership. And she leads Obama by 17 points as the candidate who's campaigned hardest in New Hampshire, a plus in a state where candidates are expected early and often.
ISSUES -- Building on her ratings for experience and leadership, Clinton leads in New Hampshire on six of seven issues tested in this poll, with an especially large advantage on one of the top concerns to likely Democratic voters, health care.
Obama, notably, leads on none of these.
Unlike Republican voters, there is a clear emphasis among Democrats on top issues: About half cite both health care and the war in Iraq as the two most important issues in their vote, with the economy and education following -- quite similar to views in Iowa. Among Democrats nationally the same items come up, with some different emphasis.
These are in sharp contrast to likely Republican voters in New Hampshire, who, as in Iowa and nationally, disperse among a wider range of issues.
CONTACT and TURNOUT -- Likely Democratic voters are more engaged than their Republican counterparts -- 12 points more likely to be very enthusiastic about their choice of a candidate, twice as likely to have attended a campaign event (35 percent vs. 17 percent) and 20 points more apt to have received a phone call from a campaign (74 percent vs. 54 percent).
Given the differences among groups in this poll, turnout of course is essential. This survey anticipates turnout in the Democratic primary by 31 percent of the state's adult population, and by 27 percent in the Republican contest. Tighter turnout scenarios make no difference in the Republican contest (in which Mitt Romney has a broad lead), but indicate a slightly larger Clinton lead (albeit within sampling error) on the Democratic side.
Likely voter estimates can be one source of differences in polls, as can sample sizes; another potential factor is the level of so-called "undecided" voters, in reality a function of polling technique rather than true indecision.
ABC/Post polls have fewer undecideds than most others, given the context of the question -- asking whom likely voters would support if the election were today. This survey finds 3 percent undecided, compared with an average of 12 percent in nine other publicly released polls in New Hampshire in the past month.
METHODOLOGY -- This ABC News/Washington Post poll was conducted by telephone Nov. 29-Dec. 3, 2007, among a random sample of 592 New Hampshire adults likely to vote in the 2008 Democratic primary. The results have a four-point error margin. Sampling, data collection and tabulation by TNS of Horsham, Pa.
Mitt Romney seeped in sewage :drool:
Personal side: Candidates' worst jobs
By CALVIN WOODWARD, Associated Press WriterWed Dec 5, 6:37 PM ET
All these years later, Mike Huckabee still avoids touching the glass when he opens a door. He remembers a thankless task at Penney's as a teenager, scrubbing away fingerprints only to have customers smudge the glass all over again.
Mitt Romney worked in a sewage pipe on an Idaho ranch when the effluent was still flowing. In Alaska as a post-grad, Hillary Rodham Clinton spooned the guts out of fish.
Let it not be said of the presidential candidates that they've never done an honest day's work.
Today they are officeholders past or present, governors, members of Congress, a mayor, and for the most part they are rich to very rich.
Once they were a haberdasher, a landscaper, a bouncer at a drag strip, a gofer at a textile mill. Whether children of privilege, the burbs or tiny towns, they've worked hard at crummy jobs, in a distant past remembered as if it were yesterday.
The Associated Press asked them to talk about their worst jobs in a series of interviews exploring their personal side. They also named foods they hate, cracked favorite jokes on cue, spoke of keepsakes, reflected on what they do on a rare lazy day, and more.
They answered with relish — sometimes spoiled relish long past its best-before date — when asked about lousy jobs.
"Backbreaking work," Democrat Bill Richardson said of his summer of laying sod on Cape Cod. A banker's son and Tufts University sophomore, he worked for a meager wage to cover room and board while pitching in the Cape Cod Baseball League in 1967. "The pay was terrible," said Richardson, now New Mexico governor. "And I think the minimum wage at the time was under two dollars." (It was $1.40 or less, depending on the work.)
Republican Fred Thompson, son of a used-car salesman, remembers his years before law offices, Hollywood and the Senate. "Well, let's see," he said. "I've worked in a factory, I was a bouncer at my uncle's drag strip, I worked at the post office, I sold children's shoes, I sold ladies', I sold men's clothing, I was a night clerk at a motel.
"I can't think of a job that I had that I wasn't thankful for at the time."
Romney never went begging for dollars — his dad was head of American Motors and governor of Michigan. But the Republican presidential candidate got up close and personal with sewage while spending time at his uncle's spread, doing chores at age 15. He said he spent a week on his assigned task of cutting the sewage pipe.
Middle class in her youth, Hillary Rodham was already on a promising track when she spent the summer of 1969 working her way across Alaska. The year before, her commencement speech at Wellesley College in defense of war protesters was such a hit she was featured in Life magazine.
In Alaska, she washed dishes in Mount McKinley National Park, the better of two brief menial jobs that financed her travels. "My worst job was sliming fish in a fish cannery in Valdez," she said without hesitation.
The Democratic New York senator elaborated on this in her memoirs: standing in bloody water in knee-high boots on a pier removing salmon guts with a spoon; supervisors yelling when she didn't slime fast enough; switching to the packing line where she reported spoiled fish to the boss, who soon fired her.
In her husband Bill's hometown of Hope, Ark., another presidential aspirant worked two jobs at age 14. Huckabee remembers his gig at a radio station with fondness; his department store stint, not so much.
"When I worked for JCPenney it was a great job and it was a great company but they worked me hard," Huckabee told AP's Online Video Network while campaigning at a college tailgate party in Columbia, S.C. "Just as I'd get all the fingerprints wiped off the door, somebody would come and they'd put their hands all over the glass.
"To this day, I'm still very sensitive about never touching the glass, but touching the handles, because I had to wipe those windows so many times."
Democrat John Edwards, who made his own wealth as a trial attorney, had awful cleaning duties earlier at the textile mill where he worked summers and part time during school.
"I cleaned out overhead in the weave room, which is where all the crap goes," he said, his eyes raised skyward and arms clawing the air. "And I'd be up there climbing around, knocking the stuff down. And it would go down on the looms. The weavers would be, uh, not happy with me for that.
"And the other part of that job was mopping out from under the looms — the grease."
Republican John McCain, son of an admiral, had post-grad employment unlike most — war. The Navy pilot landed in a vicious Hanoi prison and has no complaints about other circumstances of his youth: "I've never really had a bad job."
Democrat Barack Obama cleared a construction site for a summer on Manhattan's Upper West Side while attending Columbia University. But he says his worst job was scooping ice cream at a Baskin-Robbins because he ate too much of it. Republican Rudy Giuliani weighed the priesthood and medicine before pursuing law.
Democrat Chris Dodd did construction work for the Peace Corps in the Dominican Republic. He counts his job selling clothes in a haberdashery as his worst job.
"It was boring," he said. And the boss? "We used to call him the good thief."
In Speech on Religion, Obama Explains His Faith in Oprah
Calls Belief in Talk Show Hostess a “Personal Matter’
Under pressure to explain his religious faith to the American people, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama delivered a forty-five minute speech today discussing his belief in Oprah Winfrey.
In an election year that has been dominated by discussions of candidates’ religious faith, perhaps no candidate’s religion has been more controversial than Sen. Obama’s Oprahism.
Speaking to supporters at the University of Iowa, the Illinois senator devoted his entire speech to his religious faith but mentioned Ms. Winfrey only once by name.
“My religion is a personal matter to me,” Sen. Obama told his followers. “Having said that, let me make this clear: I have accepted Oprah as my host.”
Later in the day, Ms. Winfrey toured the state with Mr. Obama and, in a stunning demonstration of her influence, briefly caused a solar eclipse.
“Sun and moon, do my bidding!” she roared, raising her hands above her head and delighting the crowd with the celestial display.
“Oprah is without question the most powerful force in the election right now,” said Carol Foyler, 45, an Obama supporter from Cedar Rapids. “I’d like to see Bill Clinton do that.”
Davis Logsdon, who studies the interrelation between politicians, religion and talk-show hosts at the University of Minnesota, said that Sen. Obama’s worship of Oprah Winfrey puts him in the mainstream of American theological belief.
“Over thirty percent of Americans currently define themselves as Oprahists,” Mr. Logsdon said. “And that number is higher during sweeps.”
December 10, 2007, 1:53 pm
New NYTimes/CBS Poll: Explain, Don’t Attack
By Dalia Sussman
The latest New York Times/CBS News poll finds voters give the presidential candidates positive marks on at least one score at this stage in their campaigns: They credit them with spending more time explaining what they would do as president rather than attacking their opponents.
Still, while no candidate tested in the poll was perceived as attacking more than explaining, some candidates were given more credit than others.
Hillary Clinton was viewed as running the most positive campaign of the leading Democratic candidates. About seven in 10 Democratic primary voters said she has spent more time explaining, four times the number who said she has spent more time attacking.
Six in 10 Democrats said Barack Obama has been explaining, compared with 25 percent who said he has been attacking. Fewer, 45 percent, said John Edwards has spent more time explaining his positions, while 29 percent said he has spent more time being negative.
On the Republican side, Mike Huckabee had the best positive-negative ratio in the poll, with 53 percent of Republican primary voters saying he has been mainly explaining himself, and just 9 percent saying he has been mainly attacking his rivals. The rest had no opinion.
More than half of Republicans also said Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney have spent more time in their campaigns explaining what they would do if elected, while 4 in 10 said the same about John McCain and Fred Thompson (many expressed no opinion).
But as the primary season begins and the campaign rhetoric heats up, perceptions can certainly change.
The telephone poll was conducted nationwide from Dec. 5-9 with 1,133 adults, including 417 Democratic primary voters and 266 Republican primary voters. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 5 percentage points for Democratic voters and 6 percentage points for Republican voters. Complete poll results and story will be available this evening at nytimes.com.
November 29, 2007, 4:12 pm
Clinton Polls Best Among Gays, Lesbians NY Times
By Kirk Johnson
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York is the clear favorite among gay and lesbian voters, who see her as a champion of gay rights, according to new nationwide poll released today by Hunter College in New York. Almost 63 percent of respondents said they supported Senator Clinton, with Senator Barack Obama of Illinois a distant second with just over 22 percent.
The survey of 768 respondents, all of whom identified themselves as gay or lesbian to an interviewer, suggests a voting bloc that is overwhelmingly Democratic in its leanings – more than six-to-one over Republicans among the 579 who said they were likely primary voters. Of the Republican minority, 50 percent favored former Mayor Rudolph Giuliani of New York, with Senator John McCain of Arizona second at 23 percent.
The poll, which had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4 percentage points, also went where most voter surveys never tread – into matters of sex and identity and how those issues are connected or disconnected with political views.
About one-third of the respondents, who were interviewed through an internet system link by Knowledge Networks Inc. between Nov. 15 and Nov. 26, said they became more liberal and more interested in politics after coming out about their sexuality. Overall, about 33 percent of the respondents described themselves as very interested in politics and public affairs, compared to about 22 percent of the general population asked the same questioned by Knowledge Networks.
And I thought, wow, lesbians have their own NY TIMES, that's crazy.
I never figured it out why they use gay and lesbian. Don't all homosexuals fall under the category of gay? Or am I wrong?
AMES, Iowa (AP) - Campaigning for his wife, former President Clinton says that when they were starting out he was so struck by her intellect and ability he once suggested she should just dump him and jump into her own political career.
That didn't happen, of course, and on Monday he gave an Iowa crowd his version of why it didn't.
"I thought it would be wrong for me to rob her of the chance to be what I thought she should be," said Clinton. "She laughed and said, 'First I love you and, second, I'm not going to run for anything, I'm too hardheaded.'"
Hillary Rodham Clinton is running now, and husband Bill was stumping for her in the 2008 campaign's leadoff caucus state—two days after rival Democrat Barack Obama got a full weekend's worth of attention by bringing in talk show queen Oprah Winfrey to campaign for him.
The former president opened a two-day swing through Iowa on behalf of his wife, packing nearly 500 people into a theater on the campus of Iowa State University.
"She has spent a lifetime as a change agent when she had the option to do other things," he said.
"I thought she was the most gifted person of our generation," said Clinton, who said he told her, "You know, you really should dump me and go back home to Chicago or go to New York and take one of those offers you've got and run for office."
Now that she's a New York senator and in a tight Democratic contest—with Illinois Sen. Obama and former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards—the former president said he wanted to persuade voters that she has "the best combination of mind and heart."
He offered a self-deprecating view of the couple's early life in Arkansas.
"When she came down there and we got married, I was a defeated candidate for Congress with a $26,000 salary and a $42,00 campaign debt," said Clinton. "If she were half as calculating as someone said, that's a really great way to run for president."
In his latest Iowa swing, Clinton is bringing heavy attention to his wife, who is competing in the precinct caucuses that will launch the presidential nominating season on Jan. 3.
"It's one thing to have good intentions; it is another thing entirely to change people's lives," Clinton said. "She's the best non-incumbent I have ever had a chance to vote for. In my whole life I've never met anyone like her."
I never understood why they use "gay and lesbian" either. They're all homosexuals. When they use the term "gay marriage" they're talking about both, so why can't they use that all the time?
|All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:16 PM.|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com