January 9th, 2008
05:39 PM ET

An Obama-Clinton battle?


Sen. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama (PHOTO CREDIT: AP)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

The race for the Democratic nomination for president just got a whole lot more interesting.

Hillary Clinton's victory over Barack Obama in New Hampshire means there's no front-runner. What many initially believed would be a Clinton coronation, and then turned into Obama-mania, is now neither.

What is clear is that these two candidates are in it for the long haul. Both Clinton and Obama have lots of money, and the ability to raise even more. In fact, Obama's campaign says it's raised more than $8 million in just the first eight days of this month, and another $500,000 dollars online since midnight.

Clinton told supporters last night that in talking to the people of New Hampshire she "found her own voice." As the race moves on to Nevada and South Carolina, her challenge will be to prove New Hampshire wasn't a fluke. She will have to prove to voters there are reasons other than her "experience" that make her ready to be president. When it comes to Obama, he'll have to try to recapture the magic that was Iowa.

And, an interesting side note on this race: one Clinton adviser tells "The Politico" that it's President George Bush who should get the credit for turning this into such a long campaign, saying: "He has done more than anyone to get the people of this country involved again in politics. They now realize it is important who the president is."

Here’s my question to you: What will ultimately decide the outcome of the battle between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Dave from Newnan, Georgia writes:
The deciding factor between Clinton and Obama is quite simple: Edwards. He's taking votes from Obama. He cannot win and the longer he stays in the race, the more likely Clinton will win.

Chell writes:
The younger generation will be the factor between these two candidates. Barack can not win without those under 35 showing at the polling booths, and Hillary can not win if we vote. This is the election that will remind those under 40 that our vote does count, but only if we cast it.

Adam from Oregon writes:
My wife will decide. In other words, women will. And right now, my wife is leaning toward Clinton but still on the fence… I will vote how she votes because while she voted for Gore, I made the mistake of voting for Bush in 2000 and have yet to live it down. The only way to get that monkey off my back is to vote for the candidate of her choice.

Andrew from Toronto writes:
Obama must emulate Hillary's substance and command of the issues. Hillary must emulate Obama's charisma and skills as a communicator. The extent to which one will more thoroughly master the other's strength will determine the victor.

Mike writes:
This question is too difficult to answer. One thing is clear, however: As the Democratic contest wears on and support for both Obama and Clinton becomes more entrenched as well as invigorated, it will be suicide for one not to select the other as a running mate. You won't unite the country, and win the election, if you don't unite the party first.

Mike writes:
I hope when Hillary says she has found her voice that she means she has told Bill to “shut up”.

Filed under: Barack Obama • Hillary Clinton • New Hampshire
soundoff (489 Responses)
  1. Bert D

    Ultimately it will be irrelevant whether Clinton or Obama is nominated. The powers that be will redefine the deciding issue of the general election in terms of national security and the republican candidate that plays the national security card will win. My bet's on Rudy. He wil carry on the fear driven war to further enrich the war machine.

    January 9, 2008 at 1:51 pm |
  2. Hannah

    The voters, of course.

    January 9, 2008 at 1:56 pm |
  3. Joe

    John Edwards.

    If he had dropped out last night and thrown his support to Barack Obama, to the change he is arguing for but doesn't seem to be able to deliver, the headlines this morning would have given Obama more momentum after his loss. If Edwards doesn't drop out soon, Obama is going to have to fight every moment to overcome the Clinton Machine.

    Joe from Wisconsin

    January 9, 2008 at 2:03 pm |
  4. teresa

    Its not going to matter what anyone says. Jack and Wolf will not allow any one with a differance of opinion to heard. I think the way you(jack) and Wolf tralk about Hillary is disgusting. shame on you. you two always blow things way out of proportion. You can at least show some respect towards Hillary as she was one of AMERICA' S first ladies. You will find that if you continue trashing hillary your ratings will go way down. Not everyone feels the way you two do about Hillary or women in general. You've got to know that if Hillary bashing continues that will bwe the way she wins the democrat nominee. Women in the end will stick together. What does your wives think of all the bashing you have been doing lately. Wp;f I was so disappointed in your comments the last several days about Hillary. Then your spin on President Clinton,how angry he was and being a former president he shopuld not be doing that.can you tell me why not? Last I knew it was a free country...Bush hasn't taken that way yet. Sjame on all the male commentors for giving your one way views.

    January 9, 2008 at 2:17 pm |
  5. Rich, Mckinney Texas

    Ummmm, How about the American voters or has the electoral college done away with that?

    January 9, 2008 at 2:21 pm |
  6. W B in Las Vegas

    if John Edwards was to leave the race early for some reason (probably lack of funding) it would greatly change the dynamic in favor of Obama.

    I believe most of his supporters, of which I am one, would swing over to Obama. I know of NO one in the Edwards camp that has Hillary as an alternate selection going into the Jan 19th Democratic caucus here in Nevada. she is viewed by most Democrates I know as the "politics as usual" candidate vs Edwards or Obama "change".

    January 9, 2008 at 2:28 pm |
  7. Chris Griffith

    The democratic nomination will come down to Sen. Clinton's establishment base, versus Sen Obama's grass root's campaign. Oh, but to be completely honest whoever receives the most delegates at the convention.


    January 9, 2008 at 2:29 pm |
  8. Gino

    Is it really a battle between Senator Obama and Senator Clinton, as you term it? I feel that the battle will be in voters' grey cells, as they decide who rings true, who is truthful and will do as well as he or she can for the good of every citizen in the United States and not for the good of a few.
    Senator Obama stamps himself as a person who wants to make changes; Senator Clinton also wants to make changes and states that she has already been doing this... I don't know, but my experience in the nearly last 6 decades as a U.S. citizen is that the President is a very important person, but he (or she if a lady president becomes president) can't do much (unless he/she bypasses the Constitution of the United States) unless members of the Congress and the Senate embrace his/her views and agree to act as he/she wishes. So what is needed is to get rid of the deadwood in the D.C. Houses (and eventually do the same at the state levels) and replace all members who have been for years after years taking advantage (I am using a nice word here!) of the citizens they represent!
    What will determine the outcome of the "battle" between Senator Obama and Senator Clinton hopefully should be a non-party partisanship of the voters, where citizens will vote not according to the nominee of a party, but will vote for the person whom they feel rings true and would do the best job for our wonderful country.

    January 9, 2008 at 2:41 pm |
  9. john webster

    Individual votes tallied will determine the winner.

    January 9, 2008 at 2:51 pm |
  10. Paul

    Experience. It's not the right time for a youngster to run the country, which is in crisis.

    January 9, 2008 at 2:53 pm |
  11. Scott

    dah! Jack, the voters.
    scott , bowling green, mo.

    January 9, 2008 at 2:55 pm |
  12. Mrs Bhatt

    It may depend on how we are doing as a country from now until the day democrats nominate a candidate for president. If Economy and foreign policy worries go up Mrs Clinton has better chaces.

    January 9, 2008 at 2:56 pm |
  13. Brian Nancoo - Trinidad

    If these things go the same way as in the past,the candidates will have to address the voters' issues more specifically.Broad statements are running their course now.Voters want to know about the price of gas,health care,jobs,the Iraq War.This will help Senator Clinton more.Part of her experience package is a better understanding of the issues and how to package and phrase effective responses. Conversely Senator Obama will make mistakes,contradictions etc,and that will hurt him.

    January 9, 2008 at 2:59 pm |
  14. CDR

    "THERE IS SOMETHING HAPPENING IN AMERICA!" Since August The Honorable Senator Barack Obama has been gaining increasing momentum. In late December, the Obama campaign closed a huge double digit gap in New Hampshire. On January 3rd, the Obama campaign swept Iowa and on January 8th in New Hampshire, (largely a Clinton stronghold) the Clinton regime escaped defeat only by the skin of their teeth by 2 percentage points but not without deploying very NEGATIVE, UNDERHANDED, and SUSPECT tactics which will surely hunt the Clinton regime.

    Despite the inflated overprojections from most polls days before the NH Primary, CLINTON IS NO COMEBACK . Never place too much stock in polls, particularly when vetted against reason, and it was unreasonable to expect a nearly 40 percent voting difference over a 2 week time frame from previous steady and consistent projections. However, the Obama campaign did make significant large margins of gain. The Obama Campaign drew larger crowds compared to both Clintons. The Clinton regime, should have coasted through NH but they limped out barely and it is reasonable for every expert to say that the Clinton regime is underperforming and some triumphant comeback is not the case as the Clinton regime continues to lose ground.

    "THERE IS SOMETHING HAPPENING IN AMERICA!" and it is can be simply put that the Clinton regime "The Establishment" is losing votes and the Barack Obama Campaign "The Future" is gaining votes and delegates. CHANGE is on the Horizon and "Yes ,we can be the CHANGE we want to see in the World when we BELIVE and VOTE for Barack OBAMA (A CHAMPION FOR THE PEOPLE and "THE PEOPLE'S CHAMP!")

    OBAMA '08


    January 9, 2008 at 2:59 pm |
  15. Dan

    Jack ,
    It depend on how many independent voters – females – will apeal for change versus the gender factor. Mark my words, Super Tuesday will settle that!!!

    January 9, 2008 at 3:03 pm |
  16. Vonda

    The voters of the United States will decide the outcome

    January 9, 2008 at 3:03 pm |
  17. Allan

    It will end with the first in history a woman President. Even she will not be able to clean up the mess that this administration has made. That will take more than 8 years. The Clintons are the best chance to return us to where we when Bill left office. I hope you like returning to the prosperity we enjoyed a mere 7 year ago..

    January 9, 2008 at 3:06 pm |
  18. Ralph

    Perhaps Obama was the first to raise the flag for change; his greatest contribution is that so many of those searching for a presidential nomination repeat the need for change. Clinton knows this and has learned the hard way that relying on her past only welcomes defeat. As long as she remembers this the tide may turn in her favor, as voters will see that the only person able to bring change will be one that has witnessed or been a part of this. Obama is likeable and promises to be a leader in the future - as long as for the present he remains a Senator and continues to learn the basics of true leadership.

    January 9, 2008 at 3:12 pm |
  19. Sevak

    This will be simply wether or not Hillary's campaign implodes.

    January 9, 2008 at 3:17 pm |
  20. Anne

    i increasingly have the uneasy feeling that Obama is a phoney; imagine thinking that he can smile and say please and the law makers will tell the lobbyists to go away. he twists facts. Explain what BIll Clinton was talking about regarding the Iraq vote.

    January 9, 2008 at 3:18 pm |
  21. Padmini

    The elect ability factor will ultimately decide the outcome of the battle between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

    There is enormous enthusiasm on the republican platform to greet Senator Clinton in the race. It is not surprising as Senator Clinton has great many controversies to deal with such as her vote for Iraq war, Whitewater scandal, Board of Director with Wal Mart and many more they will find to knock her down.

    It is clear how uglier and bipartisan the politics become as we are approaching the election date.

    Padmini, Silicon Valley,CA

    January 9, 2008 at 3:26 pm |
  22. Patricia

    Why should there be a battle Jack? Can't both of these brilliant people run on what they believe in & on where they want to take America. The press is helping the Republicans "Fear The Deomcrats" machine, by trying to make this a battle it doesn't have to be. The press helped George Bush use the "fear card" & it has almost destroyed this country from within. it's done more damage than OBL could ever have done. Please stop yourselves.

    January 9, 2008 at 3:27 pm |
  23. David,San Bernardino,CA.

    Money,Sex and Race!

    January 9, 2008 at 3:34 pm |
  24. Tom Bulger

    Hillary cares so deeply about change that I am amazed she doesn' t drop out and support Obama, or someone the national poll showed had a stronger chance of ousting the Republicans. She was shown to be the Democrat least likely to defeat a Republican.

    January 9, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  25. bnthdntht

    It had better come down to who can win. Think of 2000 and Ralph Nader and that little bit of difference that affected the whole world.

    January 9, 2008 at 3:40 pm |
  26. Nospamsam

    What a Ignorant question. Who do you think decides Jack? The electoral college decides. What planet have you been on lately?

    January 9, 2008 at 3:53 pm |
  27. Annie

    The younger voters will decide this election, because to them it is not about race or gender, but who they believe is truly best qualified to lead them and will be a world leader. They are smart and engaged, and know that politics as usual is not their choice. (And they won't vote for someone that lectures them or scolds them, or uses their sympathy to get votes, but will vote for someone that respects them.)

    January 9, 2008 at 3:55 pm |
  28. Boone, Atlanta

    What will ultimately decide the outcome of the battle between Clinton and Obama and then the Presiential election?......an outraged American society seeking some serious changes to the "black hole" in Washington, that is supposed to be the voice of the people, by the people and for the people!

    January 9, 2008 at 3:56 pm |
  29. Dick Gillespie

    Jack, these two could become a dynamic duo as a ticket. The fundamental question I need you to be asking every candidate is this:
    " How will you break the gridlock in the Senate and House"
    Not with fluffy answers, but really. HOW?
    I think we need to look in the law to find a release mechanism to remove grid lock minded senators, have them re interview for their jobs, or get lost.
    Like many of us, I want our government working again. This is the biggest issue of all because until it is resolved, the other issues don't have a chance.
    Please ask and keep asking this question to all candidates Thanks,

    Dick Gillespie
    Winston-Salem, NC

    January 9, 2008 at 3:58 pm |
  30. Jordan - Cedar Rapids, IA

    What will determine the media's battle between Obama and Clinton?
    That's simple Jack... John Edwards.

    Never underestimate the strength of someone fighting for a cause.

    January 9, 2008 at 3:59 pm |
  31. Dennis in Gwinn, MI


    January 9, 2008 at 4:04 pm |
  32. Dale Hill

    Our ethnic communities' turnout will determine which candidates will determine the winner. The rest of us don't appreciate the opportunity of voting.

    Dale – Anadarko, OK

    January 9, 2008 at 4:20 pm |
  33. Jenny from New York

    Obama's inspirational message of "yes we can" will win the day and the nomination. His consistent message went over as well in NH as it did in IA, but Hillary won NH out of sympathy. She won that battle, but Obama will win the war.

    January 9, 2008 at 4:23 pm |
  34. suzie from atlanta, GA

    Hopefully, NOT the hype and opinions of the pundits.
    Maybe this time the PEOPLE will do their job and actually investigate and listen to all of the people running for office, not just the Presidential race, but for Senate, House, and State and Local offices as well.
    If we want to take back our Government, then WE have to do that, instead of sitting back and complaining and listening to others yak about things that don't matter.
    If we do our job, we will have a good result, and FYI Pundits: it is far too early to tell us what that will be, or how it will be determined.. But KEY to doing that is voting!!!!
    Are all of you out there registered to vote?????
    Lets get registered, and volunteer, and have house parties and go to events and donate and participate. Wouldn't it be great if we had 100% voter participation this time? Now that's how to have an election!!!

    January 9, 2008 at 4:25 pm |
  35. Billie

    People may not want to mention the race word, but before they can get through half the states, race will be a factor. Talk about bringing people together, I don't think so. Every African American t.v. star has jumped on the Obama bandwagon. Just take Oprah, she's never backed a candidate before, didn't know anything about Obama, but she started backing him right off the bat. In my opionion, it's only because he is black, she just wouldn't say it, neither would anyone else.

    January 9, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  36. Alex

    I think that what will determine the outcome is not even the democrats. The republican race, thanks to my candidate John McCain, now have a wide open field. If they somehow nominate Romney, which looks very bleak at this point, the democrats could send either Clinton or Obama to the ballot because Romney is the most polarizing republican candidate. If McCain is the nominee, the democrats do not want to nominate Clinton, because she is the most polarizing democrat, leaving McCain with an enormous amount of independent voters to persuade, and even thought the conservative base does not like McCain, they would rather see him and rally behind him than Clinton. If Giuliani is the nominee, Clinton may push her base even more because they know each other all too well. I think the best match-up for both parties is Obama-McCain, because they will be fighting for independents, and they will run something that has not been seen in a while: An honest and integrity-based campaign. The mudslingers will have to wait another 4 years.

    January 9, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  37. Terry

    Maybe I am foolish in believing that their answers to how they intend take care of the issues that continue to haunt this country of ours every day and are not being addressed by our present administration will be the determining factor in deciding between Obama and Clinton.

    January 9, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  38. Bruce in Chicago

    So its pretty obvious that either Obama or Clinton will get the nomination... but are either of them really qualified?!? Obama is a one-term Senator who hasn't delivered on his promises for change in my homestate of Illinois during his term(probably because he started campaigning for President right away); while Hillary constantly touts her "35 years of experience", but what has she really done? She makes it sound as if she was making policy decisions in the Arkansas Governor's mansion and as First Lady. Does attending State dinners really qualify as foreign policy experience? Gimme a break.

    With no incumbent in the race we should've had the strongest field of nominees imaginable, but it looks like we are now going to be stuck with a nominee that does not appear all that qualified for the job at hand. As a lifelong Democrat, I feel abandoned by my party (FYI- I supported Gov Richardson from the start). I think that no matter who wins this dogfight there is opportunity for a third party candidate to get in the race for all those disaffected democrats in the other 48 states who now have but two choices.

    January 9, 2008 at 4:31 pm |
  39. Ali

    Eventually, the result will be determined by the raw orgnization in the voting by each candidate. If the people of the upcoming states waits until last moment to decide who deserve the nomination, the invitable scenario is bouring more and more money to secure a better orgnization in the voting day.

    Hoboken, NJ

    January 9, 2008 at 4:32 pm |
  40. Tatyana

    Electability and Obama's amazing charisma will ultimately determine the nomination. When such an inspiring, charismatic, handsome politician runs, think Kennedy, (both John and Bobby) Reagan, Bill Clinton, they ultimately win over their usually more experienced, trusted, establishment opponents. Why? Because people ultimately go with their heart and Obama is clearly pulling on the Nation's heart strings–I know he's got mine.


    January 9, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  41. George J. Lujan

    Although I am leaning toward a candidate other than Hillary right now, I may yet vote for her and acknowledge that she has never EVER been as bad as the bloviators on cable television have made her out to be. Moreover, I have tried to do my homework: I have visited the websites of the top four candidates for the Democrats and the top five websites for the Republicans, try to watch all three of the main cable news shows - CNN, MSNBC and Comedy Central - and read a number of on-line magazines and print newspapers. Too many people talk about likability and whom one would like to have a beer with, but not enough about issues and workability of the ideas advanced. Many of my relatives and friends get together prior to any given election to discuss issues, candidates and ballot measures. Moreover, I doubt that I'll ever meet any of the people who are likely to be president, but I am concerned about what they'll do for the nation, not what they'll do to the nation and for themselves. Obama has said that he can bring people together and that Hillary is too polarizing, but the polarizing rap has been spread by people who dislike her anyway (Joe Scarborough, Andrew Sullivan, Michelle Malkin and so on who will NEVER have a good thing to say about her!), and it is a matter of fact that she has worked with her Republican colleagues in congress and has a good working relation with them. (When Giuliani was asked about her as a legislator he said that she has worked hard for her New York constituents, but disagrees "philosophically", leaving that unexplained.) Briefly, the voters of New Hampshire probably ignored all of the superficial analyses of the chattering class, done their due diligence and made up their minds on the basis of their own views and interests. My family, friends and I intend to do the same.

    January 9, 2008 at 4:41 pm |
  42. Carole

    As far as Obama's Iraq vote question, he said in 2004 he didn't know how he would have voted. The Clinton's never let anyone know this was right before the Democratic convention. What was he supposed to say?' Ruin Kerry's chances? There will be a lot of half truths about everyone before this is over. Wolfe covered this yesterday.

    January 9, 2008 at 4:44 pm |
  43. Ernest Price

    Delegates, Experience and the Economy will demonstrate Obama`s very liberal policies. Obalma is great at making speeches and capitalising on soundbites but, the White House needs a leader with experience, who can hit the ground running to solve US Economic woes. In deal ing with the War in Iraq, Obama fails to offer a convincing well thought out solution to Iraq , and fails to grasp the international diplomacy needed. Yes, he is young chrismatic proponent of change and a welcomed breath of fresh air in US politics but, change where ,when, and how.



    January 9, 2008 at 4:45 pm |
  44. Richard Sternagel

    Jack, this "battle" between Senators Clinton and Obama will be decided by who stays on message and who is deemed electable!

    January 9, 2008 at 4:47 pm |
  45. Mark Loper

    The media! The more coverage one gets the more desperate the other campaign becomes. Clinton needed media coverage after Obama's win in Iowa. The only issue the media covered was that she was no longer in the race. She resorted to crying and her coverage went from she's no longer in the race, to it is hard to be running for President, and in turn got the votes.

    What's the chance we'll see a Clinton, Obama ticket in Novemer?

    January 9, 2008 at 4:47 pm |
  46. Nick

    How much Washington experience did Bill have when he became president? None. Did it matter at that time? Well why does it matter now? Is it because a Blackman must run that extra mile as they say to prove himself. I think being a Washington outsider is a good thing myself because one is not as dirty as the rest of them.
    Obama seems to be a good family man that will make a good president and world leader.
    No Obama No Vote
    No Obama Why Vote

    January 9, 2008 at 4:50 pm |
  47. Terry the bugman

    Hillary needs to swipe the "change" challenge and make it her own with the simple message that only an experienced person can affect such a change, one who know the intracies of inside the Beltway politics, so well as she does and has been so effective as a NY Senator. She will also need to get very Green, so far not stressed. All that jazz on the middle East and whatever only needs a bit of downplay so for her to be in the final nomination process her message must be to the middle class: things will get better under her in our pocket book, our schools, our health care, our enviroment, our reaearch and development (not bombs), Congressional ethics, our respect in the world, as it use to be.

    January 9, 2008 at 4:52 pm |
  48. Cristine C. - IL

    I too believe that electibility will be the deciding factor. No matter what the pundits are saying, they're giving a lot of Americans too much credit in thinking that they truly will go for a woman or a black man. There's just too many idiots and racists and misogynists in this country...and that leaves the middle-aged white man, John Edwards.

    January 9, 2008 at 4:55 pm |
  49. John

    If you want the Republicans to win the White House cheer for Hillary to win. If you want real change then you have to cheer for Obama. I am a Republican but would vote for Obama in a heartbeat. The only real way to fix the mess in Washington is to fire them all after two terms and make them live in the real world. If they had to walk in our shoes after two terms, they would pass real legislation that help and protect us.

    January 9, 2008 at 4:55 pm |
  50. Rae

    We are talking about employing someone to run the country for us. We should read their resumes very carefully, check their references very carefully, and study their responses to questions asked wherever these are available. Then we should sit back and very carefully weigh the pros and cons before making a decision of such importance.

    In the end, it is our individual choices that will make the difference between one candidate or another. Thats what democracy is all about.

    January 9, 2008 at 4:57 pm |
  51. Dexter

    **imagine thinking that he can smile and say please and the law makers will tell the lobbyists to go away.**

    Maybe he can take a page from Hillary and pretend to cry on camera.

    Give me a break.

    January 9, 2008 at 4:57 pm |
  52. Jarrett

    Hopefully, the voters will decide the outcome of the election unimpeded by the media hype we've been witnessing over the past few weeks. Your words can influence voters in a positive or negative way. When you degrade the candidates (as you guys have done) by turning some minute statement made by a candidate into a major negative news article, you turn voters off and encourage them to give the candidate a second look. You declared Hilary the inevitable winner months ago, and look what has happened. You declared Obama the inevitable winner days ago, and again look what happened. Focus on the news, not the hype and divisiveness, and perhaps you'll better predict the outcome of these elections. This is the only way either of the candidates will have a fair chance.


    January 9, 2008 at 4:59 pm |
  53. Nunya

    No need for me to mention who I would like to win but all I can say is that if a Republican wins again I don't think I will ever vote AGAIN.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:00 pm |
  54. Zac Branstool

    It will come down to who can bring out more of their individual base – Barack supported by young voters or Clinton supported by baby boomers. It's an all out generational battle!

    January 9, 2008 at 5:00 pm |
  55. Ben Thayer

    Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton needs to be supported by all of us. She is smart, compassionate, and hard working. She knows what needs to be done to get the country off on the right track. I do like Senator Obama very much. I believe he is a good person with a good sense of the issues. But in this season of change, you need solutions. And I truly believe that Senator Clinton has the passion to be a great President for all of Americans and will get the job done right. I believe she has been tested and knows how to get things done in Washington. Not to mention it is high time we elect a women to be President of the United States.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:01 pm |
  56. Patrick

    John Edwards may be the decider. I think he is the best candidate in the party. But if he throws his endorement out there it could likely put one over the top. If Edwards is sincerely wanting to cut the ties between big business and government he would endorse Obama. Hillary Clinton is bought and paid for by the very businesses who are taking the middle class to the cleaners. It is unfortunate that Americans still can't see the largest issue facing us. Corruption and Collusion by anti-American World Bankers, Corporations, and our Sell-Out elected officials. Edwards would go after them like he did in private practice.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:04 pm |
  57. Kym Lamb

    Experience, and a proven track record, over relatively unknown-but-promising. Choosing both would rock! I think a Clinton-Obama ticket would be a sure winner for the democrats.

    To another responder: Oprah knows Obama as a fellow Chicagoan, and supported him in his race for the Illinois senate.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:05 pm |
  58. Carl Rastella

    I don't know why or if anyone picked up on this but I did, and it may explain how Hillary came bac so she came back to win. In all of the speeches she made, she used the word "I", but in the last few she made used the term "We" similar to Obama, and believe it or not she sounded so much more better! I believe this attracted many voters, becuuse using the word we made them feel like they would be a part of the change movement. I for one liked it BETTER

    January 9, 2008 at 5:06 pm |
  59. Grey Fox

    Dear Jack,

    I think the politics Obama represents scares most baby boomers because it would signal an end to their politics and political style. Younger people for the first time since Vietnam have come out in force to vote as seen in Iowa, they have different ideas about what the nature of a politician should be and more importantly shouldn't be. New Hampshire was a different story where Hilary Clinton found support from many older baby boomers because of their familiarity with her style of politics. In a nation crying out for change, especially change for the middle class, there are some that offering a clean break like Obama, and others like Clinton offering a change of party and gender. For Hilary to win she needs to force Obama to attempt fight style of a political campaign. The Clintons are at the top of politics when it comes to the velvet hand in the iron glove routine when dealing with opposition. Obama can attain victory by not being the next baby boomer Democrat, his message will be the break out he needs if people honestly believe that not only will it no longer be politics as usual in Washington that he has fortitude to get it done. Also Obama can make up points by taking a stronger stance on the nations defense harkening back to the days of the FDR style Democrat, one that was not a wimp.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:06 pm |
  60. Jack

    I believe if Obama can show some emotion like Hillary he might have a better chance, or if they take the script away from Hillary she might show her inexperience in talking to the people that would work out for Obama as well.
    Come on we have a woman 60 years old almost demanding we elect her to office and Obama who has coined the phrase Change, yet neither of these candidates are telling us of their "change plans" what are we suppose to do, wait like we do for Christmas and see what we get? I'm almost 50 and Christmas was a long time ago. All I see these two doing is telling the people what they think we want to hear, and trust me there is nothing Hillary says I want to hear except she is dropping out of the race!!

    January 9, 2008 at 5:07 pm |
  61. Charles in Alexandria, VA


    My crystal ball is not working - it was recalled by the manufacturer in China.

    What will most likely decide the race between Clinton and Obama is an unforeseen incident in the US or some other part of the world that will force them to display their competence and true leadership skills. Otherwise, we'll have to use the gut-check method: What does our gut say when we hear "President Hillary Clinton" or "President Obama"?

    January 9, 2008 at 5:08 pm |
  62. Kwame Eric

    Jack, the answer is BILL CLINTON.
    He is a “double edge sward”. You either love him, or despise him…
    Those (Democrats) who love him will want a Clinton “3rd and maybe a 4th term”.
    And those who think he’s yesterday’s news will flock to the Obama camp.
    He’s a “tactical politician” whom even Mr. Bill Bennett acknowledged last night he will never underestimate his political skills.

    Eric, Houston TX.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:09 pm |
  63. Marie in New England

    The Republicans like Obama for a reason. That is because he will be so much easier than Hillary for the Republicans to beat in the general election.

    For the Democrats to regain the White House, a tried and true candidate like Mrs. Clinton is the only rational choice. The relatively new and unknown Obama and his background would be full of surprises, and this is what the Democrats should not risk.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:10 pm |
  64. Cathy Norem

    Hopefully what will decide between Clinton and Obama will be that people did their homework and found out everything there is to know about each candidate. Find out what they stand for, what they support, what their goals are, what mistakes they've made and will own up to them. I, however, don't think Obama is the candidate at this time. He does not have enough experience, some people might think that a blessing, I don't. I'm not sure about Obama. I don't think we'll actually know what he's all about until he is actually elected President, if that should happen. I've had this feeling before, the first time Bush ran for President and it made me very nervous for our country. Obama lost the New Hampshire primary and immediately the "race" card was played. He even commented that he wasn't sure it wasn't a factor. That alone should be proof that he isn't ready to be President.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:16 pm |
  65. Annie

    Please do not believe everything that you read, and definitely not everything that Bill Clinton says. I voted for him twice, but when I watched him the other day, the only thought that came to mind was him saying "I did not have sexual relations with that woman." I would love to see a female US President, but we need to look for a candidate that will be able to negotiate with not only the other party in Washington, but with other world leaders. Hillary, has always been very devisive and although I respect her and know that she has worked hard to get to where she is, she does not have it in her to negotiate without getting angry when she is not getting her way. Her tears were very humanizing, but was she really worried about the country or was she seeing the election not going her way? When she says that she has 35 years of experience, she is lying to you. She was the wife of a politician for 35 years, a lawyer for a few years at a prestigious law firm, and a Senator for 7. Obama resume is more impressive than hers. He was the President of the Harvard Law Review, a civil rights lawyer, and State Legislature for 8 years before becoming a Senator (3 years). He taught Constitutional Law. Hillary worked for a prestigious law firm and became the !st lady of Arkansas and the !st Lady of the United States and then a Senator.

    As far as his being too polite, ask yourself this, when you are talking to someone and trying to get your point across, is it easier to do it if you are polite and non threatening, or do you have to get angry and wave a finger at them when you are talking. If the latter, ask yourself how that is working for you.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:18 pm |
  66. kaj korvela

    simply it should be clinton and obama
    on the same ticket.

    shame really they are at odds

    its time the patriarchy
    of washington to be over

    January 9, 2008 at 5:21 pm |
  67. Chris

    Hillary is a sure bet, as a tremendously skilled politician and with most of the party brass on her side she will no doubt win the general election and have a reasonably successful presidency. Barak's upside is so high; I don't think comparisons to JFK are crazy. He could be the fresh face that leads our country into the future. But he's also the bigger risk, as a more inexperienced politician he could make a debilitating mistake that would cost him the general or ruin his presidency. Voters need to decide how ambitious they are willing to be with the future of our country.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:22 pm |
  68. brandon perrault

    What happened to "We The People Will Decide?"

    January 9, 2008 at 5:22 pm |
  69. Charles

    Jack, Hilary has to do more then show her experiance.Many young voters like myself(im 17 and will be voting in the Maryland primaries since I will be 18 by November)do not trust older politicians.Some of my freinds have said that these cold war tactics taken by those born in the 40's 50's and 60's don't work.And WHAT has she done, its never her name you her on the news when talking about congress.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:23 pm |
  70. Mara Riekstins

    I don't care what decides it, as long as the decision comes from the voters. Not the media, not the party elites, not corporate America or (worst of all), not the Supreme Court.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:23 pm |
  71. mike wisneski

    Watch edwards,huckabee ,votes for them will give hillary a victory, Clinton will need a v.p. from the south, who sells out / ? obama ? edwards ?

    January 9, 2008 at 5:28 pm |
  72. Ron K - San Diegp

    Oh come on Jack:

    It's a battle between who has the "BIGGEST MOUTH". This presidential election will go down as: "THE BATTLE OF THE BLAB!

    RonK -. San Diego

    January 9, 2008 at 5:28 pm |
  73. Jim

    Since you and the other CNN pundits seem to think that just by saying it often enough you can make this into a two person race, I sincerely hope that John Edwards beats them both. Don't get me wrong, I could easily live with either Clinton or Obama as the Democratic candidate, I am just fed up with your snarky comments, Dobb's demogogery, and Blitzer's "Gosh oh Gee" ennui. The only goal of this electorate should be to put a Democrat with some common sense, decency, and honesty into the White house.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:28 pm |
  74. Aaron from Chicago

    Everyone keeps saying how experience is maybe the biggest factor for becoming president, it's not. FDR who is arguably the best Democratic president ever served only one term as governor of New York. Look at what he did as president without a whole lot of experience. Clinton keeps saying that she has brought change for 35 yaers and considers herself an "Agent of Change". Please tell me what changes she was making thirty or even twenty years ago. Because as far as i know she has not made any. After South Carolina whoever wins will have a slight edge in certain states for Super Tuesday we all know Clinton will win New York and Barack Obama will win Illinois hopefully but all the states where the race is close they will decide who wil get the nomination.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:30 pm |
  75. Donald, Butte Montana

    People will decide between Clinton and Obama based on their merits - not because history is being made by the possibility of the first female or black President.

    The media needs to do a better job of reporting on the real issues and positions of the candidates - not petty BS they'e been covering.

    Obama makes lofty campaign statements, but nothing specific. NO President is going to get her/his reforms ( not changes) implemented without a majority in both Houses of Congress. This means replacing many of the incumbents and Republicans - as well as Democrats now entrenched.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:31 pm |
  76. Jodie


    The answere to your question is simple...Diebold voting machines

    McKinney, Texas

    January 9, 2008 at 5:32 pm |
  77. Mo

    What will ultimately decide the election is Democrats' desire to win not just the Presidency but the working majorities necessary to enact change. Senator Clinton cannot offer anything more than high negatives, and a divided electorate on election day. Remember that Bill Clinton was a minority president, and not just because he was supposedly black. He consistently garnered less than 50% of the vote. Hillary will be no different.

    Barack Obama on the other hand is onto something. By appealing successfully to Independents and Republicans he is not just seeking the election of a democratic president, but of a Democratic majority. If you analyze his words correctly, he's not going for the JFK comparisons, but to the FDR comparisons. He's seeking to be the attraction at the top of the ticket that will push independents and republicans to vote not just for himself, but for all the Democratic Senate and congressional candidates, giving Democrats an unassailable majority in enacting legislation.

    The sooner the Democrats perceive this strategy and endorse Obama the better.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:33 pm |
  78. elaine

    while we need change we also cannot afford on the job training...we have had that for 4 years and it did not work.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:33 pm |
  79. Robert Adams

    Obama is too unknown for the Presidency. He has no foreign policy experience and less than one term in the Senate. Yet, he and his supporters want to act like this is a good thing.

    His "change" and "yes we can" are the voice of ignorance. The changes that he claims he wants in Washington, he can't provide. His policies are too far left for the republicans to ever be wiling to work with him so he will have to try to work around them. If he had a little experience, he would know that.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:37 pm |
  80. Bo

    Who Cares? Neither will ever get elected at POTUS anyway so it is a moot point.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:37 pm |
  81. Dana

    Jack, the outcome will be decided by the democratic party and who they think can beat the republican candidate. While Hiliary talks about her experience, I am not sure what experience she is talking about. We know she voted to go to war and that's about it. Obama, has helped to open the eyes of the American people. He makes you want to change what is going on in Washington. He inspires people and I believe he wants change. Obama may be able to inspire our Congressman to do something more than sit on there backside. Jack, can CNN cover a story about what these candidates have done that is important?

    January 9, 2008 at 5:38 pm |
  82. Michael Marciniak

    Simply put the People will dicide on an American for President, not the "divisionist" Hillary clinton. No matter what party affiliation, the Citizens are Citizens First, not democracts, republican, or independant and the Citizens are the biggest Lobby group of America and the American Vote is the Citizens Voice as United We Stand.

    What most American People do not realize the simlpe definition of "People". Most decipher "People" meaning the plural od person, however the truth of the Real definition of "People" in defined as - "a State". Thats why the saying "United we Stand, divided we fall" has meaning when it comes to "the People", the People are a State that when united "We the People" have the power to move this country and the "divisionist" in this government have to go on the movement of the Peolpes' request.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:39 pm |
  83. Jason in Ky

    Depends on who pays who more money. This is all a joke! It doesn't matter who gets into office. Hillary has already got her feet wet an Obama will just be another pawn President for the Elites to makeshift. Meanwhile the mainstream media will determine the winner. It's pathetic!! 1% of America has voted an were all talking about whose making moves in the campaign. What about the other 99% of America. Do WE not have a say!! I feel like I'm watching a movie and everyone is just acting. By the way, Hillary deserves an Oscar for her performance the other day.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:43 pm |
  84. Melanie

    Well it won't be Hillary's tears that will make want to vote for her. I don't want someone crying on TV as President. So that leaves Obama!

    January 9, 2008 at 5:45 pm |
  85. Brian

    I just hope the struggles between them wont prevent an Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ticket. Clearly the voters are looking at them as the top two presidential candidates in any party, and it would be a disservice to us all if the bickering leads to them resenting each other.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:45 pm |
  86. Michael

    Someone should ask Edwards, an attorney, what he thinks about class action law suits. We recently discovered we were entitled to receive $25 because of a class action suit involving credit card conversions in foreign countries. The attorney's are getting something like 90 million.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:46 pm |
  87. Tanyah

    Jack, the economy will be the determining issue. We the people, those of us who do not make 100 grand plus a year already know there is a recession. Bush policies have raped and pillaged the middle class. Not only do we have no disposable income, but also our wages have been depressed, our infrastructure is crumbling and everybody, including the Country is in debt. Here is a clue for you experts; in the States where it takes more income to live like New Hampshire, Senator Clinton made have an edge because the Clinton economic policies. She just may know how to achieve a balanced economy in which the people are participants not prey.

    Moreover, you men in the media do not have a clue; you cannot group all Blacks, Young People, or Women into one group. Historically Black men were given the vote before any color women got to vote. As a Black woman, I have been abused, mistreated, and overlooked by men of all colors; change for me is having a woman President, not a just man of a different color. The good thing is a Clinton-Obama or Obama-Clinton administration is a win for us all.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:47 pm |
  88. Nick

    When it comes to Obama, "where's the beef?" applies. He TALKS about making change, but she's DONE IT. Edwards said she was for status quo. She said she had been working for change for 35 years. She could have added this: They are like a family that has guests over for the Superbowl. The lady cleans the house and cooks the dinner, and the guys swoop in at the last minute and try to steal all the credit. Obama has criticized Hillary for: 1) she's overly ambitious – but she has 8 years of first lady and 8 as Senator, but Obama was only in the Senate for 2 years before running for pres, 2) her service as first lady was meaningless (he said, it's not like she was treasury secretary), Obama made the analogy that he discusses things with his wife (Michelle), but it's not like that means she's experienced. And, maybe that's so. Maybe Michelle would be a more traditional first lady. But, that's not the role that Hillary played for Bill, not by a long shot, 3) Obama gives Hillary no respect for her accomplishments, 4) She's accused of changing the way she speaks. Hillary lived in Ark. for 20 years! It's natural for someone who had some drawl to pick it up when they go back. But, when Obama speaks he suddenly has a drawl and preacher like intonation! Well, Obama never lived in the South! He grew up in Hawaii and lived in Chicago. Now, he has a soft, southern genteel accent. Get real! Obama's camp has excelled at the Karl Rovian tactic of accusing your opponent of everything that you are guilty of yourself!

    January 9, 2008 at 5:47 pm |
  89. Judy

    I think it will come down to whether the women of America can overcome their anger over being passed over for position, pay, and privilege in generations past and harnass that energy towards creating a future for their daughters that transcends the narrowness of gender politics.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:48 pm |
  90. Brenda

    As a woman, and senior citizen I am tired of seeing the media run Hillary's human moment over and over again. Previous Presidents were actually human unlike the present one. As far as Obama I have a question, if he is for the poor, needy, etc. why hasn't he brought his 83 year old grandmother to the states from Kenya??? That is the way he treats a senior citizen!!!!

    January 9, 2008 at 5:48 pm |
  91. Mark

    The battle between Obama and Hillary won't come down to money. In fact, the candidate waging the biggest ad campaign will probably annoy more people than they'll attract. What this battle will come down to is the volunteers, going door to door, adding a personal touch to a candidate's rhetoric and motivating supporters to get out and vote. To date, Obama has won this battle decisively, but Hillary's campaign seems to be catching on.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:49 pm |
  92. Bruce L.

    The simple answer... the almighty dollar will decide the nomination! Senator Edwards is right when he says it's an auction, not an election; and unfortunately whichever candidate spends the most will likely win.

    Ironic, in the end it will be the dead presidents that decide the future president.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:51 pm |
  93. Pat

    This outcome will be decided when Hillary and Bill show their real faces and come out swinging with all their might. I wonder how long it will be before Chelsea takes her shots at Obama. Probably something like "he raped me." I might have voted for Hillary had not Obama entered this race and after listening to him I don't think he is as liberal as the Clintons but neither do I think that he is as money hungry as the Clintons. How soon people forget what the Clintons were involved in before taking office. And tell me how you buy a house in one of the priciest neighborhoods in New York when you told the American people that you had no money when you began your presidency. Hil has always been the one to look out for the money and I don't think she is going to change. I believe that she will do some things for middle class people but basically we will still have the same old crap going on in government.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:53 pm |
  94. Jonae


    It is, of course, all about strategy. Who will pull out the best strategy in the final hour? Who will answer the tough questions in the right way or have the most sincere and convincing cry when it comes down to the wire? If Barack knows what's good for him. He will be sure to keep him likeable, every-man's candidate persona air tight, while remembering that this is political race and getting on the defensive every once in a while. Though he should continue to defend himself against Hillary's accusations, I wouldn't advise him to take on Bill, people like him too much. Though I support Barack wholeheartedly, I wouldn't want to call it too early. I hear some people did that this week and it didn't turn out so well.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:54 pm |
  95. Tom

    With the exception of the final vote tally, no one really knows. If they did, they would be millionaire campaign advisers or even president.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:54 pm |
  96. Mary A Goodman


    Please tell all your supposedly intelligent analysts the following heard on CNN last night.

    Paraphrased: About 9,000 NH democratic votes for Hillary were counted from early voting ballots cast before Dec., 31, most from nursing home residents. This was from a voting official from the Secretary of State's office.

    Tell them to check facts and come up with an intelligent analysis.

    Keep up the good work and keep at these know it all pundits and reporters.


    January 9, 2008 at 5:54 pm |
  97. Jo

    It is interesting that the commentators and pundits, some of whom are usually very interesting, have taken the arrogant path of deciding who is or is not worthy of winning. This is America and We the People should demand that we choose, not the cable commentators, who love a fight or a gaff to pad their programs.
    Hillary has borne the brunt of the TV pundit assault for the last few months - but the people are listening to her. They see an incredibly brilliant, well informed and gracious leader. She stands on the world stage with the best there have ever been. The rest of the world adores her - something you never hear from the media or the press. She has been chosen the most admired woman in America for more than a decade – including the current year. She is a talented, gracious leader, who just happens to be a woman. She is the kind of woman that makes America really strong and enduring - the kind of woman who always had to do everything twice as well as a man to be even noticed - the kind of woman who leads the best efforts of most families and who binds them together. Her experience is better than any other candidate. She will make a fabulous President and her time has come. ( By the way – being chosen Editor of the Harvard Law Review does not a president make, and is not "experience.")

    January 9, 2008 at 5:55 pm |
  98. stan brenner

    Hillary Clinton have the nerve to try to make Obama look bad about his
    experience on foreign policy even though many people know Bill was
    a draft dodger during the Vietnam War, it is clear to me Obama who
    was against the war in Iraq from day 1 had a vision that the war was
    not the right way to go, so much for Hillary and Bill, due to there bad-
    mouthing and twisting the truth on what Obama really said about the
    Iraq war, if Obama does not win the nomination and Hillary does
    my wife and I will vote for a republican instead, come on america
    it is time to get the status quo out of Washington.

    stan in pennsylvania

    January 9, 2008 at 5:55 pm |
  99. jeniffer-Marshall tx

    it will depend on the voters decisions.These candidates have both strong arguments and also have shown good leadership skills.The most important thing to guide voters should be that we have no bias or ill feelings about the candidate because of race.If this is the case then we have a tight race ahead between Clinton and Obama.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:55 pm |
  100. Barbara

    I have not made up my mind about any person or party. But Chris Matthews of MSNBC gave be a great idea and I intend to pass it on to everyone I know. No matter which person or party is "ahead" or "leading" according to the Talking Heads or pollsters I will start supporting someone else. I will lie on Phone polls, entrance or exit polls. I am sick to death of "forecasters" telling me how it is and who to vote for, I don't think the Clinton win was so much "for" her as against the Media.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:58 pm |
  101. John

    People will need to decide if they want to elect the old Clinton clan with their mock tears and scandals or elect someone new and fresh like Obama. The outcome of the elections should be having a new face as a President.

    January 9, 2008 at 5:58 pm |
  102. Frank

    The choice between Clinton and Obama will be made by supporters of Senator Edwards. One of Clinton's advantages in New Hampshire was that supporters of Biden and Dodd moved to her, presumably because (next to them) she offers the most experience.

    So the question is, when Edwards supporters give up on him, who do they move to? Given the fact that Edwards message has been the most adversarial among the top Democrats, I would think that Clinton's theme of fighting for the average person would enjoy the advantage over Obama's promise to bring people together.

    After tolerating the lies, corruption, and incompetence of the Bush administration, I suspect that most Democrats are more interested in payback than in play nice. And remember, most of the primaries from here on are closed primaries.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:00 pm |
  103. Ed

    Jack, I think that Hillary's much touted 35 years of experience has only made her an expert at learning how to negotiate the troubled waters of past administrations. While I do believe that she is very capeable, I also think that ultimately she represents the status quo much more than Obama.
    The public looks at Hillary and they see the establishment.
    When they look at Obama, they see a fresh face, hope, and the change that is so desperately needed by middle class America.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:00 pm |
  104. Pete Schap

    The whole CNN news team reporting on the primary election last evening should be ashamed of theirselves in the way they villified Hillary Clinton's election win. One panelist stated something to the effect that Ms. Clinton was the first candidate who cried to garner votes. That was not only irresponsible reporting but it was a hateful slur at the candidate who is now the frontrunner. I thought Fox News was completely biased until I saw the reporting by CNN. Shame on all responsible. If your going to report on elections, personal comments by the reporters should be left out, especially when the polls are still open.

    Pete Schap Cockeysville, Md.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:01 pm |
  105. Brian - Dallas, Texas

    A lot of people thought they wittnessed something genuine when Hillary's emotions went on display in New Hampshire. I and many others did NOT, even for one nano-second. She was clearly exhausted from the rigors of campaigning in NH and could not contain her emotions.

    Watch for Clinton's next opportunity to try to exploit her own tears at some point in the near future; this time to a much different end result...

    January 9, 2008 at 6:03 pm |
  106. Stephen

    It will be Obama's if he can get all of the black votes in America. Jessie Jackson asks if he's black enough, well that's a question only black Americans can ask. Allthough some have asks is he American enough. If President will he stand up to the Islamic terriorist that have sworn to wipe America and Isreal of the map. I myself just can't trust Barack Obama because of his Muslim upbringing. That's not to say all Muslims are bad but at a time in history when we're at war with the Muslim/Islamic ideology or theology I for one can't support Obama. We need a President that will secure our borders because right now we have no clue who is in the country that are planning the next 9/11.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:03 pm |
  107. Ismael

    I feel that the fact Obama does not have a lot of experience is a plus. In all aspects of life we tend to think experience is the most important thing. The fact Hilary has been around politics for a long time does not mean she would be better than Obama. This just means is she is a part of the political machine that has run this country for almost 2 decades now. I want somebody removed from all this to get a chance. Someone who still believes they can come in and shake things up. Someone who feels anything is possible. Yes I know this might not be Obama, but I also know it's definitely not Hilary. Can't you see we really need someone who cares about the people, and what the people want. Hilary could careless about us, she is going to come into office and do what she thinks she can get done, not what needs to be done. We I see Obama speak or read about his views, I see what I saw in Bill Clinton years ago. He believes he can make a difference, and he cares about what the people want to see change. I know change is a word that has been thrown around a lot, and I am not sure who can really deliver on there promise of it. I know this though Hilary, Guliani, and McCain have all had there chances in the past and they failed us. Someone new deserves a shot.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:03 pm |
  108. Allen, Hartwell GA

    I hope what decides the battle is John Edwards winning the nomination. If not, I don't mind voting for either one, rather than the choices put forward by the GOP.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:03 pm |
  109. mark

    BLACK CAUCUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Does this mean WHITES not allowed??I am registered independant,but i have to believe the big money republicans have got to be giving money to obama campaign!!!!!!!!I would if i was running that show.Listen to the last few days on cnn.Can you figure out who the smartest person interviewed is?Bill Cohen,I may be biased but a blind man could see it.Thanks for the place to GRIPE,coyotepolice

    January 9, 2008 at 6:05 pm |
  110. mike

    The ability of either candidate to cross racial, age , gender ,and prosparity lines.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:06 pm |
  111. Mike

    This question is too difficult to answer. One thing is clear, however: As the Democratic contest wears on and support for both Obama and Clinton becomes more entrenched as well as invigorated, it will be suicide for one not to select the other as a running mate. You won't unite the country - and win the election - if you don't unite the party first.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:06 pm |
  112. Jon

    Did you hear Obama's speech last night? How about Clintons? Well there is the difference. I was holding my breath while Obama spoke and clinching my ears as with Hilary.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:08 pm |
  113. Chris

    I think it ultimately boils down to who will cry the most before Super Tuesday.

    By the way, who is really running the Clinton camp? Hillary or Bill?

    January 9, 2008 at 6:09 pm |
  114. Mike

    Votes! Of course.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:09 pm |
  115. adam in Oregon

    My wife will decide. In other words, women will.

    And right now my wife is leaning toward Clinton but still on the fence. She likes Obama and finds him in inspiring. She identifies with Hillary but is worried about her electability in the general.

    I will vote how she votes because while she voted for Gore, I made the mistake of voting for Bush in 2000 and have yet to live it down. The only way to get that monkey off my back is to vote for the candidate of her choice.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:09 pm |
  116. Jess Edison

    The deciding factor will be: "Who does the Diebold want?" (they make the electronic voting machines)

    January 9, 2008 at 6:10 pm |
  117. Marianne Beasley

    As for the Democrats, they will have to decide : do they want the Clintons back based upon past performance (( am a Dem and I do want them back) or do they want to shuck the oldsters and go for unknown factor, aka Obama.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:10 pm |
  118. DP

    I'm not certain what will ultimately clinch it for Hillary, but if Barak does start expounding on his empty promises of "change" soon people will begin to lose faith in his ability to formulate a workable plan for recovery.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:10 pm |
  119. Howard

    It was the media that overly hammered Senator Clinton on her emotional display, claiming that it was false or contrite. While this might have been true look at the NH voter many were older women baby boomers and that connected them to Senator Clinton.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:10 pm |
  120. Horace Crowe

    Gee it seems to be who will cry the most. All of these people need to get a life and start acting presidential and not like actors and actresses.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:10 pm |
  121. John Onyango

    The ultimate decider will be tears, all Obama has to do is cry in public and he will have the womens votes that Hillary is depending on, cry Obama, cry.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:10 pm |
  122. Nathan from North Dakota

    Oh Jack, call me a cynic, but why not the Supreme Court? They decided the last closely contested election. Sigh. So much for this whole "change" matra.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:10 pm |
  123. Stephen H. Mack

    For the first time in nearly eight years, we have two candidates that actually make everyone feel good. It's not about choosing the lesser of two evils, but rather who speaks to our inner selves as Americans. Both Senator Clinton and Senator Obama speak to that soul that is America. For me, it just depends on who speaks louder. But, I am delighted to have two amazing choices.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:11 pm |
  124. Pamela in FL

    The answer is easy...John Edwards. If he stays in too long he could become the 2008 "Ralph Nader..." for Barack Obama.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:11 pm |
  125. David Buco

    The deciding factor between Clinton and Obama is quite simple. EDWARDS. He's taking votes from Obama. He cannot win and the longer he stays in the race, the more likely Clinton will win.

    Newnan, GA

    January 9, 2008 at 6:11 pm |
  126. JoAnn in Iowa

    Edwards splits the "change" voters. When he is out of the race, the change voters go to Obama. Hillary is connected to the past and to big money and to the status quo. The Clinton team already had 8 years in the white house. Step out of the way.
    The energy and excitement of the young people connected to the Obama campaign give me hope for the future of this great nation. We need them to be interested and involved in what happens next.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:12 pm |
  127. Jason

    The race will be decided by the Edwards supporters. When and if he leaves where will they go. If change is still the mantra, then they could swing for Obama. The longer he stays in the Better for Mrs. Clinton.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:12 pm |
  128. H. Grooters

    What it boils down to is who the American voters believe will actually implement change.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:12 pm |
  129. betty moore

    The most important office in the world MUST have experience to deal with the politics of the world we're all living in.
    This is not the time for the Presidency of the United States to be "going green"...

    January 9, 2008 at 6:12 pm |
  130. Joanna

    Hillary MUST win because she is the only one worth listening too. She will sharpen up in the months to come and she Will be the next president.
    It was disgusting to hear, but interesting, that Obama went down last night because the WHITE people said they would vote for him, but when they entered the booth they did not. Good strategy! Now I wish CNN and all other stations would stop this surprise over why Hillary won, but then again, get her name out there!
    John Edwards is wasting the money again. He will never get to the White House. Once a loser, forget it.
    As far as Obama is concerned, I do not want to see him lead the USA into anything and anywhere. I have read everything i need to know about him from the time he was born. I do not care how many times he has changed schools and religions, his raising was done with the Koran by his side. We may very well be making a very serious mistake here that will cost us severely. Let us never forget what Al Qaeda or Bin Laden said...your worst attack will come from within your borders.

    Posters should find spell check...how can you vote if you cannot even find spell check?

    January 9, 2008 at 6:12 pm |
  131. Deborah


    January 9, 2008 at 6:12 pm |
  132. EDD McQ

    Just like the saying, whoever has the most toys–wins. What ever states have the most toys (electoral votes) wins. It should be the PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES who elect the nest President not some out-dated-run-into-the-ground alleged college. The Government is for the people and by the people. REALLY?

    January 9, 2008 at 6:12 pm |
  133. Christie Rickert, stockbridge ga

    I believe experience will be the ultimate decision maker in this race. Obama may be good but he really lacks the experience the get the nomination I think.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:12 pm |
  134. Fran

    Jack, I am truly hoping that the determining factor in the Clinton Obama race is simply THE ISSUES. What a concept! We need to take this process seriously and I would hope that you all in the media would ratchet up the integrity of the information you share to address differences in position, not differences in personality, gender, race or jokes. Treat the American voter as though you think we are intelligent enough to comprehend the subtle differences.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:13 pm |
  135. Chell

    The younger generation will be the factor between these two candidates.

    Barack can not win without those under 35 showing at the polling booths and Hillary can not win if we vote.

    This IS the election that will remind those under 40 that our vote DOES count, but ONLY if we cast it.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:13 pm |
  136. Adrian

    Jack in one simple word " DIRT ". How much dirt they can find. How much dirt they throw and who comes out cleaner. I wonder who has the best washing machine.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:13 pm |
  137. Marianne Beasley

    So the Republicans want to bring back the "whitewater scandal." Oh dear me. And I reckon they also want to string Hillary up because she's married to a man who lied about adultery? Republicans had better get into the 21st century and face the real issues, like $700 million per day going down the tubes on a war that is not being won.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:13 pm |
  138. Tim

    As long as Richardson and Edwards are in the race, votes are being stripped away from Obama and Hillary has an edge. If her and Obama were the only ones fighting for votes last night, Obama would have won no contest. I think that Richardson should drop out, and Edwards should step down and go for an Obama/Edwards ticket.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:13 pm |
  139. G

    Race, of course. Iowans are remarkable people. They voted their interests. But the voters in New Hampshire mirror what voters in California did when then Mayor Bradley ran for Governor of California. Bradley, like Obama, was ahead in all the polls, but when it counted, white voters pulled their levers for the white candidate and lied to the pollsters just as they did in New Hampshire. We're not there yet. Also believe the media's focus on Black reaction to Obama hurt him; conjuring up visions of the OJ scenario.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:13 pm |
  140. Evan

    Honestly, Jacko, it really depends on which of the two potential candidates show America that they're the best person to choose if you want change. That's by and large the Democratic platform this year, so coinciding with that would net the most votes, theoretically.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:13 pm |
  141. Beverly

    Well hopefully it will be the voters after a long process of listening and comparing
    the two on issues and experience. I for one am getting tired of this media blitz of crowning Obama king! The media should be investigating and reporting, not crowning candidates, yet, it seems the media is now just a fawning, screaming like a teen aged girl at a rock concert, "fan" unable to do the job they are chartered to do. I for one am glad that all the pundits have egg on their faces today!

    January 9, 2008 at 6:14 pm |
  142. Judy, Bozeman, MT

    Women will decide this one...and we will ultimately vote for Hillary because: 1) we are tired of you white male talking heads telling us what we think - we will tell YOU what we think with our votes, 2) no matter how appealing Obama is to us, it's just not his turn yet - we will give him his turn when he is seasoned & ready, 3) we are tired of the male-dominated media bashing Hillary when she's tough, and then bashing her again when she appears vulnerable - play fair you guys, and, finally 4) she "stood by her man." She's got more "try" in her than any other candidate in any other party.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:14 pm |
  143. Vito

    Jack, it's as simple as this. If American voters want politics as usual, they will side with the Clinton's. If they want to fundamentally redirect the course of our country, they'll go with Obama. We've already had a 30 year dynasty of Clinton's/Bush...and where is the Universal Healthcare that Bill Clinton promised when he was running for election? Where is the universal Health care that Hillary fought for, when her husband was in office, and she was the first lady, and the congress was behind it along with 80% of our country.

    No, we need a new direction for our country, and only the will of the people will decide it.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:14 pm |
  144. Phil

    The factor that will determine the outcome of the race will be John Edwards.
    This may surprise many because most of the media refuses to report on him. If he cannot garner enough support to win the nomination he will mat the very least pull support from Obama. Making Hillary the nominee. Thanks for reporting on more than the two mcandidates with $100 million plus each.


    January 9, 2008 at 6:14 pm |
  145. Bryan

    What will ultimately decide the race in favor of Clinton, Obama or Edwards is the fact that the media will never compare the skimpy records of these lightweights and air-heads with the long record of accomplishment of Bill Richardson, who has twice the experience of the three of them combined and ten times the accomplishments.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:14 pm |
  146. Zach N New York

    Jack, Hillary is got this electiion in the bag... people vote for names that sound ok no one would back 'OBAMA" that does not sound like a presidential name like clinton i think she will take the party nomination dues to her experiances in the house

    January 9, 2008 at 6:14 pm |
  147. Michael Morelli

    The intelligence and gullibility of the American people will decide this race.
    Hillary is for change? How about changing the unemployment benefit rate in New York. I'm unemployed for the second time in four years, and the rate is the same.

    Neither of these candidates is a leader and neither has governed. This
    race is simply a matter of charisma.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:14 pm |
  148. Andrew

    Obama must emulate Hillary's substance and command of the issues. Hillary must emulate Obama's charisma and skills as a communicator. The extent to which one will more thoroughly master the other's strength will determine the victor.

    Toronto, Canada

    January 9, 2008 at 6:15 pm |
  149. Malinda Handforth

    First Major Media and second Money. Sad, but true fact.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:15 pm |
  150. Bob Stein, Sacramento, CA

    Ultimately, who can best retrieve the economy from the ditch it's headed into will be the winner. Considering everyone associates the good and bad of Bill's presidency with Hillary, she'll have the advantage as Bill Clinton's time in the Oval Office produced an economy that mostly sparkled.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:15 pm |
  151. Jane

    If the voters take the time to actually analyze what they are being told and determine who is offering things that can't possibly be accomplished and who is laying out attainabile goals, it is no contest . . . Hillary will win. Or do voters really think that the Republicans are going to suddenly support a Democratic President just to make Obama look good. . . I don't think so.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:15 pm |
  152. ken p

    I hope the Democratic Convention begins with no candidate having enough delegates to win the nomination. Then we can all stay up late to watch a good old fashioned political convention unfold, just like when we were kids!

    January 9, 2008 at 6:15 pm |
  153. James B.

    A heavy dose of reality. Real definition of the problems they think they're going to "change", coupled with the real answers and solutions these candidates think they can actually deliver. It wouldn't hurt to do so with a liberal dose of authenticity.

    The American people have had well enough of the polar opposite. That will give them some hope of conducting an adult, responsible debate with the Republican candidate, that actually confronts our shared reality as opposed to the pseudo-reality of the recent administration.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:15 pm |
  154. Brenda Furmato


    January 9, 2008 at 6:16 pm |
  155. Jill


    I think the states of California and New York and other later states will decide who gets to represent each political party this year in the presidential election. I'm thankful for this and find it refreshing.

    Clive, IA

    P.S. I sure wish 90% of the public would vote instead of only 10%. Get with it America. Vote. The stakes are really high this year!

    January 9, 2008 at 6:16 pm |
  156. Stella

    The war in Iraq is the main subject they should be stating clear and concise answers to what, when and how they will end the war. Each of these candidates have good intentions and are interested in the return of our country to we the people. But CNN last night was very negative to Hillary and continually focused on Obama. One of you, (don't think it was you Jack,) remarked that the Hillary voters in NH were old geezers and older women. I suggest you guys try to tone down your own political agenda. Thanks Jack for the opportunity to have my opinion heard..

    January 9, 2008 at 6:16 pm |
  157. Stephen Kirby

    What will decide the Obama-Clinton battle? It will come down to whom the Democrats decide is more electable. As a life-long "yellow-dog" Democrat, I will vote for the nominee. Even though my heart would not be in voting for Hillary, there's no question she towers above anyone who might get the Republican nod.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:16 pm |
  158. Rachel

    If Clinton can continue to show her humanity and emotion, voters will respond to that and vote for the Hillary they always thought was under the very practiced and fine-tuned act. If not, then Obama's message of hope that responds directly to how personal and emotional this election is for many Americans will be what carries him to the White House.


    January 9, 2008 at 6:16 pm |
  159. Chad

    The answer to your question is simple Jack. Female African Americans in South Carolina. It is very likely in my opinion who ever wins South Carolina will have the momentum to win Florida and win big on Super Tuesday.
    Will the Female African Americans vote for Obama because he is black or Hillary because she is a woman?
    I for one am glad that it comes down to this, because it would be a tragedy for the election to actually come down to issues. Maybe then someone would pay a little more attention to Edwards the one with the real ideas and the real experience. Oh, well though, I guess it just goes to show where we are as a country voting on the color of someones skin or sex. Oh, well...

    January 9, 2008 at 6:16 pm |
  160. Keith Fitzgerald

    This is the first presidential election in my lifetime where I am genuinely undecided. Endorsements usually don't carry much weight with me, but if someone I respect like Al Gore or Jimmy Carter were to endorse Clinton or Obama, I'd have to take a serious look at that.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:16 pm |
  161. Julio

    Hillary Clinton has made the best comeback since I don't know when. This is my first presidential election that I have deeply followed since last January and the battle is well on its way- the Clinton-backing Democrats against Obama-backing independents. Thats the battle with African-American women standing at the sidelines in SC and Latinos and Union workers standing at the sidelines in NV.
    So Hillary can come out strong or maybe just a little strong.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:17 pm |
  162. john

    Obama...Clinton? Obama/Clinton Clinton/Obama Obama/Edwards...at this point it doesn't matter....as long as it's a Democrat! America can't survive another 4yrs under the Republicans..Heck, we'll be lucky if there is an "Election", Bush could pull a "Musharif"..antagonize Iran..and Declare Martial Law...at this point,I just want this nightmare to End! John in deptford NJ

    January 9, 2008 at 6:17 pm |
  163. Erik

    I believe that substance will reign supreme over style. The issues facing the nation at this time directly affect Americans especially in their wallets. As we move forward, the economy, or lack their of, will become the dominant issue. Candidates who'll move forward will need to thoroughly explain their positions and plans to move us back toward economic prosperity.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:17 pm |
  164. Dwight Whipple

    I think both Obama and Clinton are excellent candidates. Possibly a hint as to who their running mate might be would tip my vote. How about an Obama/Edwards ticket? An African American running with a southern gentleman. Both are articulate and embody democratic values.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:17 pm |
  165. Lewis

    I would hope that the difference between who wins that race is decided based upon the ISSUES! It would be disappointing if the difference was pure based upon esthetics.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:17 pm |
  166. Jawinka Smith


    What will ultimately decide the outcome? Experience.

    The American people aren't stupid. They recognize BS when they hear it. Obama continues to back up his talk with more talk of what he's talked about! What on Earth has he done? I don't know, but I sure know a lot about what he would have done!

    Talk is cheap. We can go to church to become inspired. We need someone with some experience tackling issues, and I think the American people will eventually see that Obama doesn't cut it.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:17 pm |
  167. Deborah

    The answer if found in the dictionary. Edwards and O’Bama are “passionate” (found between passim and passive) about becoming president. Hillary is “compassionate” (found between compass and compatible) about our country. This has nothing to do with a coffee shop but was driven home during the last debate.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:17 pm |
  168. Mona

    Who really knows what the 'twenty-second attention span public' will decide to do. I'm constantly amazed at the number of people who say they haven't decided–or better yet–the ones who say, they haven't been "given" enough information. Here's a thought–how about cracking a book? Or doing some research on your own. Too many people are waiting for someone to say something that "moves" them. They need a soundbite, and the skilled politicians know this. Hillary "worked" it the other day with the crack in her voice–and it worked.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:17 pm |
  169. Diego Miranda

    Jack, with all your respect, i think the answer is obvious, the voters will.
    however if you want to know how will they decide?, i think PR gurus are working on that right at this moment. they're getting paid as well, millions of dollars for the campaing, a couple hundred thousands for the gurus.
    by the way, i love the show. and im from san salvador, central america.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:18 pm |
  170. Linda Crawford

    There is still a 3 way battle, though most of the media would like to eleminate John Edwards because he represents the strongest threat to the entrenched corporatist status quo. And big corporatist media, excluding CNN, has tried to pretend John Edwards does not exist and to create a battle between two candidates because it is a good story.
    The outcome will be determined by the voters if the electronic computer voting machines which have been proven to be very easy to hack don't just choose our candidate once more.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:18 pm |
  171. Danny

    EXPERIENCE after George Bush, enough changes. Its time to go back to stability. With Obama as VP wow what a team.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:18 pm |
  172. DEVINDER, Toronto

    Experience is more important in any job in this world, the US voters should actually decide

    January 9, 2008 at 6:18 pm |
  173. lynn Ridley in Pittsburgh

    Jack, Why must this be characterized as a "battle"? That is a media come-on. Both candidates and John Edwards represent the hopes of ordinary people to overcome the anguish brought about by the politics of conservatives like Bush and his minions. I wish that I could vote for all 3 at once; why not a triumverate?

    January 9, 2008 at 6:18 pm |
  174. basil

    'What will ultimately decide the outcome of the battle between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton?'

    As long as it's not a bunch of misogynistic media morons intent on furthering their own careers at the expense of a fair and unbiased campaign process, I can live with whatever the outcome is.


    January 9, 2008 at 6:18 pm |
  175. Hasan Kazi

    Jack, although I wish the millions of independent voters would decide the outcome, if history was to repeat itself, a handful of supreme court judges may get to show their muscles again and seal the fate of democracy.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:19 pm |
  176. Randy Slovacek


    What will ultimately decide the outcome of the battle between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton will be if people follow their own hearts and instincts as opposed to following who they "believe" the winner will be. Often, people want to vote for a "winner" so they will vote for the candidate who looks to be in the lead.

    NH shows us that people can vote for themselves and not follow the polls. The past week gave us "Obama-mania" and suddenly it seemed like it was all over. And it wasn't. I hear a lot of people saying "Well, it looks like Obama can do it and maybe Hillary can't, so I might vote for Obama" – which makes no sense.

    If people vote for who they WANT as opposed to who they THINK will win, that will ultimately decide this as an honest race between two good candidates.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:19 pm |
  177. Daniel

    It is very simple. The Clinton's have used all their tricks to sway voters in NH and I have to give them credit regardless of how descriptive they were but it is all over. You can't keep crying, crying and crying. The only thing they can do is distort the truth about Obama and it will catch up with them. Nevada and SC will decide the fate of Ms. Clinton. The buck will stop on Super Tuesday though!

    Springfield, VA

    January 9, 2008 at 6:19 pm |
  178. Jeff

    I applaud the voters of N.H. to make this race go on – allowing the american voters to futher vet the candidates and allow the american people to decide who will win. I will say however, that while candidates do need to tune and recommunicate their message over the course of a campaign, I am completely turned off by Candidates – like Clinton and Romney – who completely change their message or steal the sound bits of others. Clinton's victory speach "its personal", "fight for those that don't have a voice and are invisible", fighting for change", "the young voters" – um, these are all Barack and Edwards themes for the last year. How is Clinton going to change things when the Clinton's themselves have been a big part of this partisian argument for the past 15 years. And do we really want three decades of either a Bush or Clinton in office? How is that Change? And Mitt Romney – no brainer on how much he changes positions.

    So now that I've said my peace, it's still the American voter that will decide which candidate they want to see in office.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:19 pm |
  179. Munya Munos

    Jack, to put it simply, race will simply trump political sense. Hillary is to all intents and purposes an intellectual midget but her skin is politically correct. I hope we can honestly discuss this dimension of the Clinton/Obama duel without sweeping it under the rag!

    January 9, 2008 at 6:19 pm |
  180. Martin V

    Experience will be the key issue. After 8 years of Bush, America knows that it's no time to experiment with newcomers like Obama. This whole Oprah business along with his inconsistent record on the war is making him look more like a hype than someone who can get things done.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:19 pm |
  181. nana

    Well, it has to do with the polls and how people actually like the speeches so the people should decide in which canditates Obama or Clinton would win. The conclusions of who would win have to do with what the people want and everybody expects change. I really hope the topic change leaves the subject healthcare there are more important subjects beside healthcare how about Education and what all the opther subjects are.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:19 pm |
  182. Tim

    Something to note is that John Edwards voiced his disagreement in 2004 with Nader for running because he cost Kerry the nomination...isn't he the Nader of this democratic election? The second he drops out his votes will go to Barack Obama and Hillary won't have a chance.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:19 pm |
  183. Dorothy Weintraub

    What should determine the ultimate winner between the two candidates is the ability to affect change. Unfortunately, the one question that Obama has never been asked is how he intends to do that. Whereas, Clinton’s track record has already proven that she can.
    More unfortunately, the laziness of many Americans will prevail – they will take their cues from the sound bites and the pundits who after all have no more insight that an educated citizen who sits down and does the research themselves into the candidates positions.
    If anything the last 7 years have proven, the likeability factor should be discarded in favor of the ability factor!

    January 9, 2008 at 6:19 pm |
  184. Mari

    When you consider two candidates for one job, you compare their resumes and weigh their latest experiences most heavily. Whoever distinguishes themselves with their work ethic and garners respect amongst their colleagues is probably the best qualified for the job they seek. Most senate observers question Obama's work ethic as he has missed many important votes and hasn't held a single hearing on the foreign relations committee he chairs. People will look at that and realize there is little substance behind him and he is underqualified for the Presidency.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:19 pm |
  185. Patty Davis


    I see Hillary's victory in NH as a backlash against Edwards & Obama for their roughing her up at the last debate. Even the moderator's question regarding her likability was seen as a personal attack. She handled it with humor, but Obama's comment that she was likeable enough seemed dismissive (he didn't even look up or smile). I was considering Edwards or Obama, but now i'm leaning towards Hillary. It looked like the men at the debate except for Richardson, were bashing her over the head with the proverbial glass ceiling. The news media seemed to join in. I don't see any need for the bashing, their programs do not seem that different. The men are a little bit too full of themselves.


    January 9, 2008 at 6:20 pm |
  186. Pramod

    This race will be decided soon when american people realize experience count. Talking about hope & change is nothing when you don't have a experience to deliver the promise. Anybody can give speeches that full of hope I think the people of this country need to realize that.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:20 pm |
  187. Abrar

    I think the way Rebublican Noinee becomes more clear, the Democrates will slowly starting the Democrat who can compete Republicans best!! No matter what happens, Democrats really want to win this election and Republican results will soon start to show the impact on Obama and Clinton campaign.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:20 pm |
  188. Cedric

    Bill Clinton. His defiance in going after Obama's position on the war and calling it a "fairy tale" reminded me of his finger wagging defiance in refuting the allegations that he had an affair with Monica. Eventually, people are going to realize they want to get off the Bush/Clinton bandwagon.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:21 pm |
  189. Liz

    What's going to decide the battle is EXPERIENCE, EXPERIENCE, EXPERIENCE and IT'S THE ECONOMY STUPID!!!!! HILLARY WINS!!!!! Battle over

    January 9, 2008 at 6:21 pm |
  190. Art

    The Democratic nomination will depend upon whether or not we think that Hillary is electable in the general election, and what current events are occuring over the next few months.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:21 pm |
  191. Matt- Tempe, AZ

    Lucky you, Jack: it will be the media who decides whether Hillary or Obama wins. Consider how before a couple of weeks ago, when yourself and other pundits near-unanimously started promulgating a false dichotomy between "change" and "experience," the only candidates who were really saying much about "change" were Obama and Edwards. Since the media has framed the issues in these terms, especially as an explanation for why Obama took Iowa, the dynamic of debate between candidates has been altered dramatically and voters have made up their minds that whoever more convincingly spouts off this arbitrary mantra of "change" is who they'll vote for. It's heartening to know American voters are so suggestible. Thanks for making up our minds for us, guys!

    January 9, 2008 at 6:21 pm |
  192. Mark

    What makes people think Rudy is the right man for the job? He's a Bush clone and would start a new war in a heartbeat. Living abroad now, I have witnessed open hostility from every country I do business in and the priority is to repair relations with everyone and to focus on our economy, now heading for a recession. Does Rudy have any foreign relations or economic management experience? none. A consensus builder like Obama or someone with past White House experience like Hillary would actually bring more stability to the world stage. Enough arrogant people in charge of our military and diplomacy; 8 years of that was enough. Although I support his moderate views on social issues, Rudy is not fit to be president and to keep the peace while being tough on terrorism. I welcome harmony and balance and to be proud of our U.S. president when I am abroad.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:22 pm |
  193. Howard

    That battle between Senator Obama and Senator Clinton will be deicide, not on experiences. It will be decided on like ability and who can sell the message of change. If Clinton makes comment like “NH gave me my Comeback, now let us bring America it’s Comeback” with President Clinton standing by her , the media and the people (the common man ) will think a comeback to 90’s when William Jefferson Clinton was President. While that is a change it is not looking to the future but the past .
    The people want to look to future a change for the better that not only look to a strong economy, but a reliable form of healthcare that does invade our lives, and a tax system that does not burden the middle class. That want a change that allows one to live the American dream without violating the Constitution.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:22 pm |
  194. sandy

    I believe experience will be the deciding factor in the race between Clinton and Obama. We've just gone through putting a rookie in the White House and it's been a disaster. We need somebody with some foreign policy experience, and I believe that Bill Clinton as 'first gentleman' will be a great representative for our country.
    I voted for Obama to be my senator from Illinois and I have to admit to some resentment against him for the poor job he's done so far; he's too busy walking on water to do my state much good. I would prefer he do his time in the Senate and get some experience under his belt before he reaches for the brass ring.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:22 pm |
  195. Mike

    It was the Bradley Effect that caused Hillary to win the primary. When you have an overwhelmingly white primary, you're bound to have people who lie to make themselves feel better about their prejudices.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:22 pm |
  196. Don Shannon

    Obama is a perfect Republicam ploy. If he doesn't win the nomination he will scream "race!' at the top of his voice, and all of the African-Americans(inclluding Oprah I suspect) will refuse to vote for the Democratic candidate, thus giving the election to the Republicans. If he does win the nomination, the Republican slime machine will kick in, and he'll be destroyed along with the Democratic chances for regaining the White House. God only knows what they have on him but they seem to think it is earth shattering
    Better yet the GOP gets a twofer. Hillary won't be able to run again having lost. and the Democrats will never forgive Obama for costing them the election and he won;t be able to be elected third assistant dog-catcher.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:23 pm |
  197. Lorry Mulhern

    What will ultimately decide? Well, huge corporate media will decide, of course, Jack. Are you, or is anybody on CNN talking about the fact that as of today, after only two state campaigns, that the delegate count is 25 Clinton, 24 Obama and 18 John Edwards? With 48 states yet to vote, looks to me like Edwards still has plenty of room to pick up the delegates he needs. But if you and other like you continue to paint it as a two person race, how long will it be before your brush strokes it into a one person race. Frankly there are few true journalists reportin on television anymore. And shame on you for selling out the American public, in this way.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:23 pm |
  198. Keith Osentoski

    Yesterday Hillary Clinton shut down all the polls and experts, and proved that there is no mathematical formula for elections, it all lies in the voice of Americans engaging themselves in the political system and casting their votes accordingly. She fought her way back to the top, and crashed Obama wave right into the shore of reality, but it's still anybody’s race. I believe the deciding factor in this race is not only going to be the ability of candidates to catch each other in vulnerable moments and expose them, but just how that candidate responds. This time around, Americans are not only looking at issues, they're looking at personalities. Although Obama seems to be leading in this category, yesterday proved that people are not only listening, but also liking Hillary.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:23 pm |
  199. jeannette

    I think there are several determinants for the outcome. Do we want the visionary whose abilities are not yet known, but who inspires us to do better than we have? Do we want a pragmatist who may rely a little TOO much on the past when we desperately want a new future, but whom we know to be extraordinarily smart, more than competent, and able to make wise choices of those who will share her leadership? Do we want to close our eyes and leap in the presence of someone, in our gut, we DO believe can lead us to become a United States that we have not yet been? Do we want our eyes wide open and work hard with an inspired if less than inspiring, experienced leader who has proven she knows how to get through and beyond inordinate difficulties, who already knows many of the world players firsthand, whom we DO know can take us forward to a better version of what we are? On the surface, I think it will boil down to the younger orator vs. the wise pragmatist, if we must use labels... but for once, I think it will boil down to Democrats choosing at a visceral level between two extremely competent, extraordinarily gifted and talented leaders. I do not agree with all of what either says. I don't believe either is an innocent in the world at all–don't want them to be anyway. We cannot afford innocence in the world as it is. I DO, believe, however, they care about the American people and would be president of ALL these United States, not just those who support them. It will boil down to the private passion of each voter in the primaries, and which speaks to that part of the most voters... for ALL the polling and spewing of the pundits. And how exciting it is NOT to know–an African American or a woman? FIRSTS of the highest order. bless them both.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:23 pm |
  200. Hilary Marmon

    Dear Jack,

    I believe that what will ultimately decide the Democratic race will be John Edwards" dropping out now. He's the spoiler. If he drops out most of his support will go to Barack Obama. I hope he does drop out.

    Thank you,

    Hilary, NYC

    January 9, 2008 at 6:23 pm |
  201. Matt Smith

    Jack, the cable companies should thank you for driving viewers away from Dish Network and back to them. Dish doesn't give me FOX news with their intro. package and I've had to watch CNN in the evening for my news. Your acidic anti-American, anti-Military, just plain bitter rhetoric has me screaming with phone in hand, give me back my cable!

    January 9, 2008 at 6:23 pm |
  202. Margaret from WI

    The United States has never had a female president. We have had one male president after another. Yes, Barack Obama is a male. Yes, he is black but he is still a male. When it comes right down to it I cannot believe there will be many women who will vote for another male. This country, this world, needs a strong female leader. Hillary happens to be at the right place at the right time and yes, she is ready and she is strong.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:24 pm |
  203. bnthdntht

    Who can win the big one. First we have Clinton who has had the republican slinging dirt at her since she came on the scene. Second we have Obama: he was in a senate race in Illinois that was against a disgraced republican(wife swapping, a ugly divorce,and etc.)they brought in the a black republican Alan Keyes at the last minute the joke was he didn't even live in the state. So the election was basically given to Obama. No republican machine,no swift boaters nothing. Do you believe the core republicans will be shy about using Obama's drug use,race,name,and friends against him. The lady that used the "B" to McCain against Clinton won't be shy in using the "N" in how to we beat the"""'.
    That lady represents the core republicans.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:24 pm |
  204. Lynn Harden

    Well...I certainly hope it's not teary eyes and finally getting one's voice at Hillary's age is not the only dynamic that compels thinking individuals to vote for Hillary. It occurs to me that if she is just now getting her voice, perhaps she may be unpracticed at sharing it...at least authentically so. In fact, if someone has been a first lady and a senator from a state as large as New York, dealing with life and death issues that affect Americans every day, I, for one, am frightened that she just found her voice over the last five days. And whose voice is it, anyway? We should all be worried. For that matter, Obama's "inexperience" somehow doesn't seem so bad. He seems to have had a voice all along.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:25 pm |
  205. Pamela in FL

    Hillary Clinton as "Obama-Lite" is a joke. This woman is known on the Hill as a "euphanism for a female dog" who would step over her own Mother to get to the White House again...

    America...don't fall for it...she is faking it...something I am SURE she has done in the past...

    January 9, 2008 at 6:26 pm |
  206. negi


    January 9, 2008 at 6:26 pm |
  207. samuel roman

    I do believe we need change at this time of history... but we can't afford to have Obama learn on the job. See what happend the last eight years of on the job training. I believe the people will vote for Hillary because she is for changes and has some experience over Obama.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:27 pm |
  208. Derek in Texas

    There shouldn't even be a battle...if the 'independent' minded of the Granite State hadn't been so stubborn that they couldn't stand being pigeonholed and voted against what the polls said, then Obama would have won and Clinton's days would be numbered. What's wrong with being pigeonholed if it's the right decision? And why would 'independent' minded NH want to vote for Clinton when she's more of the same old stuff anyways? How independent is that? I live in Texas and I can still see that. What they forgot is that if Obama gets the nom, all those fed up Republicans who were probably going to sit this one out will do just that, but if Clinton is nominated, the same cracker barrels will be out in mass again...do they really want a close race? Heck, Gore even said the only way he'd get back in is if Clinton fails...imagine that landslide? Gore/Obama! If the Dems lose in November, we'll have the Graniteheads to blame for it because going back to 1988, the NH primary winners have ended up being the nominees.

    Thanks New Hampshire!!!

    January 9, 2008 at 6:27 pm |
  209. nana

    Barrack Obama

    January 9, 2008 at 6:27 pm |
  210. Chris

    As other democrats such as Gravel, Richardson and even Edwards inevitably drop out of the race, their supporters are going to be the deciders and will most likely lean towards Obama. Its that simple.

    Ottawa, Canada

    January 9, 2008 at 6:27 pm |
  211. Ken

    Jack, the outcome of Clinton vs Obama will depend on whether enough people in this country can put aside the politics of fear, secrecy and apathy of the past seven years and believe in hope.

    Hillary came out in New Hampshire with a message that believing in hope and change is foolish and naive. Clearly that message served her well, so she has no incentive to change it anytime soon.

    Barack's message has been one of reaching for the sky, and it's only natural that the response is to tell people to get their heads out of the clouds.

    Clearly Barack Obama believes in the American people, but if the American people aren't willing to believe in themselves, it's more likely they'll choose to remain "invisible," and opt for Hillary, who promises to be their champion and speak for them as they continue to have no voice.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:28 pm |
  212. Michael Manchester

    Jack, if experience was more important than talent, then NBA coaches would draft over the hill has been's versus young super stars like Le Bron James. If experience were more important than character, then non-profits all across the world would seek out money-hungry CEO's to run their organizations.

    The will of the American people, and their desires, will choose our next president. But let's not let this "experience" theme get completely out of control: Character is just as important as experience. Because you might have all the experience in the world, but if you're just another Washington politician, then America doesn't have all that much to be excited about when the election is said and done.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:28 pm |
  213. Troy

    I think what will decide the outcome will be a divided nation. Who is stronger? Everyone is making this a “racial” or “gender” race which will ultimately divide our nation between men and women, African Americans and all others who reside in this great country. Come on people we are AMERICANS. Can't we make it a race to fix our problems instead of the path we are taking? Let's focus on the economy

    January 9, 2008 at 6:28 pm |
  214. mariama

    How about you guys have a little humility and apolpgise to Sen. Clinton. You all trashed her and thought that the American people will follow. Be warned the more you try tell us what to do the more we put you guys to shame. We the American people will decide not you with your own motives to boost your ratings.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:29 pm |
  215. Tracy

    Well Jack, to answer you question,you have experts that say this and that, but the it will come down to the black vote,the Clintions are well liked,by the black community, but,but it will be very hard for Mrs Clintion,to stop something that the everyday black person would say to themself or others that their will never be a black persident, and they have said this for years.And to be quite frank Mr Cafferty,black people are not going to let history be denied they all ready fill that they are wrongful denied rights, and jobs you name it,so what make you think they are not going to rise to the challenge for Mr Obama, all you hear is talk of the white votes In Iowa or New Hampshire but they black vote will decide this race, but just tell the public to thank the great god almighity for the change,and chance that we get to see a man and a women together make history as one.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:29 pm |
  216. Ed,Ellenville,New York

    Jack,the race between Obama and Hillary is skewed by republicans that support Obama under a false flag and have no interest in him winning,just her losing. You simply cannot ignore the fact that so many Obama voters either support him or will vote republican. All these cries about bringing the nation together is just doubletalk for please don't put a democrat like Hillary in the WH or all my scams will get halted. A true voter for change would opt for Edwards.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:29 pm |
  217. Linda

    Forget the misty eyes. Hoorah for Clinton standing up for herself at the pile on.

    THE motivating factor for our office of 23 women ages 19 to 68 was the "Iron my shirt B****" AND her experience. It will get all of our votes.

    Obama is skin deep and a smooth inspriational talker, but will he love us in the morning? Edwards is a Professional Candidate. How many of us could leave our jobs for 5 years to make campaining our daily job?

    Clinton is the most vetted experienced not only by Repubs, politics but was ALL women know about.....and it is called life.

    Alabama Dems, Repubs and Independs waiting for the Feb 5 Super Tuesday vote

    January 9, 2008 at 6:29 pm |
  218. Kat

    The nerve of Bill Clinton to accuse Obama of spinning "fairy tales". He should know. "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" was one of the most classic fairy tales ever told. If he is back in the White House, lock up the interns! The most important qualities of a good president is character and judgement. The Clintons don't have it. . . and I know he's not the one running, but he has certianly interjecte dhimself into this campaign.

    As for experience, Barack Obama is smart. Smart enough to build an incredible campaign. He will be smart enough to create an amazing cabinet and get the most experienced people in areas where he is lacking expertise. No president is an expert on everything, but picking the right experts takes brains and judgment. . .just look at how Bush did in that regard.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:29 pm |
  219. Gail A. White

    What will put Hillary Clinton into the White House is in Ellen Goodman's words do we put our trust in a change "icon" or an "agent" of change. Hillary is the agent of change with know-how and determination. Hillary is the one for our time of renewl. Gail White

    January 9, 2008 at 6:30 pm |
  220. Lynn

    I certainly hope that it’s not Hillary's teary eyes and finally getting her voice at her is not the only dynamic that compels thinking individuals to vote for Hillary. It occurs to me that if she just now got her voice, perhaps she may be unpracticed at sharing it…at least authentically so. In fact, if someone has been a first lady and a senator from a state as large as New York...and has been dealing with life and death issues that affect Americans every day, I, for one, am frightened that she just found her voice over the last five days. And whose voice is it, anyway? We should all be worried. Obama’s “inexperience” somehow doesn’t seem so bad. He seems to have had clear a voice all along.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:30 pm |
  221. MJ

    The media has alot of power and influence over what voters see and hear. That moment when Hilary got emotional on the eve of the New Hampshire primary became a "media moment". It was played OVER and OVER on every news channel and all over the internet. It was not the only factor in her SLIGHT win over Obama, but I believe it did influence the women of NH to feel sorry for her. That coverage, combined with over inflated polls, gave everyone a sense that an Obama victory was inevitable. If we the voters have learned anything, it is that NOTHING in this race is inevitable! Barack Obama gets this woman's vote because he is the right candidate at the right time. I urge you to get out and support the candidate of your choice because this is the most important election this country has faced in my lifetime and EVERY VOTE COUNTS!

    January 9, 2008 at 6:30 pm |
  222. Delane

    I truly hope the battle is not won with a tear or two here and there. 35 years of expereince by association that started at age 25 by Sen. Clinton doesn't add up. That makes me wonder if the next time I need a plumber, his wife will show up! Or maybe the electrician's wife?

    I hope people do not get caught in this "making history" for either candidate. If there are things this country needs right now, they are inspiration and belief in themselves and their government. We certainly haven't had anything but fearmongering for seven years, so it is a breath of fresh air to hear HOPE and 'WE CAN' , with serious people and good judgment to carry it into the hills and vales of America, finally breaking the partisan divide that has murdered getting anyting done in the Beltway.

    Sen. Clinton says she has found her voice. What was she using before last night? And now that she has found it, what will change? Am I wary? Yes.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:31 pm |
  223. Alicia K

    The race will be decided by the voters based on the information they receive. You made Hillary out to be so bad, that people were embarrassed to say that they really wanted her in the polls. Then you turn that into a black thing. Guys wake up! It's a woman thing! Be fair to her! She has the experience and a true desire to get this country back on track. Try to understand her and fairly give us the accomplishments of both. You play up the rock star quality of Obama. Ask him what has he done, truely challange him. You question Hillary's tears. Why don't you question Obama's Change. How? Will the republicans automatically like his liberal policies because he has a cute smile?
    Bill helped her, but you make that out to be bad too. Hey guys, Two for one is great! If we are attacked internationally, and economically we are faltering, the two of them may be just what we really need.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:31 pm |
  224. Robert Clayton

    I think the outcome between Clinton and Obama will be decided when they start stating issues and what they would do as president. Not just stating we will change. Just what changes will you both make.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:31 pm |
  225. Charles Reaves

    On balance, Obama's leadership ability, experience, coalition-building skills, and message consistency will make the difference. I like Obama because he is a self-made man. Subtract Hillary's years as the first lady of Arkansas and the first lady of the United States, and ask yourself what has she really done on her own that many other talented women have not also done? Could she have been as successful in her public office career as New York's Junior Senator without Bill holding her hand and running interference for her? Maybe, maybe not. Obama, on the other hand, has definitely managed to get this point in his life without the spousal mentorship of a former multi-term red-state governor and U.S. President. Finally, do not discount the 7 years Obama spent in Illinois State Legislature, which, if added to the time he has spent in the US Senate, actually gives him more elected public office experience than Hillary. Obama has my support to the very end of this process, which, I trust, will conclude at his inauguration as President of the United States of America.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:31 pm |
  226. Homer

    Jack, it may well be that Diebold, the manufacturer of voting machines, will decide the Democrat primaries, as well as the Republican primaries and the general election. Take a look at the differences in percentages Hillare and Obama received in areas using manual ballots and precincts using Diebold scanners in New Hampshire last evening. Wasn't it Rove that said Hilary would be the Democrats candidate.


    January 9, 2008 at 6:31 pm |
  227. Lynn

    I for one would like to know what changes Obama has in mind. For all his talk on "change", I have yet to hear what exactly those changes would be and how he plans on bringing them about. Is he all talk and no clear change????

    January 9, 2008 at 6:32 pm |
  228. Abhishek

    First: Experience, Experience, and Experience! Obama can inspire and motivate people around the country but once he's at the white house, he will fail to do the job right. Second reason is, are the major issues driving this race. We need a canidate who can provide American people with the incentives to help this country grow, which is clearly Hillary Clinton.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:33 pm |
  229. Jana

    What will decide the battle? The American voters. After 1 caucas and 1 primary the pundits and pollsters were digging Hillary's grave...and dancing on it! Don't the voters in the other 48 states have a say in whom the nominee will be? Frankly, I think the 24/7 cable newscasters run out of things to discuss and have to "make news by making waves," ad nauseam. When will it be over? When the fat lady sings and many more votes have been cast.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:34 pm |
  230. Ben W. in New York

    As much as I hate to say it, I truly believe that Hillary is going to come out of this on top. Personally, I am an Obama fan. Hillary's connections across the country and massive amounts of money will help her pull ahead of Obama. People will begin to realize that despite being an incredibly motivational speaker, thats all he is turning out to be, with little experience or solid policy to back it up. I'm going to still support Barack, but I think Hillary is inevitable.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:34 pm |
  231. Drew

    Democrats feel like they have been excluded from the process since the Bush Administration took over in 2000. The choice Democrats have to make is whether to support a candidate who will attempt to shift the balance of political power to the left (Clinton), excluding the American right, or a candidate who will attempt to bring together Americans from the right, left, and center (Obama). I hope the American people can see that, whoever is elected, we will only make real/lasting progress by bringing all sides to the table and allowing all voices, left, right and center, to shape the future of this country.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:34 pm |
  232. Juan


    Edwards is gonna be the key in this democratic primary. I see Obama/Edwards '08 as a great ticket. If Edwards would drop out and throw an endorsement Obama's ways I think we will finally come out with a front running ticket.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:35 pm |
  233. Ray

    Youth will decide who wins the democratic nomination and ultimately the Presidency. We have all heard the "change" word from all the candidates but Obama started the 'change" wave and this country wants oit desperately. We want America and Americans to be respected around the world again. I think all the candidates with the possible exception of Romney, who is finding out the Presidency still can't be bought, are too "Washington entrenched" to offer and deliver real change. The youth and ideolgy of Obama is what we need to lead us into the future and restore our place of respect and leadership in this new and changing world.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:35 pm |
  234. Chris

    Jack, The batte between Obama and Hillary should be decided on real data. That will only happen when the media starts reporting the news and stops shaping public opinion. Why is the media in Kenya... This is designed to shape public opinion. Don't forget Clinton was the favorite for New Hampshire 1.5 weeks ago... Obama did well to come in a close second.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:37 pm |
  235. Meme

    The corporations – that control vote counting – may think Clinton is the most corporate friendly of the Democrats or that she is easier to beat than Obama.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:37 pm |
  236. Mark Spencer

    Obama will be president. I will bet you anything you want.

    Now, it may be Hillary's turn, but even if she wins, he will keep his cool and when she is gone in 4 or 8 years, he will be president.

    I believe if he can do this well organizing a campaign against the Clinton machine, if he wins he will be capable of being president this time and ready to lead...

    But this is great for America. By the end of this campaign we will see if the American people not only want change but are really ready for it. It will also season him if he wins because he has made his stand... he has to stand up to her without punching back.

    I am really refreshed to hear his message today.... He will be tempted and urged and bullied to hit back, but he cannot and maintain his message.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:37 pm |
  237. Chike Nwosu, Netherlands

    The two Johns – Edwards and McCain and how long they stay in the race.

    The majority of younger age-groups, male and anti-Clinton votes for Democrats is currently split between John E and Obama. John E drops out and Obama will take the larger portion if these votes, tipping the 'tight' balance in his favour.

    For the states where independents are allowed to vote for either party (and when both primaries are run on the same day), what John M gets, Obama loses.

    The longer these two Johns stay in the race (especially John E), the more the Clintons' can sustain the race – and inevitably (if neither John drops out early) win the Democratic mandate.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:37 pm |
  238. Shawn P

    As long as Edwards stays in the election, the more he hurts Obama's campaign. This can only help Hillary and if he doesn't get out before too long there is a good chance there will be NO CHANGE in Washington. Hopefully Edwards wants change enough to let reality sink in and withdraw soon.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:38 pm |
  239. Ron

    The race between Sen Obama and Sen Clinton will be decided when John Edwards no longer has the funds to continue in the campaign. Then, if he does what he should do and lends his support to Obama, the race will be over. There, and I'm not a cowering political pundit.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:38 pm |
  240. Alexander

    In response to Bill Clinton’s comment, directed towards Senator Barack Obama’s story and message, “this is the biggest fairytale I’ve seen…” It is a travesty to the commitment of the African-American community and above all to the dream of Martin Luther King Jr. and it demands an apology. While democratic candidates may disagree on the issues, the personal attack of the Clinton political machine is dishonest and abhorrent. It’s high time the democratic people, and all people, reject this personal attack and vote for both a change and a new face of American politics. And to quote one of your distinguished colleagues and respected democratic strategist, Donna Brazil, “African-Americans have long lifted up democrats, it is now time for democrats to lift up an African-American.” The so-called fairytale that Barack Obama has put forth represents a hope and breath of fresh air that has long eluded politicians of our age. We only have to look so far in the archives of history over the last 27 years to see the tactics and results of the political dynasty of the Bushes and Clintons. Politics as usual has become divisive, dishonest, and in short disillusioned the American people into apathy and complacency at their inability to affect the system. However, with the new message of Barack Obama, the possibility, and yes the possibility of change is on the horizon. And by the way, whoever said politics by definition should be mean-spirited and not inspiring?

    January 9, 2008 at 6:39 pm |
  241. Douglas Getts

    I'm happy Hillary showed some emotion. Our commander-in -chief showed nothing for 7 minutes on Sept 11th.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:39 pm |
  242. James Brown

    John Edwards is holding all the trump cards right now , the longer he stays in the race , the bigger Clinton wins.

    If Edwards would get out NOW , OBAMA would run the table on Clinton , it wouldn't even be close.

    If Clinton wins the nomination , it will be a dream come true for the Republicans,they will chew her up and spit her out , as they laugh all the way to the White House.

    Jim Brown

    Eugene Oregon

    January 9, 2008 at 6:39 pm |
  243. Shirley Jones

    I guess I see things differently than some of your viewers. The 'emotion' Hillary displayed did not show her as a strong candidate to me. I saw it as a weakness and I asked myself: Is she going to sit down and cry every time she doesn't get her way in politics? Do we need a weak , cry-baby in the White House, or someone with some balls.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:41 pm |
  244. Lynn

    I for one would like to know what changes Obama has in mind. For all his talk on “change”, I have yet to hear what exactly those changes would be and how he plans on bringing them about. Is he all talk and no clear change???? It will be over when we know what we are voting for in addition to whom.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:41 pm |
  245. Judy

    I think that eventually people will get tired of being preached to and not talked at. He's beging to sound more like a preacher than a candidate. I want him to talk more about the issues and what's his plan to bring about this change. Yes, we all want a change in Wash. but without a plan you're still preaching to the choir and waitng on those hallelujah and amends.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:42 pm |
  246. Terry

    You people in the 24 hour a day media read way too much into these things. Barack won in Iowa and Hillary won in New Hampshire. It doesn't necessarily mean anything except that there are at least 4 decent candidates among the Democrats and people can waiver from one day to the next. Contrast that with the Republicans. The pickings are pretty sparse, thus a lower turnout and less excitement. What will decide all this in the end, are the voters. Unfortunately, you guys will have to wait.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:42 pm |
  247. cadmus

    for me, its going to be the ability to reach across the aisle and bring Americans together to work for the common good. there really is no shortage of ideas about specifics/ what we have not seen is the kind of optimism and participation that energises people to believe things can be done. again i will not predict anything, seeing what New Hamshire did to all the prophets.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:43 pm |
  248. Charlie

    God bless the Situation Room!

    If in fact this is the year that we see change… then Obama will win. The student loans line trumps tears. Besides… and you heard it here first.. “Hill Ain’t Bill” All of the efforts from celebrities and vote campaigns from the last election are paying off. The young people who felt disenfranchised in ’04 did not go away.. we’re back and angry at the old guard, Democratic leadership. Out with the old and in with the new. Blitzer-Cafferty in ’08.

    I love you guys!


    January 9, 2008 at 6:43 pm |
  249. Gary

    I think the key to Obama v Clinton will be the youth and independent turn-out. The past several voter turn-outs have been abysmal. There is a huge population in that younger and independent demographic. If the Iowa momentum continues to bring them out and they truly believe they can make a difference in selecting the future leadership of this country... they will.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:44 pm |
  250. Philip Ortiz

    I think what Hillary learned is that she is not 'The Inevitable Candidate' and not 'Ready to Lead'. Personally, I hope Obama wins the Democratic nod. To answer the question though, I believe the statement now more than ever, "It's the economy, Stupid." I believe that between Clinton and Obama, the candidate that proposes tax-reform to penalize companies that take jobs overseas will win. Knowing that Edwards has proposed just that, I'm surprised this element of his message falls mostly on deaf ears. The working middle-class rarely seem to grasp what's really needed to turn some things around. And 'GO OBAMA!'

    January 9, 2008 at 6:46 pm |
  251. Joseph in Arkansas

    What will decide the battle? Two words: John Edwards.

    There are only two democrats with a willingness to change the status quo in DC. Edwards and Obama. Clinton will not. If Edwards stays in the race, even pulling 3rd, he and Obama can join forces in an Obama/Edwards ticket and 66%+ of the democrats would be jump-up-and-down happy.

    Hillary has proven time and time again she cannot take a stand for the everyday person. Look at the bankrupcy bill – done for the banking industry against everyday voters; her vote on the prescription medicare bill – done for the insurance industry; even her continued support of Joe "Lying" Liebermann. Even as a lifelong democrat I'd rather vote for a Republican and make him clean up the doo-doo of his fellow partner in crime against the American people, George W. Bush, then put her in office. We Edwards people cannot stomach her and the continued assumption that we will vote her because she is the nominee.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:46 pm |
  252. Joan

    We will know the final results when all the states have their primaries

    January 9, 2008 at 6:50 pm |
  253. basil

    What will ultimately decide the outcome of the battle between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton?'

    As long as it's not a bunch of misogynistic media morons intent on furthering their own careers at the expense of a fair and unbiased campaign process, I can live with whatever the outcome is.


    January 9, 2008 at 6:52 pm |
  254. Theresa M.

    It is so simple, as everyone keeps on about "change", the only real change will be when we get rid of the men in the White House and put a woman in charge, now that will be the real "CHANGE".

    January 9, 2008 at 6:56 pm |
  255. Garson

    All of you guys got the primary wrong because none of you "report", you all "repeat ". Now will have to listen to terms like "got a bounce" from every talking head out there. I think some of the reaction was to your under reporting of anything worth knowing in this campaign. Hey you all get to sit around and get paid right or wrong...something like politicians.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:57 pm |
  256. Mel in Missoula, M T

    Jack –
    If Barack were to announce that Colin Powell would be his vice president...yep, I think that would do it!

    January 9, 2008 at 6:57 pm |
  257. Rose

    I think the key to Obama winning the election is for the voting machines to be checked, checked and then checked again. Otherwise, votes going to Obama will wind up in Clinton's column.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:57 pm |
  258. merv rainwater

    Dear Mr. Cafferty:

    I was born in 1960. I graduated at age 18 in 1978. My first opportunity to vote in 1980 rea-Bush, 1984 rea-Bush,
    1988 Bush, 1992 Clinton, 1996 Clinton, 2000 Bush, 2004 Bush, 2008 Clinton, 2012 Clinton, 2016 Jeb Bush,
    2020 Jeb Bush, 2024-Chel Clinton, 2028 Chel Clinton, 2032 Jen Bush, 2036 Jen Bush, 2040 I am 80 years old now!
    Had I known this was my american dream I would have never gone to sleep.

    Merv Rainwater

    January 9, 2008 at 6:58 pm |
  259. Ben

    I think Hillary is probably the most qualified of the Democrats. But I want the Democrats to win this time. I know you think you do too, but you always seem to coronate people who don't have a realistic chance to win. Do the names Mondale, Dukakis and Kerry ring a bell? These people had virtually no traction in a large swath of the country. Hillary may have the most experience of the Democrats, but there are a HUGE number of people west of the Mississippi River who won't vote for her under ANY circumstances. You probably think it's just the crazy right-wingers who listen to O'Reilly and Limbaugh, but it's not. It's moderate Republicans, it's an enormous number of independents, it's even no small number of Democrats. It's both rural and urban voters. The reputation she has by this group of people is undeserved and inaccurate, IMHO. But it's there, and if you blow off this sentiment, then there's a very good chance you're going to be scratching your head on election night saying "I can't believe it happened again."

    January 9, 2008 at 6:59 pm |
  260. fred jacobson

    With all the New Hampshire polls predicting an Obama win, why is there no discussion of foul play in the balloting. The governor is a democrat, after all. The husband of a former governor was the Clinton in New Hampshire co-chair.
    I was surprised to hear one of the TV commentators describe all of the Massachusetts license plates he saw in the parking lot at a Clinton rally.
    Do you think only the Republicans can steal votes?

    January 9, 2008 at 6:59 pm |
  261. Rose Hann

    I think Hillary will win in the end because we are now in a recession and as memory serves, the Clinton's clean up after the Bush's very well. Race is a non issue but gender is. We have admired Collin Powell and though I don't share the same admiration, Condoleeza Rice is Secretary of State. Men, regardless of race have held the highest office and look where we are. I think this country is way behind, it's time we give a chance to a woman. Statistics have shown female managers are more productive then their male counterparts. Come on America, I'm ready for a change, a gender change.

    January 9, 2008 at 6:59 pm |
  262. william

    Jack, I thought CNN stood for cable NEWS network, not cable make-the news network.

    January 9, 2008 at 7:00 pm |
  263. Lorenzo from Chicago

    The utimate decision for Obama rest in the hands of the media. I feel that no one has really put Obama to the test. I don't think I've seen him swet once. I believe that the tears from Hilary came from her fear of losing. I didn't like the emotions that were shown by Clinton, although, it did make her look like a concerned mother showing that she actually cares about the American people. But America is not baby, it needs a President not another parent. I would prefer to see her behave a little bit stronger. She's not even in office and she's already breaking down to the pressure.

    January 9, 2008 at 7:01 pm |
  264. Donald Menezes

    Clinton for President and Obama VP ......now theres some change! That ticket would energize this country like never before!!

    January 9, 2008 at 7:02 pm |
  265. Syamal

    I hope that US choose a candidate who will ift the economy of the country and global economy at large. Economy and foreign policies are not run by speeches of change and unification.

    There are indications that US economy is heading towards recession - it may not be apparent by Super Tuesday. US voters will choose between foreclosures/ job losses versus change / fresh faces in their politics.

    January 9, 2008 at 7:03 pm |
  266. Tyler

    Clinton can not be the nominee, and she cannot be on the ticket as VP either. Hillary is the most divisive candidate of either party and she will sway many independents and even some moderate Democrats to vote Republican because they don't want to see Hillary in office at all. Hillary will lose for the same reason Gore lost; people are still mad at Bill and don't want anything to do with that administration.

    At this point the Democrats need to wait until "Super Tuesday" then boot Hillary out of the race and take Richardson into consideration for VP or Secretary of State, unless Joe Biden wants in. Biden was the most qualified candidate running and thanks to the national media for focusing on the celebrity of Clinton, Obama, and Edwards, both he and Dodd have left the race. Biden, if he wants it, needs to be the Democratic VP nominee for the sake of him taking on Republicans next summer or Secretary of State since he knows every world leader on a first name basis.

    January 9, 2008 at 7:04 pm |
  267. jesse

    The one that can convince the voters that his or hers leadership can bring about the changes. calling for change is not enough.

    January 9, 2008 at 7:05 pm |
  268. Mohan from Cupertino California

    Judging the candidates to the same yard stick

    It is very easy to play monday morning quarterback. Senators and Congressional representatives are sent to Washington to particpate and make choices representative of their constituents. The media continues to underplay this very critical attribute and requirement in a leadership role and one so important to a person who is going to be the next President of this great country.

    If the following blog is true that Obama sidestepped voting 130 times then the playing field is not level. Does he have the right to make judgments about fellow candidates on bills that he chose not to participate. We all make misakes in our judgements but take a position and explain the change in position. That is the least middle class folks deserve.

    "In 1999, Barack Obama was faced with a difficult vote in the Illinois legislature — to support a bill that would let some juveniles be tried as adults, a position that risked drawing fire from African-Americans, or to oppose it, possibly undermining his image as a tough-on-crime moderate.
    In the end, Mr. Obama chose neither to vote for nor against the bill. He voted “present,” effectively sidestepping the issue, an option he invoked nearly 130 times as a state senator.

    January 9, 2008 at 7:05 pm |
  269. Chris

    I am so sick of the media telling me who the battle is between. This is the reason Edwards is not ranking as high in the polls. I am still a believer in Edwards! And, unless he drops out (which is not likely) before super Tuesday, I will NOT let the media tell me who I should vote for. I will vote for Edwards!

    Edwards '08
    Go, John!


    January 9, 2008 at 7:06 pm |
  270. Kat

    You have people coming out to vote! Which candidates are the inspiration for this? Obama for a start. You have had Bush then Clinton then another Bush now you are considering another Clinton?! 35 years of experience and you want more of it? Get some new blood in office and maybe you will see more people looking fondly on America

    January 9, 2008 at 7:07 pm |
  271. Weldon

    I think it is great to see a politician shed a tear rather than the whole nation shedding them.

    January 9, 2008 at 7:07 pm |
  272. H. Hammour

    Obama will bring peace to the world, we (People from Sudan/Africa) seeking for change, foriegn policy needs change.
    Obama got the change.
    World peace means better economy for the U.S, Obama can bring that peace.

    January 9, 2008 at 7:08 pm |

    Have we not learned from Bush's war-freak foreign affairs experience? Look what happen to America. Yet, we are now taking chances from another in-experienced Obama? Come on give me a break.

    January 9, 2008 at 7:08 pm |
  274. Patty Craven

    The key to Obama v Clinton will be the total failure of the Clinton machine and the total success of Barack Obama. Clinton has outrightly stolen Barack Obama's talking points, manner of presentation, and words. Fortunately, they cannot steal his soul, although they will try. But this time, the Clinton maneuvers and manipulations (the tears were NOT real, they were planned for hours! and Bill playing the race card infuriated many black people) are so transparent that most of the public can see right through it all. Ironically, the people who can't see through it are the gullible, rescuer-types (mostly middle-aged women, the pre-baby boomers, those over 60 now), who see themselves as owing a vote to Clinton because she's a woman. Even more ironically, there are black people who don't think Obama can win and it's the white folks who are having to convince them of Obama's electibility!!!

    January 9, 2008 at 7:09 pm |
  275. Kim

    Jack, I'll make a deal with you, an honesty contest between Hillary or Billary as I call them. I bet it won't go down, and the Clintons will decline, what do you think?

    We have the most motivated, inspiring, honest, intelligient, strategical leader in our midst, and with all the BS and lies over the past seven years will be a welcomed relief, from all three parties. Thus say the American Independent, Fed Up Republicans, and Tired and neglected African Americans.

    With the desparities open to the public, could you blame America's moral compass. Look what it did for Hillary, now she's a sensative woman, when she's losing.
    Ambition, go figure.

    January 9, 2008 at 7:11 pm |
  276. Noah

    Rhetoric is a poor substitute for action, and we have trusted only to rhetoric. If we are really to be a great nation, we must not merely talk; we must act big.
    Theodore Roosevelt

    January 9, 2008 at 7:12 pm |
  277. Hera Bell

    My husband who is a medical doctor in Canada beleives that the next US president will sahpe up the direction that the world will take on heakth care system.

    In this case we both hope that it will be a Democrat. I, as a female want Mrs. Clinton. But Obama will ok then any Republican.

    Education & Health are among among the first issues towards a good & more powerful nation. Not fabricating new wars for economical oil games.


    Hera Bell

    January 9, 2008 at 7:14 pm |
  278. Garson

    All of you guys got the primary wrong because none of you “report”, you all “repeat “. Now we will have to listen to terms like “got a bounce” from every talking head out there. I think some of the reaction was to your (the media) under reporting of anything worth knowing in this campaign. Hey you all get to sit around and get paid right or wrong…something like politicians.

    Sorry for the original incorrect email address

    January 9, 2008 at 7:17 pm |
  279. jim

    hillary will win it all eventually because she is more a centrist than barock, and people in the end will always pick substance over idealism, because it is the nature of all true democrats. a dream is nice, but it is just a dream. hillary goes from a dream to a plan, and thats what its all about.

    January 9, 2008 at 7:18 pm |

    Have we not learned from Bush's war-freak foreign affairs experience? Look what happened to America. Yet, we are now taking chances from another in-experienced Obama? Come on give me a break.

    January 9, 2008 at 7:25 pm |
  281. Kim

    Hey Jack;
    why don't we just end all the rhetoric, Barack's ideas and solutions to healthcare are on his site. Good journalist used to do their homework when Presidential Candidates lied, now they have to be led to the stories and a light shown on the truth.
    Last time I checked, Baracks the one who wants to shine a light on the DC Dark Stars.
    Everybody is acting like they don't know what happened? Duh, Diebold strikes again.

    January 9, 2008 at 7:26 pm |
  282. Eric Howlett

    There was a very persuasive discussion hosted by the Heritage
    Foundation today suggesting that the surge might actually be

    If that's true, it would be compounding tragedy to leave too
    soon, but it would require a peace-keeping force in Iraq for
    many years.

    So then - you love irony - only Obama could persuade the
    country to "stay the course."

    The people know, or will come to believe during this campaign,
    that Obama goes to the heart of any matter and tells the truth.

    January 9, 2008 at 7:29 pm |
  283. Kim

    Everytime Barack tries to stick to the issues the Clintons are bringing on the drama. No more Dramatic scenes this is the Presidency. In private is one thing, but to be asked about a bad hair do that day and put on so, is just plain weak as a Presidential candidate and the Clintons played the DC games so well. Check out that diebold and have a paper trail before we have a little problem with the counts please. The machines are adding in favor or partician favors right now. None of them works worth a damn.

    January 9, 2008 at 7:29 pm |
  284. ida

    i have aquestion why was barack obama name frist last night ? when it was clinton that was frist ????????????????? it,s not fair an i dont trust obama . i feel that he,s gonna do all that he can for his country an nothing for us .

    January 9, 2008 at 7:32 pm |
  285. Kim

    The Blue Tsunami, that we promised you all in November of 2006, that's who.

    Can't you see the wave of change we voted for? We the American People do.
    He's not scripted and speaks to the spirit of what Americans used to have pride in representing. Decency and honesty!

    Barack On The Campaign 08
    Isn't it Great!

    January 9, 2008 at 7:33 pm |
  286. Bimbo

    It comes down to one thing: who looks best in a swimsuit.

    January 9, 2008 at 7:35 pm |
  287. Kathleen

    It's kind of interesting to see how the media are trying to shape the campaigns but the public is not listening to them. Thankfully this time people seem to be actually taking the time to be informed about the candidates and are realizing that their vote really does matter. Hopefully there won't be any strange happenings when the voting for president starts, as there were in the last couple of campaigns. Any of the people running should be able to do a better job than the one that was done by this administration. Question: Why is John Edwards not getting more media coverage?

    January 9, 2008 at 7:35 pm |
  288. silke wedding

    Diebold, again

    January 9, 2008 at 7:37 pm |
  289. Robert Adams

    I have to laugh every time one of the weak minded says if Hillary is the nominee, they will vote republican, lol. They are so determined to have change BUT being simpletons, they would vote for four more years of republican lies and killing our poor soldiers rather than vote Hillary. My gran used to say, "cut off your nose to spite your face" and she would roar with laughter at some of the things that get said today.

    January 9, 2008 at 7:41 pm |
  290. Duane

    Hopefully the voters of America will see the need for change, instead of the “status quo”. America is too great of a country to be run by two families. Can you imagine what the history books would look like if it went George H.W. Bush (1989-1993), Bill Clinton (1993-2001), George W. Bush (2001-2009), with a possibility of Hillary Rodham Clinton (2009-2017), how about Jeb Bush in 2017 to ???

    It’s time for a change!!


    January 9, 2008 at 7:43 pm |
  291. Joe

    Well... more than likely, Obama will be caught in a scandal not unlike Gary Hart and disappear from the race, leaving Clinton and Edwards. Then, Edwards wins because the country is not ready for a woman as a president.

    January 9, 2008 at 7:45 pm |
  292. Phillip


    I've been watching several of the news channels, with a little disdain I might add. "The Pundits Got It Wrong!", no they did not. Obama got the percentage of votes that you guys said he would. What was not taken into consideration was the backlash toward Edwards for his perceived indifference toward Hillary's emotional moment. Period! End of Story. No racist movement against Obama, no big push for Hillary, no mystical magic powder.....


    January 9, 2008 at 7:51 pm |
  293. Jack from Pennsylvania

    I believe strongly that the winner in this Democratic race, will be the candidate that emulates the best traits of their opponet. Like the Carthiginians and the Romans in the 1st Punic War, either the Elephant must learn to swim, or the whale to fight on land. Obama must be able to hook the voters that Hilary has enthralled with her authority and "I will solve the problem attitude. Hilary must appeal to the younger generation, which I believe is leaning towards Obama. I think Clinton is appealing more to the younger race, and can sense what she needs to do to win this election. It's a long race however.

    January 9, 2008 at 7:52 pm |
  294. Derrick

    i Like Hillary and thats because she has Bill. I don't think Obama has tough enough skin to endure the Republican smear machine which would have him out of the contest before it starts ( and i'm a African American) They would show how Jesse Jackson Jr. Who's his campaign mgr. is just like his dad and we know that the majority of white america hates Jesse Jackson and then they would go to Kenya and find out his dad was muslim and participated in lynchings or ect...... It's one thing you learn as a liberal democrat it's bad for democrats to use the negative tatics but the republicans live by them can you say "Lt John Kerry"

    January 9, 2008 at 7:53 pm |
  295. Mike

    Hi, I listened today on NPR to the woman who asked Hillary the question that turned the election in NH to Clinton, the woman is 64 and she voted for Obama. She says that he is the communicator, someone who speaks from the cuff. Obama speaks to her, and to me, as a matter of fact. He is always like this. One Clinton person (The former Surgeon General – Shulale (spelling)) said that she had never seen that side of Hillary. Hmmmmm, well that says it all, she was acting.

    January 9, 2008 at 7:59 pm |
  296. Howell G Plunkett

    Old Fools Advice: In Arkansas "Knowledge & Experience Counts"

    The Smartest Move for Barack Obama in 2008 to change the world would be to do Eight Years Apprenticeship & Bachelor's Degree as Vice President in the 2008 Clinton Administration; Then Obama could handily become President in 2016 for another Eight Years. Otherwise He Will Lose It All. Clinton's have a proven track record of the most prosperity for all in Eight Years in America since Franklin D Roosevelt.

    Mayor Bloomberg will run in 2008 for President as an Independent for and would eat Obama's lunch in a New York minute. Clinton / Obama Ticket could win hands down, without even campaigning.

    Howell G Plunkett

    January 9, 2008 at 7:59 pm |
  297. Bill

    HILLARY can beat anyone in the Ru-pal-blican party anyday !! GO HILLARY !!! 2008

    January 9, 2008 at 8:02 pm |
  298. Jim

    Those of us Democrats in Michigan don't even get to make that decision, as Hillary is the only major Democratic candidate on the ballot here. This seems to be a seriously overlooked factor in the media. Since Michigan has no delegates to the DNC anyways, I'm voting for Ron Paul on January 15th, and urge other Michigan Democrats to do the same.

    January 9, 2008 at 8:02 pm |
  299. Dave

    Jack, got your book for xmas,FANTASTIC. When is the next one coming? Not sure which Dem will win but for sure they are getting record votes out and either one of them will be 100% better then the jerk in there now.

    January 9, 2008 at 8:06 pm |
  300. Sharon

    American voters are finally voting with their brains. We love a rock star... we love a fishing buddy... we love somebody who'll save us a few bucks. However, these are dangerous times. And I think Americans are finally looking for the best centrist candidate. We are showing up to listen to Mr. Obama, and he's simply not saying anything. We are showing up to listen to Mrs. Clinton, and she's giving us solid answers.

    January 9, 2008 at 8:10 pm |
  301. mtodd

    what is everyone jabbering on and on about change for? Can anyone please tell me what is so different about Obama? He talks like a politician, kisses all the babies, parades his pretty wife about and of course parades his young children. Has he created any change while in office as Senator of Illinois. He doesn't even vote against funding the war. I know after 9/11 I was so ticked and emotional I joined ranks behind our bumbling president. So did all of America and every politician excluding Bird of WV. So anyone who wants to blame Hillary or anyone else who trusted our president for believing him and his intelligence about Iraq is a numbskull. What is important is that she stopped supporting the war long long ago. Not like McCain or Leiberman (should never have been re-elected in CT) or Guilianni who will not repair the dammage Bush has done.

    P.S. Edwards could not even produce a win for kerry in his home state or the state her represented as a Senator. Ya, that's real power. Even Mondale won his own homestate against Reagan.

    January 9, 2008 at 8:20 pm |
  302. Merran Williams

    I am a proud, independent, bipartisan voter, but I cannot begin to express how disgusted I have been over your Hillary bashing, especially this past week. Your comments are the epitome of "Wag the Dog" and what CNN is allowing to go across the air is starting to make the Dan Rather fiasco pale in comparison. Your ignorant dig today where you stated that the older New Hampshire women didn't want change since they hadn't voted for Obama was beyond incredulous. How can CNN allow you to demean these women and disrespect their choice merely because they formed a different opinion from you? The majority of New Hampshire voters chose to go with the very FIRST woman candidate ever to run for President of the U.S. in the history of our nation...something you and the media fail to ever mention or recognize. Apparently giving an entirely different SEX a shot at running this country isn't change enough for you or CNN. In the past ten years, our nation has twice elected a charismatic, likable, MALE with no national experience who also trotted out the gimmicky "I 'm going to change Washington" diatribe along with a pack of pretty promises coming out of his smiling, likable mouth and look where it has gotten us. We are now in the worst shape in our history with the worst international diplomatic relations at a time when the world stage politically and ecologically is precarious at best. Yet, you expect me to go that route AGAIN? How would that be change, Cafferty? Wouldn't the biggest change of all be for the American public to grow up and stop electing our leaders based upon looks, popularity & "charisma" and more how all successful businesses across our nation choose to hire their leaders as well as employees...through careful review of a resume filled with various accomplishments and yes, even failures (which also teach a lot), proving why the candidate actually meets the QUALIFICATIONS for the job at hand?

    January 9, 2008 at 8:25 pm |
  303. Thomas J Woolridge MD

    When are you members of the news media going to accept the responsibility of having interfered with the news rather than reporting it? The fact of Hillary's "moment" was not the deciding issue in the election; it was the incessant re-running of the incident which had the effect-you couldn't have done a better job had you been paid.

    January 9, 2008 at 8:26 pm |
  304. Lydia

    There is a reason I can see for the weaker Edwards to stay in this race, even if it rattles my nerves a touch- He was seen speaking to Hillary during a break on of the first debates between candidates. Many then joked he was trying to become her vice president. This very well could be true- and if he did, would he drop out and let someone who may NOT select him for a running mate win??

    I have always admired a lot about Edwards, but I know having him lose- even as the VP- to Bush in 2004 is a bad mark on his luck. Obama has a much fresher feeling of change- and if I could select his VP- it would be Edwards. Edwards stepping down and having Obama/Edwards in 2008 would be a good ticket.

    January 9, 2008 at 8:28 pm |

    The differences are evident. Where does Obama stand on the issues? Change isn't going to cut it. Change to what, a dictatorship, maybe we could have an emperor, oh wait , we have one now.. Hillary has the experience to get the job done. Obama is too naive, how will he, as a freshman Senator, expect to get the job done. He isn't tested. I could run on, a never vote for this or that!

    January 9, 2008 at 8:31 pm |
  306. Michael Manchester

    Brenda, you said

    "As a woman, and senior citizen I am tired of seeing the media run Hillary’s human moment over and over again. Previous Presidents were actually human unlike the present one. As far as Obama I have a question, if he is for the poor, needy, etc. why hasn’t he brought his 83 year old grandmother to the states from Kenya??? That is the way he treats a senior citizen!!!!"

    First of all, you don't know that he hasn't tried. You don't know if she is able to leave the country. Do you even know if he grew up with his grandmother, and if he had any chance to develop a relationship with them? I suspect that he hasn't.

    January 9, 2008 at 8:34 pm |
  307. Gaye Thompson

    I believe that the outcome will be determined by the spirit of the
    American people. I for one, jumped on "The Obama Train" immediately
    upon hearing his speech after the Ohio caucuses. I was so inspired that
    my first inclination was to call all of my family and friends and
    encourage them to climb on board. However, I soon came to the
    realization that they may be a bit hesitant... since our destination
    was pretty much unknown. So, I went to the internet and read
    everything that I had instant access to. Well, I am still riding that
    train, however I do realize that I tend to be a bit more daring than most.
    Hence... the New Hampshire turnaround (or what I consider to be a sharp
    right),"The Fear of the Unknown". Sure, we all want change, and we want
    to believe in the man who proposes to take us there, but there is no
    roadmap through this largly uncharted territory. We know that the risks
    are enormous, problems are inevitable, and that the resistance will be
    How many of us are willing to put our fears aside and prepare for such
    a long and difficult journey? How great is the vision before us? How
    deep is our faith in each other? After all, it will not be done by just one man, no matter who the man (or woman).

    By the way, I am a woman, but not one so shallow or dogmatic as to vote for Hillary Clinton just because she is a woman. On the contrary, I feel that she has yet to display what I consider to be the most basic of feminine characteristics, the nurturing instinct (please note the word "instinct", not to be confused with an overt behavior). Additionally, it appears to me that her demeanor is often offensive, and her words divisive. This is in no way representative of American women.

    January 9, 2008 at 8:43 pm |
  308. muad' dib

    Oh Puhlease! Hillary barely squeaked by Obama in N.H. The youth will decide the Presidency this time. Besides the REAL change candidate out there (Ron Paul) Obama is the only one I trust to lead our country. As a country we must go in a different direction in ideology and policy.

    January 9, 2008 at 8:45 pm |
  309. BM

    The Culinary Workers Union spokesperson announced they are supporting Obama. In his announcement he said they don't just have Wonder Bread, they have pumpernickle, whole wheat and rye, what a statement. Is he calling the people in New Hampshire that voted for Hillary, white, but in Nevada they will have a different color of voters. This world is in turmoil, that is another reason we need Hillary, she can pull everyone together and Obama, like this spokesperson for the culinary workers in Nevada will cause more turmoil.

    January 9, 2008 at 8:47 pm |
  310. stephen

    Lack of thinking from Clinton supporters. Yes, she has fought for healthcare, but it has taken her 35 years just to get healthcare for several thousand of the tens of millions of children without it and you have to ask yourse if the millions of dollars she has taken from the drug and insurance companies has inhibitted her form accomplishing more. At her rate of change, we might see health care for everyone sometime around the year 2350.

    January 9, 2008 at 8:47 pm |
  311. mtodd

    Hey stan of PA. You re-enforce why I think of PA as the Alabama of the North. I've had the misfortune of driving through the state (at the time still 55 mph unlike EVERYONE ELSE). You would be so ingorant and bitter about Your '"BEACON OF CHANGE" not getting the nomination that you would vote for some Republican who will keep our young boys and girls in a place to get killed for nothing. Nice. Real smart. That's the kind of brain power that got this president into office and kept him there. My only hope is that PA has less people like you voting there. They made me optimistic in the last general election.
    Your so worried about Bill being a draft dodger but I'll bet you voted for Bush whose Daddy got him into the Texas Air Guard where he flew around, partied, got in trouble, disappeared for a few months while in Alabama and I'm sure did more than "inhaling" perhaps snoting rings a bell. You keep stressing over the clinton. But come election time please JUST STAY HOME. In fact anyone who voted for Bush the last time should have to pass a test in order to vote again. Good luck!

    January 9, 2008 at 8:52 pm |
  312. WM

    The very sad fact of all this is when Bill Clinton was on TV and LIED to the American people about the Monica Lewinsky affair, Hillary stood by him. Every time
    someone votes for Hillary, they are really saying, "Lie to me again, it's ok". Her run for office says MUCH more about how people want to be lied to than anything about her. All the Clintons do is tell you what you want to hear and people want so desperately to believe them it is pitiful. The keyword for her run should be "Truthieness"!!!

    January 9, 2008 at 8:52 pm |
  313. Nathalie

    I find it hard to believe that any voter in Iowa or N.H. would cast a vote for Clinton, Obama, or McCain. what short memories we have. Have voters forgotten that all three are determined to push amnesty down our throats in spite of the fact voters raised hell when the democratic senate and Mr. Bush tried to pass a bill to give citizenship to 12-20 million criminals. When you come across the border illegally you are a criminal . None of the above listened to the american citizens. If any of these three end up on the final ballot, I will use my absentee ballot for toilet paper.
    All three senators took an oath to support and enforce our laws,and since they are not doing so, they should be removed from office.

    January 9, 2008 at 9:14 pm |
  314. Elwin Kern

    Could you please tell me why the press is completely giving Bush a pass on what should be one of the biggest stories of this political campaign? Has there ever been a time when a sitting president's esteem was so low that no one in his own party has asked him to help them ?

    Elwin Kern

    January 9, 2008 at 9:19 pm |
  315. Marge Thompson

    I think we should hear what Obama 's changes are. We have heard alot about change from him but not what they are to be.
    We need to hear from him more on what his change is.
    We know what Clinton did and what changes she wants to make.
    We need our country back,our men and women home from Iraq,our health care
    system opened up. It will take years to get out of the mess we are in.
    Who ever it is,it won't be a walk in the park. They are going to have to be strong,honest, and truely for the people of this great country.
    We ,the people , have been heard , Bush has heard us,but ignored us.
    The media is making a mockery out of this election. When will everyone in the media stop and think about what they are doing?
    Thanks to Bush and his team, we are in a worse mess then ever before.
    God help us and this country.

    January 9, 2008 at 9:20 pm |
  316. Mohan from Cupertino California

    Jack judge the candidates to the same yard stick

    It is very easy to play monday morning quarterback. Senators and Congressional representatives are sent to Washington to particpate and make choices representative of their constituents. The media continues to underplay this very critical attribute and requirement in a leadership role and one so important to a person who is going to be the next President of this great country.

    If the following blog is true that Obama sidestepped voting 130 times then the playing field is not level. Does he have the right to make judgments about fellow candidates on bills that he chose not to participate. We all make misakes in our judgements but take a position and explain the change in position. That is the least middle class folks deserve.

    "In 1999, Barack Obama was faced with a difficult vote in the Illinois legislature — to support a bill that would let some juveniles be tried as adults, a position that risked drawing fire from African-Americans, or to oppose it, possibly undermining his image as a tough-on-crime moderate.
    In the end, Mr. Obama chose neither to vote for nor against the bill. He voted “present,” effectively sidestepping the issue, an option he invoked nearly 130 times as a state senator.

    January 9, 2008 at 9:23 pm |
  317. Penny

    The voters who will decide on our new leader for the next 4 years MUST become informed as to HOW the nominee will undertake the incredible task of undoing the harm done to our country over the past 2 presidential terms. We do NOT need to listen to someone using "pulpit politics" and attempting to cheerlead us into following like sheep...again! I get the feeling I am in church, needing to shout "Amen" and "Hallelujah" when I listen to Obama. Change is an easy word to say but awfully difficult to implement. We need to hear less about what "we" as a country will do and more about what HE (or she) would do as president. I mean specifics! Make a list of the steps you will take as president to undo this mess we are in...Iraq. Iran, Korea, Russia, Pakistan, Hamas/israel, economy, education, veterans' needs, taxes/IRS, Social Security, health care, etc.
    I don't care about your race, creed, color, gender, religious preference, sexual preference or even if you don't know what the citizenship status is of your construction crew. I DO want to know what your plans are for this country – MY country!

    January 9, 2008 at 9:28 pm |
  318. Vincent

    Hilary Clinton managed to barely win by manipulating people's emotions; this is very likely a one-time event. She cannot expect to turn on the waterworks a second time and not seem insincere. I am a resident of New York City and a registered democrat who voted for Mrs. Clinton TWICE, and I will NEVER vote for her again. She's using irrational appeal to win over a few extra votes. Even so, she cannot expect that winning one small northeastern state means that the great majority of the American people will support her; Obama just won the endorsements of TWO major labor unions in a state (Nevada) whose caucus is essentially decided by the labor unions. And her chances in South Carolina are... low. She pulled an upset, but it might be the last spark her flame has to offer. Obama has set forces in motion which cannot be stopped, her win in NH is like trying to hold back the Mississippi river with a dam made out of cardboard. As it is, Nevada's median age is about 4-5 years younger than that of NH, and the youth vote counts for much. Women are still split (for him in Iowa, for her in NH), but minority and young women will inevitably go to him. As for the older-population states...she has a chance, but we must remember that NH is one of the oldest states, and Nevada is one of the youngest. AND Obama has the support of the unions there.

    January 9, 2008 at 9:38 pm |
  319. Patty Davis


    The first one to address the immigration issue in a meaningful and substantive way will win the hearts of the American people.

    January 9, 2008 at 9:39 pm |
  320. Margaret

    I am unable to choose between Obama and Clinton. I hope the loser becomes the Vice Presidental nominee. Obama is critisized for having no foreign policy experience. Ronald Reqagan or George W bush didn't have any foreign policy experience when they became President.
    I am an Independent voter. I am sick of the Republican nonconcervative neocon liars.
    While Bush was claiming to be a concervative he spent the big surplus that we had when Bill Clinton left office. Bush and his gang have commited many criminal impeachable offenses including starting an illegal war . While professing to be protecting us he has done so much damage to this country that may never be prepared. With Bush's crimes and misdemeaners it's almost laughable that Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about sex and Bush get off scott free. It is time for a big change!!!!

    January 9, 2008 at 9:41 pm |
  321. Manuela

    it is hard to say right no who will win. However if all of us women unite and vote for Hillary then she can win. I hope all women out there unite and vote for her. She's an excellent candidate. women stand up for your kind and please vote for Hillary. yes she is a woman and just for that reason I will vote for her. anyhow, aside that she is a woman, she is smart, she has the experience and she deserves to be a president.
    whereas for Obama, he does not have experience, his campaign was based on humliating Hillary, stealing her speeches and turning them to his own, and he turned the media against her. I have no respect for him. Nor do I have respect for all the women who are stupid to turn against their own kind and vote for Obama because they get influenced by other men. hey all you stupid women out there who vote for Obama, please wake up and stop being influenced by your husbands or boyfriends. for once think for yourselves and stand by your own kind. this is our time to shine. if all women unite against all the hurt we got from men, work place inequality and harassment, emotional harassment. etc. please think of all the men who hurt you and vote for Hillary. she will change this world and with more women in power we can straigthen all these men out and treat us with respect that we deserve!
    if there is gender equality and candidates equality, then please crucify Obama in the media too, just like you did with Hillary.
    Hillary is great, I want her to be the first woman president of America, she deserves it!

    January 9, 2008 at 9:42 pm |
  322. C B

    Well, I hear a lot of people complaining about how its the media selecting the canidates. Then maybe you should stop sitting on your butt writing lame comments, and start canvassing and voting for the canidate you really want. Oh and the exit polls show Edwards takes from both Clinton and Obama. Then again the way the media polls, who knows the truth.

    I say let Clinton or Obama win because in four years they'll lose the media glamour and the white house. Dont get me wrong Im a democrat but seeing the way Bush has f'd up. These candidate are given too much media for the 'change' there going to make, well everyone knows Americans are impatient. Thats why in four years not much will change (although if given the approperiate time much would with any democrat), and Americans will be angry they did not get the change they demanded.

    Well America WAKE UP and realize change doesnt happen over night, just like there is no way to magically lose wait. You have to actually put forth effort and give it time.

    January 9, 2008 at 9:42 pm |
  323. Manuela

    to Shirley Jones, yes women hav eemotions and if you are a woman, and apperantly a stupid one, you will know that women have emotions, and thank God for those emotions. it is with these emotions that women bring love to a family. it is with these emotions that women raise their children and stand by their men. thank God for these wonderful women emotions who are much stronger than men emotions. women put their heart into their work, and that is because of emotions. I love working and I put all my emotions and heart into my work. and maybe this is what distinguish us women from men" EMOTIONS. and there is nothing to hide and no shame to hide them. I am proud of being a woman engineer with emotions. I love my job and my work and I crave for total gender equality. yes, and I have emotions. I love my husband, my work and I do get emotional about my life. thank God for those women emotions that are strong and with these emotions we create and maintain so much love around us. and when we are angry those emotions show and with these emotions we fix the things that bother us around us. thank you God for emotions!

    January 9, 2008 at 9:48 pm |
  324. Alex

    Senator Clinton will destroy the Democratic party if she gets the nomination. She can't win in the general election. It's not because she's a woman, but because she's the most partisan candidate. She'll be the Democratic version of George W. Bush. We don't need that anymore, and judging by turnouts, nobody wants that. I wonder if she knew that the Democratic Nomination would be a lock for Obama if Edwards dropped out (which he should). Does she realize 2/3 of democratic primary goers vote against her? I am a very strong democrat, and if she gets the nomination I'm going to vote for whoever the Republican candidate is, that's how much I hate her. She's fake, and she uses her husband to gain political capital. She needs to realize that her generation has come and gone. It's over.

    John Edwards is full of crap. He says he's staying in the race because he believes deeply in his message. Yet, every day that passes that he's still in this race he gives Clinton more and more of a chance to win the nomination, and thereby ruin his message. If he were to drop out, Obama would go up in every poll, win every state handedly, and win the nomination, thereby allowing for his message to really get somewhere. He really needs to get the hell out of this race.

    January 9, 2008 at 9:49 pm |
  325. Manuela

    oh and one last thing.... just like Allan on this thread discussion said. Hillary will end up cleaning up the mess that Bush did. Isn't this what women are best for?? Cleaning up the mess that men make?? That is why we should elect Hillary, she will do an excellent job cleaning up the mess. She is a woman and she knows very wel how to clean up the mess!

    January 9, 2008 at 9:52 pm |
  326. kirby ritter

    The media will decide the outcome between Hillary and Obama because we're all fed up and ready to vote for Hillary out of rebellion against the media's attempt to shove him down our throats. I was not a Hillary supporter until I reached my limit on Tuesday with this media idolization of him.

    January 9, 2008 at 9:55 pm |
  327. dennis

    If Hillary has found her voice, can she tell us which voice she was using before now? Politicians will always be one. FEEL SORRY FOR THIS COUNTRY

    January 9, 2008 at 9:59 pm |
  328. Aware

    We should not give to much attention to the N.H voters anymore! Clinton won because she shock up while giving a speech, wow! Obama is getting momentum continuously. His motivational speech was convincing, i would like to see what kind of change he is going to bring, i want him to lay out his plan particularly the war in Iraq, Health Care, Social Security, Economy, Education and such. I know he bit Hillary with but not quit sure about the Health Care.

    January 9, 2008 at 9:59 pm |
  329. Steve

    Don't believe the spin. The "emotional" moment where Hillary Clinton "found her voice" occurred when she said, in response to a question that "[t]his is very personal for me." This was portrayed in the media as a "genuine" moment where Hillary found her voice, but this line actually comes straight from John Edwards.

    It is Edwards who is always saying over and over gain that "this is personal for me." If you read the transcript of the N.H. debate, in fact, Edwards uses these words again in response to a question about health care:

    MR. EDWARDS: ". . . this battle is personal for me. You know, we need a president who believes deeply here, who believes deeply this battle, and it is personal for me."

    January 9, 2008 at 10:01 pm |
  330. Kathi B

    Surprise results! A big Shock! I cannot understand why there is shock and disbelief in regard to the NH results. It is called a secret ballot and the voters choose the winner.....not the pollsters. What makes the pollsters and their hanger ons think they get to make the choice? Why do we have news jockeys apologizing in regard to poll results and bad judgment??
    Democracy....say it after me....Democracy. The voters get to choose!
    My fav was a comment tonight that we now have a race. We always did, we just forgot to let CNN, NBC, FOX, CBS,ABC know.
    I know, it is a conspiracy! We are all lying to the pollsters. What great idea!

    January 9, 2008 at 10:23 pm |
  331. Marin

    A full, rich political dialogue representative of the concerns of the entire citizenry will never be fully possible until the historically most disenfranchised members of the electorate come to the fore. There is no greater change that can take place in our society then electing the first woman president and shattering the flawed Judeo-Christian tradition of the pater familius. Women are half of humanity. To discount them would be the equivalent of discounting the other half of our brain—it would be a voluntary handicap.
    Hillary is competent and pragmatic. The pressures on her presidency will be so great, they will suppress any perceived leftist extremisms. I do not fear her policies because I know they will be tempered and informed. Her presidency will be evolutionary in the details as it will be in the spirit.
    Concurrently, a vote for Hillary Clinton will not only enfranchise women, but it will sweep up with it the African American, the Latino, and countless others that have never seen a reflection of their worth in the Oval Office. It will not only reshape national politics by bringing women from the background into their rightful place within the political dialogue, but it will do for the women of the world what Barak Obama purports to do for America—it will bring them unity, hope, and empowerment. What better way is there to address national security, climate change and economic development for the impoverished then by emblazoning womankind with ultimate value and worth through the mighty office of the President of the United States?

    January 9, 2008 at 10:28 pm |
  332. Debbie Williams

    Many in the media including CNN have given many people running for President a free ride. When some speak for one hour to voters and say NOTHING about any issues, only we can make history ( for me) help me get my destiny ( for me)
    why does the media allow this? Everyone running should be given tough questions.
    The Iowa caucus or better yet the Iowa square dance means nothing,
    they have been wrong most of the time.
    New Hampshire is a better reflection of what the rest of America is thinking.
    In addition the distaste that many in the media have for certain candidates
    is very clear to see. I think because they put the media in it's place.
    CNN has always been the only strong and true and reliable media coverage many of us trust, however even CNN has started to show it's preferance,
    Please inform Ms. Malveaux to stop her girlish blushing when speaking of certain candidates. I think she may want to run away with him, but he is married.

    One who has never had their feet wet is not made captain of a ship.

    January 9, 2008 at 10:29 pm |
  333. Phillip Peterman

    Mr. Cafferty, I agree that Pres. Bush has initiated a great interest in the mass majority of interest in politics this election season, mine included. I would like to know though, with all of the current illumination on the election results, who is actually watching what the weasel is doing in the Middle East, (Isreal) right now. Also, are the Florida election machines "fixed" (meaning the chads) now? One more thing; which candidates support the restoration of our civil rights (habeus corpus and/or wire-tapping)? I have not heard much about that during the debates. Thank You, Phillip Peterman. Chehalis Wa.

    January 9, 2008 at 10:33 pm |
  334. TAPayne

    I have seen votes split along many types of lines over the years, along finacial demographic lines, along racial lines, along geographical lines, but this is the first time i have seen a vote split along the line as to the form of voting (i.e. electronic vs paper ballots)

    January 9, 2008 at 10:37 pm |
  335. Billie Markas

    I'm wondering what Barack Obama means when he talks about "CHANGE." His entire campaign seems to say nothing but, "CHANGE." I am still waiting for him to elaborate on what he is intending to "CHANGE." Does anyone have a clue regarding the "CHANGE." What differences will he bring? How? Where? When? It's not clear to me or anyone I've asked about it. I've only seen people waving banners with the word, "CHANGE" written on them, and Mr. Obama never gets around to telling us just what he will change & why.

    January 9, 2008 at 10:46 pm |
  336. rh

    clearly there is a lot of things being promissed by Hillary to appoint her flunkys to power if she wins,and i think that is why her husband is so upset and thats not change. clearly there is a lot of things being promissed by Hillary to appoint her flunkys to power if she wins,and i think thats is why her almost cry is so televised thats not change. clearly the Clinton camp has no real morals as a group collectively or they would show some class in this campaign,but some folks love to kick dirt and thats not change . clearly the more that certain cadidates hype up the rhetoric about first day or hit the ground running to scare the voters into their favor come election day,thats not change. Americans are sick and tire of the same two dynasty and that is one of the reason we support Obama,there is only one thing to do and that is start out new and that is big change.

    January 9, 2008 at 11:11 pm |
  337. Todd Tevis

    The independents obviously hold a great deal of influence. But more than that I think the supporters of the other candidates have the potential to decide the outcome, that is, if they decide to drop out of the race. Take Edwards for example. He obviously has no chance to win, and if he were to drop out of the race, most of his supporters would side with Obama, giving him a landslide victory. This would be his best choice anyway, since he can't win anyway and there is a good chance Obama would give him the VP position.

    January 9, 2008 at 11:13 pm |
  338. Douglas Barricklow

    2 things) In the first election that we have non-white, and non-male competitive candidates, the media can't help but go old school, profiling voters and even have the audacity to mention the word race. America has come so far, but the media can't seem to see American voters as such, American voters. They are black, evangelical, women.. why not break it on down to the Islam vote too? If a candidate shows emotion, so be it, but it would seem that it is because that candidate is a she.
    Secondly, you would think from the press that Americans could give a rat's butt about how a candidate does in other states. It was admitted that New Hampshire didn't care how Iowa voted. I don't think most voters care how anyone else votes and all the polls and who votes what in what state. This does not matter to the average voter. It is just the party dedicated- who can beat who mentality, that it does. They don't seem to care who is the best candidate for the job. If they feel that way, stand outside the polling stations during the election and lobby voters to vote a straigth ticket.

    January 9, 2008 at 11:16 pm |
  339. Rich Bergeron

    There's endless analysis going as to what caused the pollsters and pundits to muck up the predictions on New Hampshire. In reality, I think everyone's got it wrong as to what caused the big discrepancy. If you noticed the coverage of New Hampshire events immediately after Iowa, Obama and Clinton's reaction to the Iowa vote was starkly different. Obama's post-Iowa speeches almost exactly mirrored his winning speech that everyone saw on TV. So, he was getting thousands of people packed to the rafters coming to see him and find out what else he had to say only to be left with the impression that he's a record player repeating the same old thoughts. Hillary, love her or hate her, took the time to answer questions and listen more than speak. She hammered home the idea that in the battle of Rhetoric vs. Reality, Reality wins. It wasn't her tears or anything racial. It was just that she learned from her mistakes in Iowa and Obama thought he could ride the same sentiments when he should have been crafting creative new thoughts and speeches.

    January 9, 2008 at 11:17 pm |
  340. Theresa

    The news media will be the deciding factor. They praise the charisma and uniqueness of Obama while constantly battering Clinton. This is not fair to either one.

    I see nothing in Obama except he is a politician who is a well rehearsed but natural appearing speaker. The majority of us have no idea of what he really stands for. I had never even heard of him until he threw his hat in the ring for president. The press is building him up to a legacy that he can not possibly live up to.

    Clinton's every word, expression, thought is disected for falseness and insincerity. She is a politician people. What do you expect from any of them? She is not a adept at tugging on people's emotions as Obama is so in my opinion, that makes her the more honest of the two. He does not appear as stiff and driven as she does. How the media continues to rob the viewing public of their own ability to decide for themselves what kind of person they are viewing by portraying the candidate in the manner that they wish them to be seen in will be the deciding factor of this race.

    I view it all as a futile waste of money and effort. All that has to be done is to call CNN and ask who they want to be the next president. Save us all the stress and the endless hours of drolling pundit opinions.

    January 9, 2008 at 11:24 pm |
  341. Steve

    Jack, I'm an Obama supporter and Franklin Roosevelt is my hero. What you saw in the last days of New Hampshire were the Clintons reverting to their true Machiavellian nature. Bill ripping Obama's stance against the Iraq War as a 'fairy tale' and sarcastically, saying to the crowd: "give me a break." The Clinton Machine–as John Edwards calls it–will not go quietly into that good night. Can't wait until they bring in Carville and Begala and they turbo-charge the negative attacks against Barack Obama. The Obama campaign hass a message of change and hope and he can still win. There's a long way to go and he has enough money to stay in it for the long haul.

    January 9, 2008 at 11:30 pm |
  342. Sue Ortega

    I wish the media, including the Situation Room, would stop deciding for us voters. I heard you guys night after night attacking Hillary without mercy while at the same time elevating Obama to a modern "Messiah" status.

    To me, it's important to find out what each candidate can bring to the table... not just delivering motivation speeches. Experience counts more than ever!

    January 9, 2008 at 11:32 pm |
  343. Chechevi k

    The answer would be if America is ready to sponsor either an African American president or a female. If they can Clinton and Obama are clearly the front runners which seems imminent as of the moment but if they're i have a feeling old prejudices will force many American to settle for a lesser substitute, favorably Edwards or Huckabee. its all depends if America is ready. If it is Obama is about to bring positive change to a sad nation.

    January 9, 2008 at 11:36 pm |
  344. Wilver


    Is there any posibility that you and wolf would host any of the primary debate? I sure like you to host one debate and create the questioneers your self:? Ask Wolf about it and talk to your boss, see if it is at all possible. So far, of all the debates taken place none of them had good formats of questions towards the candidates? The American people needs to know where these candidates stand in what issues and how much they know about those issues, the later part is extreemly important. Let me know.


    Wilver Gomes

    January 9, 2008 at 11:48 pm |
  345. Jeff

    Decisions, decisions. Why the press will decide who wins, just like they decided that it's a two horse race on the democratic side. The media, doesn't like issues, they like sound bites and photo ops.
    Then again we people have become used to this and so it's what we want now.

    Obama is a modern version of McGovern, who also appeal to the then 18 year olds who could vote for the first time and didn't. Obama is courting the young collaged aged voter, a smart move but a risky one, for it might make some aftrican-amaericans question his purpose. I'll grant that Mr. Obama is in a tough situation, trying to keep race out of the election yet hoping that it will help, just like Clinton relies female voters and Edwards on independents.

    Another question is, at some point the discusion will turn to a VP candidate. Would either Obama or Clinton be VP to the other? I doubt it.

    January 9, 2008 at 11:50 pm |
  346. Jeff

    Decisions, decisions. Why the press will decide who wins, just like they decided that it's a two horse race on the democratic side. The media, doesn't like issues, they like sound bites and photo ops.
    Then again we people have become used to this and so it's what we want now.

    Obama is a modern version of McGovern, who also appeal to the then 18 year olds who could vote for the first time and didn't. Obama is courting the young collaged aged voter, a smart move but a risky one, for it might make some aftrican-amaericans question his purpose. I'll grant that Mr. Obama is in a tough situation, trying to keep race out of the election yet hoping that it will help, just like Clinton relies female voters and Edwards on independents.

    Another question is, at some point the discusion will turn to a VP candidate. Would either Obama or Clinton be VP to the other? I doubt it.

    January 9, 2008 at 11:51 pm |
  347. Warren

    Hilary being more middle of the road can take the presidency by bringing in votes from moderate Republicans and most Democrats. On the other hand, Obama is from the left wing of the Democratic Party which could lose the centerists to the Republicans. If the Republicans choose a far right winger to go up against Obama, if he makes the Democratic nomination, it may then turn out that an independent by the name of Bloomberg becomes President in '09'.

    January 9, 2008 at 11:51 pm |
  348. Jane


    Women!!!! We are tired of all the commentators bashing Senator Clinton. Ever since the debate on driver's licenses, she has been raked over the coals. After months of hearing that her voice is too shrill, that she is unlikable, that she was inevitable ( a label that the media gave her....not her campaign), that she was playing the gender card, her voice broke a little. She did not cry, nor did she show tears. She got a little emotional. She had the right! I think that she showed character. Today the spin was that the vote was racially motivated. NO!!!!! Women 40 and older are finally tired of it. We have all encountered the sexist remarks at work and even at home and are tired of it! We have a chance to elect a woman president. It is time for a change. You men haven't done so well!

    January 9, 2008 at 11:52 pm |
  349. Joe, SoCal

    If you think Oprah backs Obama just because he's black ( a stupid comment), then why didn't Oprah back Al Sharpton when he ran? Idiot.

    January 9, 2008 at 11:57 pm |
  350. susan

    No matter how well the Obama campaign ends up doing along the way, it will implode eventually if he allows idiots in his campaign to use the all divisive and usually unjustified race card. The Clintons have never been anything but supportive of the African American community and the voters of Iowa showed that race was not a factor. Hauling out the race card every time the campaign suffers a set back will anger voters in the rest of the country. You can consider that signed, sealed and delivered.

    January 10, 2008 at 12:00 am |
  351. Emily

    I find that however this race goes it will likely head in one direction- for all of these candidates-


    January 10, 2008 at 12:07 am |
  352. Danielle Kvanvig-Bohnsack

    When I see that an African American and a Woman are running for president, it reminds me of just how far we've come, yet how far we have to go.

    I think that the women in New Hampshire were the deciding factor in the New Hampshire primary. However, to suggest that the women of New Hampshire voted and the women across America will vote for Clinton simply because we saw her "teary eyed" plays into the gender bias stereotype that women are irrational and moved only by emotion and feelings.

    Maybe, just maybe, the women of New Hampshire and the women across America are capable and intelligent enough of voting for a candiate based on issues and records, and not just media sensationalism and emotion.

    January 10, 2008 at 12:09 am |
  353. James Smith


    One determining factor is the Race Card. I am seriously considering either of these two candidates but if I hear any more Race Card nonsense my mind will be made up. The biggest problem that Afican Americans have is refusing to be accepted as people.

    Thanks Jim

    Folsom, CA

    January 10, 2008 at 12:09 am |
  354. Lorraine Lilja (Lil-ya)

    Change? Recession? Iraq? The candidates are trying to determine what is the main issue in the minds of voters. They hire people to work on speeches, conduct polls, and parrot issues that seemed to work for other candidates.

    As viewers watch the "debates", I know what they are looking for. They are trying to determine who really means what he is saying. Every candidate spouts lofty statements and goals. But how do we know who is sincere? How can a voter judge what commitments candidates have made to what industry? Who can tell which has fire in his soul?

    I propose that the next debate hook up all candidates to lie-detectors. Why not? These candidates are asking that we elect them to rule the greatest power on earth. Why should we not ask for proof that they are well-intentioned? People are asked to take lie-detector readings for things that are trivial in comparison.

    A debate with candidates wired for truth is what I want to see in the next debate, then ask them questions!

    January 10, 2008 at 12:37 am |
  355. ams

    Senator Clinton is a very intelligent person and she and her husband did a lot of good things while in office. It is apparent to most of us that Wolf does not really care for her which is fine, but his constantly asking everyone what they think about her tearing up and "finding her voice", is getting on my last nerve. This is exactly what is wrong with politics today. Too many biased people. Maybe the determining factor in New Hamspire was the democratic debates when both Obama and Edwards ganged up on Senator Clinton. This could have been determined as a little shovanistic in many people's views. Also, the Clinton's have a genuine respect for and they care for people, and not just the rich. Obama has some good ideas too, but he appears to be too liberal. He has a vision, but I think he lacks the blue print to carry them out. He also speaks as if he was swaying a bunch of followers without a plan, instead of campainging for President.
    I think it is sad that with the morals in today's society, people acted like they were appalled by Senator Clinton's proposal to grant maternity leave to high school students. It happens and as a Christian, I think it would be better if the pregnant teen were able to have her child, and still continue her education , rather than to drop out and have trouble getting back in school, or losing a year, ending up on wel-fare permanently. So grow up people! We all know it happens.

    January 10, 2008 at 12:39 am |
  356. ams

    I admire the young voters for taking an interest in their future and that of America, however, the last time the young people wanted a change, we ended up with George Bush. I think they might want to know exactly what Obama's changes are and how he intends to accomplish these changes. Change is only good when you have a plan that leads to a better place. I know what the Clinton's have done and the direction Senator Clinton will go and I feel comfortable with her.

    January 10, 2008 at 12:47 am |
  357. Arrgy baby

    If the republicans are allowed to continue with diebold machine and falsly reporting votes like we've just seen in iowa and NH, They will.

    They propped up McCain. Knocked down Edwards and disqualified Paul as planned.
    Expect the nominees to be McCain vs a Black man or a Woman. They will settle for nothing less. next move...Cut Edwards out of the picture like they're doing to Paul.

    When will Jacks editor let him break the now, well known proof of fraud in Sutton county and other NH counties?
    Google news-blog fraud. It's all over the place!

    We are being soooo snowed!

    January 10, 2008 at 12:52 am |
  358. Andrah

    If he keeps up his Hillary bashing, Chris Matthews.

    January 10, 2008 at 1:56 am |
  359. John

    In a word...Oprah. If Obama can get Oprah Winfrey out on the stump with him there might be just enough women who will do whatever she says they should, from which book to read and which fitness and diet program to use to, yes, which candidate to vote for, tipping the scale in his favor. If he can't get her out there he's toast, Hillary wins pulling away from here on out.

    January 10, 2008 at 1:59 am |
  360. Salif

    This battle is going to mainly hurt the Clintons if both Hillary & Bill continue to give the impression that the US is an "unofficial kingdom". It was sad to see Hillary seemed to assume that no one but the Clintons can prevent this country from falling backwards!
    We have true and dynamic candidates in this race who can make a big difference! As an international observer and political analyst, I think Obama or Mc Cain could do better than any other candidate. However, Obama is mostly seen by international medias as a President who will better care for America and the world!!!

    January 10, 2008 at 2:16 am |
  361. Noah

    What happened to NH voters. How could you be duped by the calculating Clintons over and over. If Hillary's tears were about how hard it is for a woman in politics, how do you explain her giggling at every comment?; when she was up in the polls. She seemed to enjoy every bit of it. As soon as people started paying attention to Obama she all of sudden got emotional about the difficulties of being a woman in politics. The NH women unfortunately fell for the acting. When the results came out, she was back to her giggling and quacking again. What is genuine, the tears or the giggling. Who will be your president, the (real !!!) Hillary or the oscar winning actress. If that is how the next president of the U.S is gonna be decided, the rest of the world should be scared. George Bush might become a saint in comparison.

    Noah from Singapore.

    January 10, 2008 at 2:19 am |
  362. AL

    Is Bill Clinton Calling the American Dream a Fairy Tale?

    Any significant progress in this country has been the result of Americans working hard to achieve their dreams. The definition of the American dream has always implied men and women in the face of adversity, braving obstacles to make their dreams come through. If Bill Clinton is calling Barack Obama's bringing hope to those American men and women a fairy tale, then him and Hilary Clinton are certainly not for change. Therefore, they are either contradicting themselves and their slogan for change or they are trying hard to deceive the American people. The American people should not be taken for granted. They deserve respect and honesty, which Barack Obama has consistently demonstrated throughout this campaign. Barack Obama has brought hope to generations of Americans regardless of their background(s) through his bipartisan policy proposals for change and a positively refreshing view on politics in general. People need a clear definition of who is running for president and what they stand for. The question to the Clinton campaign is: who is really running for president? Is it Bill or Hilary Clinton? Or are we in for a Clinton Dynasty? If yes, what do they stand for? Absolute power or real change?.

    January 10, 2008 at 2:41 am |
  363. Eddie

    Who can tell which one of them is going to win when all the media talks about is one is articulate and the other one crys. I just wonder when a network will come along that turns off a canidates microphone (free campaigning) when they dont answer a simple question and move on to the next. Why doesnt the press put pressure on presidental hopefuls and find out who their cabinet picks will be. Then do some background on those picks. ooooooooooops sorry I dont own a network and GOD KNOWS that might give us something REAL to make a CHOICE about instead of whether teary eyes are real or not!

    The present system of information is enough to make a serious voter puke. Now lets discuss if the puke really stinks!

    January 10, 2008 at 2:58 am |
  364. Joyce Allen

    Americans do not want 'Hope'. We want a lynching. We do not want to bring people together we want to fight each other over the same old crap. When all else fails we just act pathetic and we vote for pathetic candidates. then we wonder why America is moving backwards. I can see the future headlines now. "America economist predict our country's financial worth is equal to most 3rd World Countries".

    January 10, 2008 at 3:02 am |
  365. nitty

    Mr. Cafferty please do not put our so called African American leaders on your show, Mr. Obama has enough going against him in the world in which we live. He does not need these rich so called African American Leaders that do nothing for the million of poor african americans living in poverty while they live in there million dollar mansions which they have achieved on the backs of African Americans that were mis used. We do not need them to come on the Television talking about what someone has said and misscrued it to the public as racism. Everything that is said is not racism but they will use it as such (Mr. Dyson, Mr. Jackson, Mr. Sharpton), Let Mr. Obama when in dignity.

    January 10, 2008 at 3:09 am |
  366. Nate Barrino

    Why aren't news commentors, political experts, or anyone, except Professor Dyson, telling what really happened in New Hampshire? How, in the eleventh hour, Mr. & Mrs. Clinton played the "Political Race Card" to sway the hearts and minds of voters, and programmed them to believe that Obama's African American greatness, is tainted with lies, inexperience and is unable to run this country! I've always admired Mr. Clinton, a powerful Democratic figure and was going back and forth with Hilary and Obama, weighing my decision. After New Hampshire, not anymore! It's Obama all the way from my household. We witnessed the Political backlash from the old Little Rock's whip yesterday. It's now obvious to me that the Clintons view African Americans as "voters only", not leaders. That is of course, you're "Amy Holmes" who navigates "White Leadership" wearing an historical blindfold over her beautiful brown eyes!! Wake up African Americans, this "Race" is beginning to show it's true colors, which can definitely be misleading! It doesn't always take an assassin's bullet to stop a potential leader, who's all for unifying the masses; it can come from a shrewd and proven two-termer! Obama's slogan should be; "If Bill Be Still, I Know We Can And Will"......

    January 10, 2008 at 3:20 am |
  367. fair,washington, DC

    Right after NH you would think people would realize how important it is to get the best candidate in as the Democratic nominee. Things change,situations change,people change their minds with them. If people realize that this is a primary and there is a General Election to win and realize that although everyone thinks the Democrats are a shoo in to win the General whoever the nominee is..yea just like Obama had NH and this race rapped up..then Hillary should win because people will see how vulnerable Obama is in a General Election. That "I was against the war" mantra that he uses as a positive in the primaries will surely be twisted to make him look weak on National Security when the Republicans get a hold of him and if he's our nominee all we will be able to do is sit back and hope it doesn't resonate. Not a pleasant scenario from where I'm sitting.

    January 10, 2008 at 3:25 am |
  368. Richard

    How about both. President and Vice. Clinton has experience and Obama is for the most part unpolluted. Can one be President and the other Vice for two years and then switch?

    January 10, 2008 at 3:25 am |
  369. Saby

    What will decide ?

    The state of the swing voters minds at the last moments before they vote. They are so fickle and susceptible to last minute news, propaganda or emotional/intellectual events..... And a lot more of them are voting.
    A Disclosure here, a tear there, a statement by someone about something and suddenly the polls won't matter.

    To the ladies out there, I don't think this is gender bashing. I was very pro Hillary for President, especially as she is a woman. The fact that she was being attacked made me more defensive of her for POTUS. But then I started watching and listening to her over the last few months and began to see why people are attacking her. I now have very strong doubts of her capabilities as a leader and also her character. She comes across as intelligent and experienced but also cunning, calculating and insincere. The only reason I could think of for her to be president is to see Bill Clinton back in the White House.

    January 10, 2008 at 3:31 am |
  370. john

    As a democrat, I would like to see a Clinton-Obama on the ticket..........it could give us 16 years in the white house..........The Republicans are very supportive for an Obama win because they know he doesn't have the experience yet.......The other thing that bothers me is some comments from African people especially does from Kenya suggesting that when Obama get's elected they can get easier a visa and jobs in the US.........as an American I know that we need jobs for American people not outsiders for now! what bothers me about Edwards is that in 2004 when he was running together with Kerry for the White house they asked the Clinton's to rally for them which they did as true democrats....and now Edwards is talking bad about Hillary....this is very upsetting!

    January 10, 2008 at 3:32 am |
  371. Jackie

    At the beginning of this race, I was sure that I was going to vote for another Clinton. It was an added plus that she is a strong woman who had experience in Washington.

    But, after listening to what Barack Obama is saying, I'm switching my vote to him. The concept that the American people need to become involved in their government is greatly needed. I believe that is the only way to get the change we need in health care, the economy and to restate our leadership to the world. As long as the Republicans and Democrats in Washington are fighting against each other. NOTHING WILL EVER GET DONE FOR THE MASSES. We will only have small successes.

    It amazes me that the experience people in Washington can't see this – they are so far from what the people of America really need. It seems that they enjoy fighting each other despite the fact that it is killing our Country and I'm no longer going to vote for them. Why can't these "so-called" experience people put aside their petty difference and get the job DONE for the American people.

    Also, I was disappointed to hear some of the politicians speak bad about the concept of hope. Everything starts with hope and throughout history there are countless of examples where hope was more effective than experience. I give credit to Obama for at least understanding this too.

    The wisest of all Kings once said, "And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot * stand." There is an urgency to take heed these words. And, the people right now MUST TAKE A STAND!!

    No more foolish fighting in Washington and we will no longer be controlled through fear!!!!!!!! It is time for the people of America to take our country back and hold each politician accountable who are NOT DOING THEIR JOBS!!!!!

    January 10, 2008 at 3:53 am |
  372. Bill

    Hillary found her own voice. Hmmm, whose voice was she using before this? Has she just been a mouthpiece for Bill? She claims 35 years of experience battling for the common folk. Does being First Lady really count as relevant experience to be President? Sure, she knows her way around the White House, but in reality, she has no more experience than Obama. In many ways he is the more experienced candidate.

    January 10, 2008 at 3:55 am |
  373. S. Pett

    I personally like both. While I like Barack Obama more my personal hope is for a Clinton-Obama Ticket that will give him the experience he lacks now for a later contest. As for those who say that the pundits should be ashamed for treating Hillary this way since she was one of our first ladies bull. Being a First Lady gives her no more right to respect than any other woman since they all deserve respect. However, in addition to being a First Lady she is more importantly a sitting Senator. cannot stand it when some pundits like that Coulter lady and others sometimes even
    including Jack and Wolf show such enormous disrespect for a sitting Senator. I like bothe Hillary and Obama and I am confident that in this election I will be able to vote for a candidate instead of against one like last time.

    January 10, 2008 at 4:29 am |
  374. Micahel Guinn, Ventura, CA

    John Edwards, a passionate and good man, needs to realize that his supporters will benefit MOST by endorsing Barack Obama. CHANGE was Clinton in 1992....Bill, that is.
    CHANGE today is the united forces of Obama supporters and Edwards supporters. John is a very intelligent and I believe dedicated Man of Change. His time was 2004. Let's finally put an end to machine politicians and the status quo!Let's forget egos and do what's best for our beloved country! Let John and his followers who believe so much as we do that change isn't just a catch-phrase... It's essential to America's future! Let's unite for Victory. The republicans are so geared-up for another Clinton-hating debacle. Let's get behind the man who is most likely to end the reign of King George and his party! YES WE CAN!
    Obama 08!

    January 10, 2008 at 4:41 am |
  375. Joe Whatshisname

    Barack Obama.

    If he had dropped out last night and thrown his support to John Edwards, to the change he is arguing for but won't be able to deliver, because his name makes him unelectable, headlines this morning would have finally given Edwards the momentum his messsage deserved after his second place finnish in Iowa. If Obama doesn’t drop out soon, Edwards is going to have to fight every moment to overcome the Clinton Machine.

    January 10, 2008 at 4:41 am |
  376. Kate

    A simple analogy – if you need a root canal procedure, who would you go to to have it done, someone who has done thousands of root canals, or someone who has done maybe two or three. If the procedure is not performed correctly, you lose the tooth. The same analogy with a heart surgeon, mechanic, etc. etc. This country is in dire need of a root canal, because of the rot over the past seven years, and I will choose Hillary Clinton, because she has the experience to at least try and save the this wonderful country. She is intelligent, compassionate, experienced, and has the wherewithall to help us recover some of what has been taken away over the past seven years. I do like BaracK Obama, and I would not hesitate to vote for him in the future, but he needs much more experience for the job.

    January 10, 2008 at 5:29 am |
  377. Diana

    I can only speak for myself in deciding between Obama and Hilary. I did this after the last debate. I asked myself, whats more important, the packaging or the content? Predebate, I was on the Obama wagon. He is painting us a picture of Utopia and who wouldnt want to live there? But I havent heard how he plans to do this. I felt he wasnt experienced enough but would have advisors and would get my vote because I liked his charisma. On the other hand, I felt Hilary could do the job but didnt like her much. During the debate, her "emotional" moment seemed to me to be heartfelt. Obamas snide comment to HIlary about her likeability made me go hmmmm..... Then I thought of George Bush and how many of my clients told me they didnt think he was a good president but liked him better then Kerry so voted for him. I found that upsetting at the time, but here I was about to do the same thing. So, I decided t he content is more important to me then the packaging. So Hilary gets my vote, providing I vote democrat, as I am registered. I want to hear more about immigration from the democrats before the general election. Thats most important to me, as a baby boomer.

    January 10, 2008 at 5:35 am |
  378. Jeremy Sundby

    Hillary Clinton is the clear choice. Her experience and overall resolve will show in this election her dedication to the American people and that she as president will have what it takes to lead on day one in the White House.

    January 10, 2008 at 5:38 am |
  379. gerry


    Clinton's win in New Hampshire reflected Biull Schneider's exit poll which showed 60% of registered Democrats and 40% of Independents voting for her.

    Her husband and the Democratic party machine stepped up for her over the last 72 hours leading up to that Primary Vote.

    Clearly the move within the Demcoratic Party establsihment to stop Obama and have its status quo candidate, Lady MacBeth, become its candidate.

    Clearly, the Clintons are willing to do anything to get back into the White House, and they seem to have little or no regard for the consequences, whether to Obama, the Party, or the body politic.

    Their subtle, nasty messages about Obama's inability and inexperience to lead contain nuances of racism and arrogance.And coming from a camp which was famous for touting Bill Clinton as the first 'Black President'.

    They are particularly offensive because Lady MacBeth cannot claim to being better qualified, on the basuis of experience, given that she was a housewife in Little Rock and Washington DC. who spent much of her time fighting off her thoughts of divorcing Bill, and only resisted because of her expansive ambition.

    Her crocodile tears helped her in New Hampshire whe she answered the orchestrated question.We shall see how many tears she has left for the other States.And we shall see over the long haul who is genuine.

    She and White House Bill are tampering with destiny, and God doesn't like 'ugly'.


    January 10, 2008 at 5:42 am |
  380. Doreen

    I stimply think that because the pundits were calling this race for Obama by so many percentage points, that the independents thought they were safe voting for McCain and the women felt secure in voting for Clinton so her lose would not be so definitive.

    I know this is the last time I will listen to the pundits - gave them the benefit of doubt once now twice - no more.

    January 10, 2008 at 5:45 am |
  381. Eshaneua

    Everyone knows that Bill Clinton met with George Bush Jr and father to reach an agreement that if Hillary would forego running altogether in 2004, she'd be a sure win in 2008. Early on, Hillary wanted to know who would best complement her and she chose the Senator Barack Obama. If you recall, Wolf Blitzer was the first to find out about the "Closed Door Meeting" between the two candidates and when Obama was asked about it, he said nothing!!! Not to mention the fact that Obama is Dick Cheney'e cousin. Ponts to Ponder!!!!

    January 10, 2008 at 6:22 am |
  382. Rick Scottsdale, AZ


    Whoever Diebold is persuaded to rig the votes for. Why doesn't the Mainstream Media seem concerned about the faulty tabulating machines that even the New York Times just published were easily manipulated.

    January 10, 2008 at 6:26 am |
  383. Francis Okafor


    I think the election will come down to issues. The country is presently in a bad state. People should put their emotion aside and choose a candidate that will bring this country back to where it belongs. Preaching change is good but not all changes are good. The media is hyping the whole thing. I fear is that the American people are going to vote with panic and bring in the wrong person because you want to have change. People, think and use your head. I am for Hilary

    January 10, 2008 at 6:46 am |
  384. Matt Kline

    I think Edwards is the real spoiler here, taking votes from Obama and preventing a solid uprising against Hillary Clinton. If she goes on to the national election, she is so divisive that Republicans will vote in droves to stop her. You'll have old folks in wheelchairs who haven't left the house for years get out to stop the oh so hated Hillary. It's not even entirely her fault, but because of her divisive nature she shouldn't even be running for the good of the nation. We need a lightweight candidate who can heal the wounds and let congress start passing some major legislation. A candidate that will get Republicans willing to reluctantly work with that candidate. Barack Obama is that candidate and is really the only one making positive mentions of Republicans, whereas Hillary continues to live in a world where they are labeled as these villains. We need to get the moderate middle to work together to put important legislation into action and the only way this is going to happen is with a president that doesn't drastically alienate the opposition.

    Edwards and Obama may end up cutting a deal where he gets the VP post in return for dropping out, however that may not be necessary as Obama could gain more momentum as the primaries move down south with Edwards having placed third in New Hampshire. I think it is more clear to people now that he can't win and that a vote for Edwards is throwing away a vote for Obama, and ultimately a solid chance of winning the national election.

    If Hillary does win the nomination, I would personally hope for Bloomberg to enter the race, teaming up with Obama. I don't know if Obama would want to do that in what would essentially be abandoning the democratic party, but at the same time, his chance at winning would be substantial enough that it would be worth considering. Enough republicans are disenfranchised with all of their choices and enough democrats were deeply moved by Obama that he would be a viable third party candidate if he were unable to snag the nomination of the democratic party.

    January 10, 2008 at 7:01 am |
  385. terry

    Hey Jack, Always enjoy the program and the Emails. But come on A few more kind words to the lady that has gave so much of herself for the past 35 yrs. Yes "Mrs. Hillary Clinton." Thanks Jack Terry.

    January 10, 2008 at 7:27 am |
  386. Dora

    The voters will chose the next President, but we need to remember a few past things. George Bush said CHANGE and boy how things have changed. The U.S. is not looked upon by the world as a leader now, but as a bully. Maybe from a" my way or the highway "attitude from the Bush group. Things at home are not good and we all know that. Health care, gas prices, jobs the voters are aware of these things. All the candidates think they can change those things, but who has the experience to help change the world's opinion of the U.S. My humble vote goes to Hillary because in spite of Bill or because of him, our world and the world was a safer place. If you take the gender out of it and only look and listen to the words, you will find the right person with the experience to lead this country. And it will take experience. Hope for a new day is great ,but if you don't know how to create a true change, it is trial and error. And I for one are tired of the trial and error of George Bush. Remember his promises and smiles and small grins and then remember where we are today. Changed. Vote for Hillary.

    January 10, 2008 at 8:12 am |
  387. Felix Lukusa

    Hey Jack,definitely the American people understand who truly John Edwards is.For him taking stand for Obama in the last debate,it's now obvious he's just an opportunist guy leaning towards whoever he thinks maybe the democratic nominee to land a vice presidential spot in general election.
    But this guy didn't help John Kerry win South Carolina his Claimed "backyard" neither North Carolina from where he served in the Senate,he won't win South Carolina primary.Old days are over John!
    Nobody from those state trust him,whatever he says its just "witchcraft powder"

    January 10, 2008 at 8:13 am |
  388. Joe Tyrrell

    Some respondents seem to think that Obama would harvest Edward votes if Edwards drops out. I doubt it. I think Edwards should stay in untill someone locks-up suffficient elegates to win. He dose not have to win any state to pick up some delegats. If neiother of the front runners have a lock by the convention, Edwards would be in a very good position.

    January 10, 2008 at 8:20 am |
  389. jeff j

    All Democrats that share a love for this country need to understand that we have an opportunity to secure the Whitehouse for possibly another 16 years!! The perfect scenario is set if Hillary is President and Mr. Obama the Vice-President. We receive a possible two term President while Mr. Obama acquires the necessary experience to lead for another two terms beyond. The Clintons have been up against the Republican machine and have beaten it down at every turn. Obama, as charismatic of a figure as he is, is also a great unknown and the Republicans will chew him up in the general election... he would be a novice on a political battlefield. I sincerely hope that this is the scenario that plays out. Iraq, Iran, China, the economy and the future of our children are at stake.

    Go Dems!!

    January 10, 2008 at 8:35 am |
  390. Eddie

    1st time visitor to your blog. There really is something going on in america and it is that we have had more than a belly full of bush. What we need know is a leader as Hillary Clinton is with the experience of what has and hasn't worked in the past. She has worked tirelessly on many issues facing our great nation. Obama is full of a whole bunch of "I have a dream speaches and that is what he is captureing his audience with. I hope people see the light, Obama is a good man but?? He needs to wait in line and build on his experiences The very best to all
    Eddie in New York

    January 10, 2008 at 8:40 am |
  391. John of Alabama

    Jack, I have yet to figure out the brother and sister battle on the Demo's side. One has know experience in the White House, and the other has housekeeping experience, then you put them both together and you have a new but the same old House as you do now. No work just a paycheck from Chevron, Exxon, Mobil, and the other big business, that want favors for them to pass own to the working people that have to go to work pay for their gas, food, house payments, and last the high cost of living that keeps going out of sight. Dont get me started on CLIMATE CHANGE none of the present people are worried about that. As do they with the war that was started with no ones permission. And it will stay that was as long as we have a war monger in the WHITE HOUSE spending the tax payers money on wars that will never be won the way the President wants. The excelent payraise they got would fund the war for 6 months, but they could not give the brave men and women that put their lives on the line 24/7 , They got a small 3 percent raise was a 3.5 then OUR Wonderfull PRESIDENT VETOED that and that of the veterans allowance to help the wounded disabled and PTSD and other war wounds. The republicans are no better the work the same. Thank you for allowing me to bend your ear on this note your friend John

    January 10, 2008 at 8:46 am |
  392. Khal

    I think that this campaigning is very,very good for America.....the Clinton Era should
    be over with, what I mean by that, is this....Hillary Clinton was Mrs. President for (2)
    terms and we know it, what does she want now? to be Madam President...and Bill
    be the Stay at Home (ex-pres...almost impeached...? let sleeping dogs lie!! Some people never get enough of anything.

    January 10, 2008 at 8:56 am |
  393. Matt Mendenhall

    I sense most Democrats are agreeable to any of the three leading candidates of their party. There are strengths and weaknesses inherent in each of the three.

    But what a luxury for a party to have three acceptable candidates who will further discuss potent topics important to today's voter. The three of them will now continue to keep visible the Democratic view on things.

    The Republican Party, which has reigned supreme for the past 8 years, is instead divided sharply. The chasm between the Huckabee wing and the Romney wing is a profound obstacle for the party.

    The differences between Clinton and Obama are subtle and nuanced. The differences between Romney and Huckabee are significant and deep. In addition, the turnout in both Iowa and New Hampshire demonstrate that it is the Democratic Party that is engaged and motivated.

    January 10, 2008 at 8:58 am |
  394. Jim

    Jack! First let me say that my choice was Bill Richardson. I am now a Clinton man. When I turned on the TV the first thing I saw was the race card being played when Donna Brazil calling Bill Clinton A racist for pointing out that Obama was not being asked to be accurate about his voting. Bill Clinton is admired by most African Americans and it's a shame to fabricate a racial lie for political gain.
    I like Donna a lot but this was beneath her.

    January 10, 2008 at 9:01 am |
  395. darrellj

    Hillary will raise her experience as the major point as to why she should be elected. She's tested, vetted, ECT. However, the American people need to know more about her experience, period. All documents that are safe in the national archive that has HER name within them in relation to the Clinton Administration NEED TO BE RELEASED.

    As it stands now, the American people are just suppose to take her word for her experience? For the last 20 years, we have had the same people in office. THINK ABOUT THAT!!! 20 YEARS!! No thanks, it's time for something new.

    As for Obama's experience, I have looked into this. It seems most Americans will just sit back and get their information from CNN, MSNBC, CNBC or any other news channel. READ PEOPLE, READ.

    Barack Obama has been on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senate Committee On Veteran Affairs, Senate Committee On Health, Education, Labor and Pensions and the Senate Committee Of Homeland Security and Government Affairs. Obama is also a constitutional professor. I think as a constitutional professor, his roots taught him a very important lesson and it's in his message of change. WE THE PEOPLE! That is how the constitution begins, right? WE THE PEOPLE. Have we felt like we were a part of our government even during the Clinton years? I don't know about you, but I haven't.

    Barack Obama also has very solid opinions about every major issue facing us today. From the economy to terrorism. From education to energy and the environment. From foreign policy to health care. From immigration to Iraq. I could go on and on and on again.

    The point is, when many people say Obama doesn't have the experience, they are not truely looking into the facts. As Americans, as the New Hampshire poll results have shown recently, WE THE PEOPLE, need to investigate every candidate that is running. READ PEOPLE READ. After you've done this, tell me that Obama doesn't deserve a fair shot at the winning the democratic election.

    January 10, 2008 at 9:02 am |
  396. Tom Downes


    Behind every great man is a even greater women, so why not hand-off the reigns off to a women. It's time for our country to refocus on the values that Mrs. Clinton has dedicated her life on improving ( family, heathcare, education, the poor and unfortunate ) and less on being the bully of the world. I know its in our nature. It's not our fault. And for the men out there who berate and belittle and impeede the accomplishments and eperience of Mrs. Clinton, would you treat your own mother that way?

    Tom Downes
    Simsbury, CT

    January 10, 2008 at 9:03 am |
  397. Dan Broe

    Grownup democrats who take a strategic look at the situation have to ask themselves of the three candidates who remain, who is the one most likely to prevail if nominated? The answer has to be Edwards. The Republicans will feel as if they have been provided with miraculous deliverance, if Democrats nominate either of the current frontrunners. If Clinton is nominated, she will unite and re-energize the Republicans, who despise her and her husband. Obama vs. McCain? McCain will win, setting the stage for an 8-year presidency of the Republican who suceeds him after one term. A three way race with Bloomberg, Obama, and McCain? Obama will finish third. In a three way race, Edwards is the only Democrat with a chance. In a two way race, he will beat whoever the Republicans nominate. Democrats in the remaining primary states, expecially those on Feb., 5th, need to decide if they want to nominate the candidate they most like or if they want to win in 2008. Bloomberg can wait until March to decide. Due to his extraordinary wealth, he would be the first third party candidate since Teddy Roosevelt in 1912 with a legitimate chance to win. Democrats must keep this in their calculus before going to the polls.

    That's why Edwards still matters.

    January 10, 2008 at 9:14 am |
  398. Brian Iowa

    I HOPE that a democrat will win the White House this year! To do that I think Hillary needs to put up the crowd a little more, and continue doing what she is...answering Americas questions! I for one think that is the reason she won NH, she showed people she was there for them because she answered their questions and concerns the best way. I have stated on here that I would vote Republican if Obama won the nomination...the reason behind that is I need to know more, and we shouldn't need to go to a scripted website to find out more!! I for one think to win the nomination Obama needs to answer questions like Hillary has, he needs to answer all the questions people through at him Why the "present/no vote" votes? His stance on certain issues. His back ground. Most importantly he needs to go further with his message of change, how is this going to be accomplished, what is it going to look like? Whenever we get a new President we get change, Bill Clinton was good for this country to a point, W. has not been that good where change is concerned for this country!

    If Obama answers the questions I have, then I would really like to see a:

    Clinton/Obama 08


    Obama/Clinton 08


    I think that would bring in the base and independents....plus I think the combination of leadership, experience, freshness, and energy would be a great thing for America!!

    January 10, 2008 at 9:16 am |
  399. Bucko

    The difference will be money. The more established/older voters have more of it than the college/younger voters do. As like everything in America you get the best government money can buy.

    January 10, 2008 at 9:23 am |
  400. Ron H.

    I am not even an Obama or Hillary fan, but the internet is on fire today with this computer count-hard count problem. Obama was shorted 6,000 votes in one county, and Romney received 17,000 after the hard copy count was done in NH. They also found another 5,100 for RP...."We forgot to put RP on the tally sheet when we turned it in", is the exact quote from the reported polling place. Then they found out that the guy who was hired to verify the count of the Diebold voting machines has a criminal record.

    Jack, this issue supersedes ANY candidate, and needs to be gotten under control before we can start picking.

    January 10, 2008 at 9:29 am |
  401. Ray

    It is always good to listen to a trade unionist and a college propfessor reciting historical events, But this is a presidential politics. Big crowd will not translate into votes. Can Obama start telling Americans What he is going to do. Beside he is an wholesale Liberal, gone were the days when American presidency will go a liberal. Todays world is complex , we don't need an intern president like GWB. We all see the impact of that with how Dick Cherney and co ruin the first term of Bush with bad decisions. We need a person that can do, not learning on the job.

    January 10, 2008 at 9:32 am |
  402. Ron H.

    This puts things in perspective, here's a article written by Ron Paul...

    The Ties That Strangle
    by Rep. Ron Paul

    I recently highlighted the irony of sending nearly $1
    billion overseas in military earmarks as we close down
    bases here at home to save money. Our government's flawed
    foreign policy troubles me especially in light of recent
    events in Pakistan.

    Benazir Bhutto's assassination was a great tragedy.
    Pakistan is now more than ever teetering on chaos. And all
    the money we have sent Musharraf has inadvertently drawn a
    target on our backs.

    Musharraf, unfortunately, appears to have learned how to
    work our system, much in the way a career welfare recipient
    has learned to do the same. The perpetual welfare recipient
    promises to look for a job. Musharraf has promised to look
    for Bin Laden. Both are terrible investments of American
    taxpayer dollars, however with Musharraf, its been an
    astonishing $10 billion loss over the last few years. But
    it is even worse than that. With his recent actions
    declaring martial law, and dismissing the justices of the
    supreme court, he is to the rest of the world, and to
    Pakistanis, a wildly unpopular, power hungry, brutal
    military dictator. The perception by most is that we are
    propping him up while simultaneously urging Ms. Bhutto back
    into Pakistan as a lamb to the slaughter.

    The trouble is the average Pakistani will have little doubt
    regarding Bhutto's death, regardless if it was orchestrated
    by Musharraf or not. At this point it is almost irrelevant
    who was responsible or how she died. The perception is what
    will fuel the anger. My great fear is their anger towards
    Musharraf's military regime will be targetted towards his
    enablers – the United States.

    This is the problem with our government involvement in the
    internal affairs of other nations. Our friend one day is
    our enemy the next. And all our friends' enemies become our
    enemies. How many times have we armed BOTH sides of a
    conflict because of this? There is little for us to gain
    from this policy, and simultaneously a lot of trouble we
    get ourselves into. It is not a rational or intelligent way
    to interact with the world.

    The administration has behaved as if there are only two
    choices in foreign policy – sending money or sending bombs.
    Our founding fathers knew a better way – to talk with our
    neighbors, do honest business with them, cultivate
    friendship, allow travel and open communication. We should
    neither initiate violence, nor take sides in conflicts that
    are none of our business. The American taxpayers are
    working hard enough to support their families here at home.
    If an American wants to send money overseas for a conflict
    or cause, let them, but do not slap Americans in the face
    by forcefully sending their children's college money abroad
    to subsidize despotic foreign governments. Our children
    should be going off to college, not going off to more
    senseless foreign wars.

    I was deeply saddened to hear of Benazir Bhutto's death. My
    hope is that we can change our foreign policy moving
    forward and truly make strides this year toward peace on
    earth and goodwill toward men.

    January 10, 2008 at 9:35 am |
  403. Caryl Robin Dresher

    What will ultimately decide this race is the diligence of the news organizations.
    We saw in the last preseidential election the rampant fraud. So I put forth...what if the polls were not wrong in NH?

    Back in the day when my grandmother was a political operative in NY, she would tell me about how to disqualify paper ballots. Any stray marks on a ballot caused it be disqualified. They put broken pencil points under their finger nails and mark the ballots of their opponents if they thought it was going to be a close election.

    If you are baffled...ask more questions... I am not saying that Hillary's people cheated...I am saying there is more here than just giving Mrs. Clinton points for being sad. The leader of Germany and Mrs. Bhuto did not have to rely on the aw-poor baby tactic to get ahead.

    If Mrs. Clinton can't handle the stress and win on her solid policies and ideas-I don't want that president. And I certainly don't want another dynasty-we have all seen where a family dynasty has gotten us. Bill has already given us a peek at how much this is about him...

    January 10, 2008 at 9:36 am |
  404. pat

    who cares who wins anyway they both great candidates am not surprise is very tight because it certain one of them will become the next president tell those repoblicans not to waist too much of there worth

    January 10, 2008 at 9:47 am |
  405. Brian


    The short answer; whichever media network the voter happens to turn to the morning of the primary

    January 10, 2008 at 9:48 am |
  406. Leonard


    I feel one of the two (Obama/Clinton), will slip up. Which will allow Senator John Edwards, to move up. Then we will have a brokered convention, and it will be whoever cuts the best deal. I feel you will see an Edwards/Obama ticket in November. Watch the debate, on the 15th. Edwards, will make his move, and someone will slip up. And I do not think it will be Hillary. Just my opinion Jack. However, we both know, who ever the Democrat nominee is, will sweep into the White House in November.


    January 10, 2008 at 9:51 am |
  407. D. Danis

    I believe that what will finally get the American people to decide who the Democratic nominee will be their realization, after all the hoopla and soaring aspirations, that we desparately need a person whose intellect, experience, experitise in sober analytical discusions and willingness to listen to others will win the day. And that will be Hillary Clinton, I hope and pray.

    January 10, 2008 at 9:54 am |
  408. Thomas Shepherd

    This question contiunes to illustrate the media blackout of John Edwards. Even after he did well in Iowa his coverage on CNN went down. He is being out spent 6 to 1. He refuses to take corporate money. How refreshing. He is the first main stream politician in my life time that has the guts to take on corporate America. To bad that the media is part of corporate America that has total control over what Americans will hear or most obviously not hear about John Edwards.
    Thomas Shepherd

    January 10, 2008 at 9:55 am |
  409. Anne

    The biggest problem with Hillary is if she gets the nomination, the Democrats can forget the White House. Too many people dislike her and it's too easy to just sit at home and not vote.

    Regarding Obama, he has as much experience as Lincoln had and more than Eisenhower.

    I'm a registered independent who will make a point to vote for Obama, and certainly Bloomberg, if he runs.

    January 10, 2008 at 9:57 am |
  410. Michael McHugh

    Mike Bloomberg will be the deciding factor . If he decides to enter the race , it will be a must for Dems to choose Obama

    January 10, 2008 at 10:00 am |
  411. Ron H.

    This neo right wing, war mongering, brain-washing, corporate serving group, who claims themselves to be republican, are NOT, and DO NOT represent the interest of the republican base which I am a part of. The Middle East is now a runaway train, World War III hangs in the balance, and perception among the people in the region is that WE DID IT, or supported the people who did it. This is really bad. Iran, Pakistan, Syria, everything is falling apart and EVERYBODY IS BLAMING US. THAT'S WHY ENGLAND PACKED UP AND LEFT TOWN, THEY COULD SEE THIS COMING.This is the MOST important election ever. I will vote for whatever candidate will get us out of the region as soon as possible. p.s. And I'm really upset that McCain said we may be there for another 100 years, what intelligent person could possibly support that?

    January 10, 2008 at 10:01 am |
  412. Joe Rogers

    Why is it that no one is discussing the recount that will take place in New Hampshire? There were counties that did not tally the votes correctly? Is CNN not aware of this developing story?

    January 10, 2008 at 10:04 am |
  413. John

    John Edwards is the key to a Barack Obama or Billary Clinton nomination. Bills recent peformances have shown that he is well past his Sell by Date. I entirely agree that John has very little chance of winning the nomination and is taking more potential votes from Barack than Hillary. Baracks declared intention to co-opt members of all political persuasions into his administration will lend it the experience it needs both domestic and Foreign. The Old guard in Washington better look out if he gets the nomination. Americas' most pressing problem is not terrorism or war but the Privately owned Federal Reserve Banks strangle hold on the Economy by its use of money supply and interest rates. It was responsible for every recession since it's inseption in 1914. including the recent Dot com bubble burst and the present sub prime mortgage collapse in the housing market giving the shareholders of the Federal Bank easy pickings to pick up stock in the regional banks increasing its power and strangle hold on the American working middle class and the economy. JFK saw this and produced an executive order to curb the feds power that is still law today but has never been acted upon, and was assasinated for his trouble. Today it's all about money not people Obama can change that.

    January 10, 2008 at 10:08 am |
  414. Leela

    Its the trust factor. I do not trust Hilary...she is a tricky and a mean 60 year old lady. She has a lot of experience on lying, acting and distorting.

    January 10, 2008 at 10:11 am |
  415. Jude

    Its as simple as ABC Obama is Black and Clinton is white. Let no one fool you its not yet time for a Black man to rule America. Clinton will win. Even if for some strange reason Clinton gets out of the race which I dont see that happening, Edwards will get the nomination.

    January 10, 2008 at 10:17 am |
  416. Antonia

    I believe that Mrs.Clinton is a strong woman and she has great view points. I'm most definately going to vote for her...not because she is a woman but because she stands for the rights of Americans. I believe that she was preparing her campaign when her husband was in office and she was a strong backbone for him. I believe that he shouldn't back down because people are talking because even though his wife is strong she needs that moral and emotional support. Like She says, she is human too... I am inspired that even against the odds, she is still running strong.... I admire her strength and her courage. She has also captivated the hearts of my 3rd graders..... I'm going to be proud to say...

    I VOTED CLINTON "08"!!!!!!!!!!!1

    January 10, 2008 at 10:23 am |
  417. Lynn

    I have read many, many posts in this thread and would like to know exactly what Obama's plan for change is? Sure he is handsome, young and appealing in those regards but what has he done? What does he plan to do and how does he plan to do it?

    Yes, the young are enamored of him but that only shows that they lack experience and that they vote based on a candidates ability to say the right buzz words and to look good doing it. Our youth live in a "what makes me feel good" mentality and Obama surely has the speeches and smile to fit that need.

    Obama is new to his office and in fact his own constituents are complaining on boards that he hasn't lived up to his promises to gain his senate seat. So no matter how pretty the package is if the box is empty what do you have?

    This country is facing the worst crisis issues that I have seen in my lifetime. Terrorism, war, immigration, an astounding debt, low moral, lack of confidence in our military, loss of the esteem of other countries, recession, etc. They will not be solved with a bunch of empty promises and glowing smiles or even with Oprah's tons of money and fame.

    We need an experienced, proven leader. I typically vote Democrat as my views are more along those lines however, if Obama wins the nomination for the Democrats in this election, I do not care who the Republican candidate is, I will be voting Republican as at least everyone on that side of the isle has a record that can be seen and experience. I want to know what is inside the package.

    January 10, 2008 at 10:25 am |
  418. beenie

    I don't care which of the Democratic candidates gets the nomination at this point. Any one of them is better than what we have now. The ONLY thing I want is for the media to quit trying to make up our minds for us. You guys are so hung up on being the first one(s) to break THE perceived story of this electorial process that you make HUGE mistakes (think New Hampshire, people!). BACK OFF!

    January 10, 2008 at 10:29 am |
  419. Paul R. Schattman, Ph.D.

    the best outcome for The United States would be brokered conventions on both sides! What's wrong with the system at the moment is that the 2 major parties have become too weak.
    Instead of crying "a plague on both your houses", independents should pick a party and join up; take control back from the "true believers" of the left and the right, and return the system to sanity and consensus.
    Them's my sentiments

    January 10, 2008 at 10:31 am |
  420. Amanda

    For me it is about who ultimately is the best person to run the country in a fiscally responsible manner and who will keep us safe

    Obama would nothing if not for Oprah!

    It is digusting that Oprah, a woman who has long preached on her show about women's strength and rights would back a man simply becuase he is black. Shame on her.

    Obama is really nothing. He uses his voice to slam Hillary on her clothes, her emotions and anything else without substance. Let us not forget he suggested we go in and fight pakistan! Good idea Obama!!!

    Let's vote Hillary in and let's see this country get back to its potential

    January 10, 2008 at 10:33 am |
  421. h.c. ecco

    the difference will be what it WAS that skipped past the page-six mentality of wolfie and the other cable ravers who failed the new hampshire quiz, (and what it always IS jacko) – the economy!

    anyone paying attention to the conditions behind recent labor stats and the dow plunge that have us on the verge of a regan double-digit revolution redux would have sensed the wage-earners worst fears rising; from there its hardly a step to the memory of the clinton economy and the budget surplus it left to us.

    primal stuff lads.

    January 10, 2008 at 10:36 am |
  422. Lamar Chapman


    WE THE PEOPLE are in trouble with OBAMA! If you really want to know who Barack Obama is, just look at what he has done for the People of the State of Illinois.

    The American Bar Association (of which Obama is a member) took a national survey (March 2006) on the "Condition of the Courts in America." The survey concluded that when it comes to "Fairness in the Courts" Illinois ranks forty-seven (47) out of fifty (50) states. Only the states of Texas, Alabama and Mississippi have courts that do more harm to black people, particulary black men, than the State of Illinois. The American Bar Association's survey also says that when it comes to corruption, the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois is the third most corrupt court in the United States of America. Not only does Barack Obama live in Cook County, in addition to being a United States Senator he is also an "Officer of the Court."

    Mr. Obama should not allow himself to be used that way!

    January 10, 2008 at 10:37 am |
  423. KF Rockville

    Character and values are the most important quality for leader ship. They will guide the POTUS. Charisma is nice Experience is EXPECTED, We all know that no President leads without the Cabinet and his/ her advisors and the support of Congress and the American people.
    Let's insist on getting answers to our questions. Whatever is most important to you. Let's make the candidates discuss and disclose their outlines for the issues. We know that everything will go through Congress and is subject to changes.Governing is about Civics. If we don't support the process we can not push through the laws that will enact change. WE have to be involved with the process. We CANNOT simply VOTE someone into office and expect MIRACLES.It is unrealistic. We have to stay involved. We have the internet , Blackberries and email to keep on top of the issues. Let not just vote LET"S make a pack with our candidate to STAY INVOLVED for the NEXT 4 YEARS.


    January 10, 2008 at 10:51 am |
  424. corky

    Hey Jack maybe you and Wolfe should run for nomination seeing CNN had all the answers pundits galore. Get over it Hillary won New Hampshire. As far as I am concerned I believe the Republicans want Obama as Nominee figure he is easier to be than Hillary.

    January 10, 2008 at 10:52 am |
  425. David Albert

    The Clintons will keep repeating B.S. and the fickle mush-heads will believe "if Bill's said it that many times it must be true." And come November we'll see Hillary bawling her eyes out begging "why can't you love me; for me." Oh well. There's always 2016.

    January 10, 2008 at 10:52 am |
  426. Cynthia

    I keep hearing people say that John Edwards is taking votes form Sen.Obama
    when the exit polls indicate just the opposite. In Iowa the people who voted
    for Edwards listed themselves as Conservative Democrats, mostly middle
    aged. I think this group would be more likely to trend for the more moderate
    leaning Hillary than Senator Obama. I would hope that neither Senator
    Clinton or Obama would ask John Edwards to join their ticket, I think he weakened Kerry's campaign, and was a major factor in Bush's re-election.
    I guess we are living in a time of instant gratification regarding every aspect
    of our lives. People make snap judgements and want to be rewarded for
    their efforts. That may be fine for choosing and American Idol contestant
    or playing video games; but when the choice we make can alter the coarse
    of history, I don't want a few thousand citizens chooseing who will be the
    President. I would urge all the candidates to stay in the race and let the
    multitudes decide. As it stands right now I will support Senator Clinton,
    unless Senator Obama can get less audacity and be a little more specific,
    he won't convince me he is ready to be the right agent of change.

    January 10, 2008 at 10:57 am |
  427. Onari, PHoenix AZ


    Senator Obama is a good man, but my concern is this, George Bush was a Washington outsider who campaigned for change based on Compassionate Conservative, what did we get an inexperienced commander -in-chief who takes instruction from Neocons...it ended us in two wars with no end in sight and deficit in trillions as against surplus of Bill Clinton.

    Honestly, the job after George Bush presidency is enormous and requires a lot of experience and foresight to proffer a solution. That's why I will vote for Hillary Clinton any day and never will I vote a republican because the republicans only care about their own pocket.

    Come to look at Al Gore an intelligent, smart and experienced man to run the country was voted out because some people said they need a change and voted George Bush and ended up with 8 years of mess around USA and the world....reason Al Gore was not charismatic and same is said of Hillary! Ludicrous, where is hard work, experience, great performance, Honesty and perseverance then?

    Are we looking at sweet talk alone...talk is cheap. We need feet put into the vision, to me thats Hillary R Clinton. Go Hillary!

    January 10, 2008 at 11:01 am |
  428. Samson

    JOANNA , Joanna, joanna please keep it clean and truthfull can ya, your comment speaks more of your own shortcomings than Barack's "since he was born?" everything"

    "I have read everything i need to know about him from the time he was born. I do not care how many times he has changed schools and religions, his raising was done with...."

    Come on, haven't this been settled already, saying that Obama is a Muslim is a blatant display of your own ignorance, hatred, stupidity, and fear. This is why our country is deteriorating, this hatred and divisive partisanship has invaded even party lines. You and others have been douped into believing that the violent irrational fundamentalism of a miniscule percentage of the Muslim faith threatens every instance of your very existence, that a tent rebellion with only make-shift bombs and guns from WWII really have any chance of bringing down American. I have more faith in our military than that, read up on China, if you want to talk about threats to our way of life, the establishment would rather you didn't though, since their supporters are realizing such large profits from a country with no human rights standards a military 3 times as large as ours and technology beyond our understanding. For your info China just blinded one of "our "satelittes a few months back with a laser as well as destroyed one of their own in a "test", a 60 year old "katouse" rocket fired by eye in the desert can't do that on it's best day. Unless you didn't know our satelitte communications capabilities are fundamental in the way we defend our homeland and fight wars we cannot effectively do either without them, now that is a eminent threat. The pertinent issue is the true intent of our "so called" intelligence gathering efforts. Under this administratiion these agencies have been used as propaganda machines furthering the partisan divisiveness in America. The same machine that convinced the American people that Iraq was an eminent threat to the U.S. and presently is attempting to do the same in regards to Iran. Our country should be lead by a President who has the ethics and judgement to decern what is in the best interest of the American people as opposed to what is in soley in the interest of the military industrial complex, medical industrial complex, multi-national corporations, or super-elite partisan party demogods. The youth of America understands that, we do not exist in a vaccum. P.S. Barack is a professor of Constitutional Law, and in my opinion an indepth knowledge the Constitution is kind of significant in regards to the leading America "the standard bearer of freedom and liberty which is supposedly based on Constitutional governance. The Constitution "was" Barack's occupation. The President works with various experts who like himself have dedicated their lives to their fields of expertise, I am confident that any President will have access to the best support and advisors that America has to offer in regards to any issue this country faces. An effective leader isn't the leader because he "knows everything" himself but rather he/she knows that they must call on highest level of expertise available, and then carefully decern the best course of action given the estimates given by those advisors, all while considering the Constitutionality of the action being considered, as well as whether said action would be in the best interest of the American people.

    Now ask yourself who would be the most effective in doing this?, who is most removed from the partisan divisiveness which destroys that process?, and who Is in the best position to challenge those historically entrenched interests which have dominated Washington politics for decades?

    Your answer should get your vote regardless of who that may be or what party they are with.

    As indicated in my comments my choice is Obama 08'
    This is our Country to Change, we've done it before we will do it again!

    January 10, 2008 at 11:01 am |
  429. Barb

    You are GUILTY of Hillary bashing. Quite telling ever body how you feel about her, we do not care.

    January 10, 2008 at 11:05 am |
  430. vince nizzardi

    Jack, the decieding factor will be the ratio of Americans who have taken the time to listen, read, and become informed of what what is going on in the great country, versus the majority, who when you talk to them , have no clue about any major issues facing America, and will vote for a candidate just because they like them, or have always backed one of the major parties. Better informed Americans. will ultimately produce a 3rd party choice, that we will get behind, ram down the throats of the dems, and republican parties, as we kick them to the curb where they belong

    January 10, 2008 at 11:11 am |
  431. BigDaddyJ

    What will ultimately decide the outcome of the battle between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton? How racist the country really is will decide IMO.

    Obama is clearly the best chance for change and Billary had it's chance on National Health and FAILED. Out with the old and in with the new.

    I am a long time Democrat who absolutely can’t vote for the Hillary Machine.

    Shady business deals
    Sketchy commodity deals
    FBI Gate
    Right Wing conspiracies
    8 million dollar book advances
    Those incredible last day pardons

    I could go on and on.

    Can anyone point me in the direction of the “Democrats for McCain” movement? I wish to volunteer

    January 10, 2008 at 11:22 am |
  432. roxanne

    Issues will decide ultimately who will win this time. Obama is still a unknown Hilary despite all her time in Washington is still a newbie and the rest can be vice presidential candidates at best. What the people of new hampshire and iowa proved is that people care about real issues this time. I am so happy that in my lifetime I will live to see an election where the american people are beginning to be the lobbyist for health,wealth. and security. AMEN

    January 10, 2008 at 11:25 am |
  433. Jim

    If for some reason Edwards drops out, he shouldn't endorse anybody. He has always been loyal to voters' interests and I think he should. and probably will, let the voters decide. As he frequently points out, elections shouldn't be about power brokering or selling votes to one side or another. Having said that, however, I don't think he will drop out...

    January 10, 2008 at 11:27 am |
  434. Matt

    Bill will lead Hillary to victory.

    January 10, 2008 at 11:33 am |
  435. Neal Ghosh

    Anyone who believes Obama doesn't have a full grasp and knowledge of the issues clearly hasn't read his book, where he dissects almost everyone of them chapter by chapter. Any candidate can have a concrete and detailed plan of action for every issue , but if they have no way of unifying Congress to put into action (think last year's immigration bill for Reps, or child health bill for Dems), then it is all for naught. Ironically, advocating specific policies which are infeasible due to their inability to be implemented is more of a "false hope" than the claims that Obama is criticized for.

    January 10, 2008 at 11:51 am |
  436. Chris

    Re: the polls and the NH primary results, I have a couple of thoughts after getting sick of sitting back watching all the pundits endlessly be entirely confused as to how the polling process 'seemed' to go wrong in NH:

    The polls were not incorrect per se, but they were not carried out (beginning to end) using acceptable research standards that polling groups are supposed to adhere to in their process. The methods used: 1) starting a poll Saturday morning BEFORE a "confounding variable" was introduced (the Debates), and ending on Sunday AFTER the confounding variable had aleady been introduced mid-way through the polling means that this research/poll not only lacks some validity in its design (is it measuring what it's intended to measure) but mostly reliability in its design (are the research/polling results repeatable - the actual election results or any other independent poll carried out using the same time frame and methods, etc.) (two hallmarks of stringent research). 2) The research or poll should have 'started AND ended' either before or after the Debates. The reason the Republican polling did not change when the actual votes were cast is b/c there was basically no confounding variables introduced during or after the polling was completed. 2) There were also two additional confounding variables introduced in the Dem. Primary the day before the vote: a) with Hillary's tears and b) Bill's stepping in to aggressively attack her opponent (this had not occurred in the past - so the result of his influence in this way had never been measured). New polling should have been done immediately and/or the old polls should have been promptly tossed out based on the above. 3) Finally, it is also never reliable to take 'averages' of poll results from several different polls/researchers that most likely used different methodology and/or were conducted over different periods of time.

    Re: the NH results: I believe that the issue of absentee ballots that were cast well before the NH election began and were aggressively sought after by the Clinton camp even well before the Iowa campaigning and primary may have also had an impact - but there is little to no mention of what that total number is, b/c that would heavily favor Clinton as the votes would have been sent in well before Iowa, when Clinton was well ahead in the NH polls and would have come from institutional Clinton/Democratic supporters who would have felt she was the likely candidate to be nominated at the time. The variable of absentee ballots has to be included in any good research design, or there needs to be a qualifying statement to that effect.

    My .02 cents

    January 10, 2008 at 11:53 am |
  437. John Demmler

    What bothers me about our presidential selection process is that public, led by the incompetence of the media, has any idea where any of these candidates actually stand on the issues. The debates are structured in 30 second sound bites that prohibit detailed policy discussions. A suggestion for the upcoming CNN debate: ask detailed, probing questions into each candidate’s policy positions. Look into the positions 10 layers deep and ask very tough “and then what” or “how does that affect this” type of questions. This is an election for the President of the United States, not American Idol.

    January 10, 2008 at 11:59 am |
  438. Ed

    Hillary got my vote when she almost cried. Wife is for Hillary. My 5 year old daughter is for Hillary. Got it??

    January 10, 2008 at 12:01 pm |
  439. Keith

    Voter fraud.

    January 10, 2008 at 12:09 pm |
  440. James

    When people start to ask the hard questions about who has the best command of the issues and ability to address them, then we will see a clear leader. Peoples' views have been clouded by rhetoric. If one takes a hard look at the performance of the candidates in the debates, it is clear who has the answers and the ability to drive change – Hillary! When asked the hard questions she starts by explaining the breadth and depth of the issue and then addresses the solution. When Edwards and Obama are asked the hard questions, they quickly flip to their standard tag lines, looking to capitalize on the opportunity to speak and ram another "pay off line" down the electorates' throats. In fact when a question addressed to Edwards or Obama was subsequently referred onto Hillary she would first remind everyone of the question and its various parts (which had been lost on the panel and the audience due to rhetoric), then go onto explain the issues and what she would do about them. We are not electing an American Idol winner here folks; we are electing the President of the United States – the leader of the free world. Lets' focus on who has the best knowledge of the issues and the ability to address them and not on who sings the catchiest tune!!!

    January 10, 2008 at 12:12 pm |
  441. Donald

    The caucus in New Hampshire resulted in a tie. As we know, popularity does not count in politics, vis-a-vis the 2004 election, and both received 9 delegate votes. Both candidates have very similar views of most of the issues, so why not go ahead and make the team everyone will vote for on election day. I'd rather see Obama as Pres. and Hillary as VP just to help eliminate the "dynasty" perception.

    January 10, 2008 at 12:16 pm |
  442. Monet

    People do make their own choice on whom they would want the vote on the highest position of this country regardless whether it is a woman or man. Pls stop on the emphasis of the gender or race of a certain candidate. People like me with a little voice do know exactly what is going on around me. We have to bear in our mind that enough is enough and we need somebody who is a person of substance and who is capable of leading this country. Do not let anybody dictate you just because she or he is good at this or that. For me Hilary Clinton is the best candidate not because she is a woman like me but because I consider her a person with atmost substance and has the full capacity to lead this country with atmost respect and dignity, and knowledge to a full comeback. I hope that people will really learn from the past and will just move on from what we have seen and experienced.

    January 10, 2008 at 12:30 pm |
  443. Mary

    The women of all ages will decide this election. In the first debate when Tim Russert went after Hillary Clinton and later when John Edwards and Obama ganged up on her and the NEWS people cut her heart out, stomped it and then buried her , I knew who my vote would go to. How foolish all of you look.

    January 10, 2008 at 12:33 pm |
  444. Alan Seidman

    Some of my republican friends were very disappointed in Mitt Romney’s showing in the NH primary. When John McCain called him the agent of change, it must have struck a cord with voters. This reminded me of the moniker attached to Bill Clinton when he was perceived as changing his position on issues. So, I’m now going to nickname Mitt Romney, “Slick Willard” (most folks do not know that his first name is Willard).

    I suggest that voters look to those candidates that articulate a position and have the needed experience to lead our country. That’s why I voted for Senator Clinton.

    January 10, 2008 at 12:41 pm |
  445. DeDe



    January 10, 2008 at 12:42 pm |
  446. Allan Williams

    I hope it is the sustenancee of Hillary Clinton's speeches and not the sermon like speeches by Barack Obama. Any one can get up and sound Kennedyish or Kingish and move the crowd but where is the beef. How will you bring about change besides sitting down at the table. Obama needs more experience and sustenance to his message and campaign but has potential in future elections.

    January 10, 2008 at 12:46 pm |
  447. dave

    I may be one of the few who has read "The rise and fall of the third reich", and I am more or less indifferent to the rhetoric surrounding the presidential campaigns, but when I heard Obama say something to the effect that,"We will change America, then we will change the world", just a day or two before the NH vote, and shown on CNN, it made me think of,"Today Germany, tomorrow the world". Shouldn't someone ask what exactly are the changes the leader has is mind, because if he is not forthright, every follower has their own erroneous idea.
    Absent specifics, Obama scares me.

    January 10, 2008 at 12:47 pm |
  448. Rhonda

    Dear Mr. Cafferty,
    Have you or anyone on CNN reported on Maya Angelou's radio ad for the primary election in South Carolina? I heard it on NPR, but have not heard it mentioned anywhere else. Here's the link:
    Maya Angelou: Hillary Is 'My Girl'
    Oprah's out stumping for Obama, but the TV queen's longtime friend and mentor, Maya Angelou, is endorsing Sen. Hillary Clinton in a new radio ad airing in South Carolina.

    In it, Angelou says, "I am inspired by Hillary Clinton's commitment and courage ... a daughter, a wife, a mother ... my girl."

    Listen to the audio here.

    More: Maya Angelou for Hillary: New Radio Ad in South Carolina

    Geoffrey Bennett

    Tags: Hillary Clinton | Maya Angelou | Oprah Winfrey

    4:27 PM ET | 12-10-2007 | permalink

    January 10, 2008 at 12:49 pm |
  449. bill e

    I pray it is not Hillary. With her 35 years experience she represents what is wrong with politics and this country. With all this experience we have high taxes, 50 million un insured people , the lobbyists running the country and politicians who have no morals and lie daily. Shame on all of us our children will hate us for our lack of interest. Wake up soon I truly believe this is our last chance to right the ship. Go on you tube and listen to George Carlin, its over the game is rigged we are not members of the club. So sad but so very true.

    January 10, 2008 at 12:52 pm |
  450. David Raflo

    Copy of an email I just posted on Obama's web site: Important suggestions to help beat Clinton. Hillary talks of all her experience, but no one has challenged her to specify exactly what she’s accomplished over the years. Many of her years in The White House were as First Lady, not an elected official. And even then, her program for universal health care failed—mainly due to her poor leadership skills (alienating style). Also, the Obama people should research the contention that she essentially dropped her health care proposal at that time partly because her friends and supporters in the Pharmaceutical industry objected so strongly—this would help underscore her strong ties to the special interests and big corporations (Sam Walton of Wal-Mart reportedly referred to Hillary as “his little lady” when she worked as his corporate attorney). After her health-care failure, you’ll recall, Hillary essentially took on a much quieter “behind-the-scenes” role in The White House. She didn’t accomplish any more than many other First Ladies, and probably less. Research of various biographies on Mrs. Clinton could provide good material for exposing her manipulative and vindictive communication style, too. And it would be great if Mr. Obama could touch on the sour feelings we Americas hold about Mr. Clinton’s adultery and his lies to the American people, and Hillary’s politically expedient decision to “stand by her man,” which she earlier declared she wasn’t going to do. These are dark and haunting echoes from the past that our country can do without at this crucial juncture, especially with so much work ahead of us to re-build our image internationally after the enormous damage reeked by Bush. What must the rest of the world think of Americans, who resort to one of two choices on who can lead us—a Bush or a Clinton. I hope that Obama’s advisors will go on the offense to beat Hillary. I think that she’s the one getting the free ride by milking the gender issue. If McCain is the Republican nominee, he’s going to be very hard to beat, because he appeals to moderates and independents, like myself. McCain’s main weakness is his support for the war. Obama’s long-standing position against the war demonstrates his clear vision which offers America a real change in direction. And finally, I urge Obama to formulate and present specific ideas on the troubling state of our economy–how to keep jobs in America, strengthen the dollar, and overcome the corporate strangle-hold on our government (fueled by greed), which are ruining our economy and stealing our future. All the polls show that the candidates are not addressing the “economy” enough—please take the lead on that important subject. Thank you, Mr. Obama, for all your efforts to win a new direction for our country. I only hope that the election is not once again stolen—speed in the counting the ballots electronically is so much less important than having a truly reliable, un-tampered and fair count—let’s go back to a tamper-proof counting system that can be fully monitored by voter representatives. Many Americans have lost faith in the integrity of our election process. Without that—hope is gone and our democracy is lost.

    January 10, 2008 at 1:00 pm |
  451. Tony

    My questions for the voters that casted their votes in New Hampshire based on the weak emotions of Hillary Clinton are:
    1. Prior to the New Hampshire primary, what was their honest view of Hillary Clinton as a presidential candidate based on her previous stumps?
    2. After attending and listening to the democratic candidates, who was their honest choice before the display of emotion by Hillary that drew their sympathy?
    3. Do they vote for a candidate for the Oval office based on sympathy or conviction?
    4. Would they have seen those emotions from Hillary if she had won the Iowa caucauses and ahead in the polls in New Hempshire?
    5. which type of president do they want for America? The one that caves in under very little pressures ( potential loss in two early states) or the one that remains strong no matter the tumbles?
    The truth of the matter is that Hillary is desperate and the emotion was due to frustration solely because of her long ambition of wanting to be president, which she saw sliding, and definately not because of the future of the American people. She was never even taking questions from supporter when she was wallowing in her percieved "Inevitability" world.
    The youths will deliver America by voting enmass for Barack Obama and securing their future. They only need to know deep in their hearts that their time is now; stand up for it and come out to vote.
    Tony in LA

    January 10, 2008 at 1:07 pm |
  452. stella

    just curious what is it that hilary clinto wants to doas president that they couldnt get done for 8 yrs in office.did you guys know that for the last 19 yrs the president of america have been a clinton or bush???????????? is it not time for a change or should we give them uhmm lets say 100 more yrs in office i for one have had my fill for clinton and bush is time for a change!!!!!!!!! this bother line going to be a freaking dictatorship

    January 10, 2008 at 1:18 pm |
  453. Ruth

    First of all I think John Edwards is trying to set himself up as the next vise pres. Sound familar. I also pick up anger from him towards Clinton. I'm not immpressed. Second, I think that the country is more aware of their situation than we get credit for and we are all trying to be careful about the dicision we make for our next pres.
    To bad the top two Candidates can't get over themselves and run on the same ticket, The we get experience and new and young ideas' in one package.

    January 10, 2008 at 1:23 pm |
  454. Tony, Enterprise, Alabama

    This election is about experience, leadership, the economy, terrorism and the Iraq War.

    In spite of what the news media would have you believe, Senator Obama is no JFK. When JFK was elected he was a decorated war hero, had met with a variety of world leaders, had written Profiles in Courage, and had served in the US Congress or Senate for fourteen years.

    In spite of the news media constantly referring to Senator Clinton as "Mrs. Clinton" (highlighting her former First Lady status) intead of Senator Clinton; she is vastly more experienced than he is. She has been a Senator 6 years longer than Senator Obama and is an accomplished attorney in her own right with a tremendous amount of political and life experience to bring to the table.

    Us baby boomers are being counted out too soon. In spite of the news media bias for Senator Obama, Senator Clinton is going to win the nomination.

    January 10, 2008 at 1:24 pm |
  455. Bill in Houston TX

    Let's hope it is the conviction and common sense of the voting public that decides the outcome of this election and any other election. I am sick to death of hearing about strategies from political analysts and pundits or the latest polls. We should give American voters credit for thinking on their own and making up their own minds, as we saw happen in New Hampshire despite all the bloviation from so-called political experts.

    January 10, 2008 at 1:26 pm |
  456. Scott

    For the love of god, this race will come down to who has the ability to create change and has the experience to make it happen. What New Hampshire showed the voters who are torn between Hillary and Barack is that there is a question here: Do you want a President who can hit the ground running on day one OR do you want a President who is going to need training wheels and has only sat in the US Senate since 2004. Sorry, Obama, but your lack of experience, knowledge about the issues and your fuzzy policy standings make me want to support a candidate who I trust and who I can understand.

    January 10, 2008 at 1:27 pm |
  457. Dan Hickey

    Jack, I can't believe one of my posts lasted over one hour on here. You must be mellowing Jack. 'Freedom of the Press' and all that I guess?.

    January 10, 2008 at 1:32 pm |
  458. Carlene

    This race will come down to who has the best answers for America's problems. To be perfectly honest and I do not want to be too mean here:

    Hope is not a policy. Change does not tell us how you can reform healthcare and fix our economy.

    If Obama came out with some concrete proposals than maybe I could consider voting for him on Super Tuesday.

    However, his unclear stances on the issues and his lack of experience beg me to question his judgment and his ability to be a sound commander-in-chief.

    January 10, 2008 at 1:34 pm |
  459. Enemson.

    Is Sen. John Edwards a SABOTUER?
    I will be glad to see him prove that he is not and quickly by giving 'CHANGE' a chance in America as he desperately preaches.
    Sen. John, American loves and respects you and your desires for a change but the longer you remain in this race, the closer 'STATUS QUO' gets to the white House. You should read the handwriting on the wall and honorably step aside, join force with Sen. Obama who has a brighter chance so as to achieve that CHANGE dream. Help bring change to the American people that you claim to love even if not from you. That way, the future will hold you high as one of the principal pilots of the change when it came. Sure you would prefer to be remembered that way than as a CLUG in the way to change.
    The youth, middle class and progressive minds in America will vote for Barack and hopefully, he will win, whether or not Sen. John steps aside to join him.
    This wind of change is unstoppable; not even with tears.

    January 10, 2008 at 1:39 pm |
  460. Dwayne

    Adam from Oregon. You should still vote for who you want as president, stand up for your own beliefs and have some courage.
    Alot of people voted for Bush in 2000 and have nothing to be ashamed of. Why? because he hadn't shown what kind of selfish, self-serving president he would make. He was running on his track record from governor of Texas, well under the radar.

    You have alot to be ashamed of if you voted for him in 2004 however.

    As for Obama, we can only keep our fingers crossed that he will become the next president. It appears the caucus and primaries aren't rigged, since he won Iowa, this has given me faith that the process may not be corrupt. Clinton is a mistake for America because she is more self serving than most politicians. Either way it shows a bright future for America, because Republicans have successfully destroyed this country so much so that it is a forgone conclusion that a Democrat will be in the White House next year, showing America's attitudes have definately changed to be either a black man or a woman shows times are trully changing before our very eyes.

    January 10, 2008 at 1:40 pm |
  461. Charles L. Gardner

    I am disgusted with the arguements amongst all the candidates.
    They talk in half sentences .None of them can tell you or I what they are going to do if elected.They say change.They can't tell you how or what they'll do.I have a fourteen year old grand daughter that could do better.
    We have no one that is running for President.We have a lot of politicions
    being politicions.A bunch of spoiled brats wanting to discredit everyone else.
    To me Lou Dobbs has more knowledge than anyone there about the government.
    I would say the only way Hillary can boast knowledge of the Whitehouse is she
    was bossing Bill around while he was President.
    Obama has already changed position about the military twice since he started canpaigning.He acts like he's gonna change everything. He can;t without congress.Now if he were to say that he would try to sway congress to what he intends to do maybe. None of the runners can tell you what they are capable of doing to help this country.The list of priorities is getting longer.Watch Mexico.
    They are being advised by Cuba, Russia, And Iran. They are already entering our borders.Just what do you think what Mexico military is doing comming into our country with no resistance?Loredo Texas for instance.

    January 10, 2008 at 1:42 pm |
  462. Kurt Matthews

    Clearly Obama will win because he is now the "establishment" candidate as demonstrated by the bias shown by all polling organizations and major media organizaitons in the Iowa primary. Even the establishment failure, John Kerry, has frantically stepped in to support the Beltway Boys. Hillary is now running as an independent.

    January 10, 2008 at 1:48 pm |
  463. Chandra

    The Democrats and The Republicans are running for “CHANGE”!!!

    What is this thing call “Change”? What will it change; from and to what: Democracy to “Cultural Diversity and Diversify???

    Under “Cultural Diversity” a woman’s right to Vote, Marry, have Children, be employed, earn an income, own a home, voice opinions, communicate…etc. are all Defunct.

    A woman must first “gain/ask for permission” to be afford such rights. But, gaining permission comes with a process call “stringent guidelines” which is undisclosed and unpublished. This then makes a woman’s choice for freedom, under Cultural Diversity”, null.

    The question is: how is it that Sen. H. R. Clinton’s freedom for Democracy has not changed to “Cultural Diversity/Diversify” under “CHANGE” and what “Stringent Guidelines” does she have that is undisclosed to afford her the Rights to seek higher Political Office and expand her Career Goals and endeavors???

    In addition, the voters who voted for her, why are they not “Cultural Diversify”???? Besides, for the record, Sen. H. R. Clinton has no “track experiences” in politics; her only political office is having the position of Senator of New York, which she bullied her way into. She is demonstrating her position for change by being derelict in her responsibilities to her job position and requirements. She is unfocused as to her responsibilities to New York State.

    Further, it was not Sen. H. R. Clinton’s place/job to change The Health Care System when her husband (ex-President Clinton) was in Office. She had no political position at that time, only being a wife to a president of the United States. She was confused then as to her job/position/title and she is more confused as to her job title/responsibilities/ position/functions to New York State now.

    When Ex-President Bill Clinton took the platform in New Hampshire, he spoke as a person who has qualifications and experiences for what the Job will require. As an expert in Politics and the Oval Office, he denounced all male from the position; he denounced all Democrat Candidates from the position, he called for “CHANGE”.

    Well, to analyze this: He wants a Republican, a Woman, and change from a white person to a minority. This would be the Ultimate Change... Who will fit this type of CHANGE he is calling for? Ms. C. Jugmohan

    January 10, 2008 at 1:52 pm |
  464. Diane D., Queens, New York

    Kerry has come out to endorse Obama, and while I am not going to vote of Obama, I personally feel this particular endorsement is not good for him as people view Kerry as losing the 2004 presidential election, Kerry’s image as a flip-flopper, and slow response to be being swiftboated, and the like. So, what do you think if Mike Bloomberg jumps in on the bandwagon in March? I think in the long run that will turn out well for Hillary. I think by March we will be down to two people fighting for the Democratic nomination; Hillary vs. Obama. A lot of people might go for Obama because they don’t like Clinton. But if Bloomberg jumps in, probably as an independent, then the Hillary haters won’t vote for Obama and vote for Bloomberg. It’s what I call the Nader/spoiler effect. I think this will bode well for Hillary. Or by March will the Democrats have their nominee because it is after Super Tuesday?

    January 10, 2008 at 2:14 pm |
  465. Linda Stoneking

    Jack, I think what will ultimately determine the out come of weather Obama or Hillary becomes President is weather or not the people can see that what Hillary says is from the heart, honest, and for the people. Obama is good with words, but Hillary really cares about the people, and she will go the distance.
    Linda from West Virginia

    January 10, 2008 at 3:05 pm |
  466. Lawrence R. Decoste

    Jack I think young voters and first time voters are voting for obama because of his speechs and the fact that he is young himself, but young voters and first time voters need to wake up and take there time to review there records both hillarys and obama's. Hillary is like a mother to most people she is a women and she should be liked by many, She has true feelings for the american people we saw that at the dinner its personal for her, young voters need to stand behind hillary not obama because hillary has expierence and records to show that she can be a strong and powerful president. Obama may think he is like JFK but he is not, Obama talks too much about change and hope and doesn't clairify what he wants to do as president. We need a president who will listen to us and be on our side and not talk about what we wanna hear but what we the american people really want real change which Hillary Clinton will deliver.

    Lawrence R. Decoste
    Albany, NY

    January 10, 2008 at 4:03 pm |
  467. Obama for President

    January 10, 2008 3:12 pm ET

    The Clintons shamed the highest office in American. Not acting when millions of people were being killed and millions were dieing of starvation in Rwanda. Hillary is going to fix health care? Right, just like she tried to do and gave up on when she was the first lady for 8 years. NAFTA was a Clinton disaster still being felt evenmore so today than when he signed the bill into law. Free trade yes fair trade no. The large multi national corporations love the the Clintons for that one. When Hillary left the White House she took everthing but the kitchen sink. And yes let's not foget Bill's indiscretion's Oh the shame of it all!! If Hillary wins the democratic nomination I will vote for a republican and I don't care who that is. God help us all!!

    January 10, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  468. Dean

    WHO IS OBAMA ???
    We know Hillary practically from childhood, we know Edwards practically from childhood... but who is Obama.? I have yet to hear him use the word GOD or pledge algeiance to the flag, all of which this country was built on. He does not display the flag as most people do . All we know is that he is a carasmatic speaker, beyond that we know very little about him. ????

    January 10, 2008 at 4:58 pm |
  469. kassandra NY

    I write to express my concern about Hillary actually winning the presidency. I have lived in New York State for over 15 years. I have written and sent numerous e-mails to Senator Hillary Clinton’s office asking for information (mind you, just information, not action). I have requested basic information on starting a business in NY State as well as information on immigration. Not once have I received any response whether email or written from Senator Clinton’s office.
    My question is:
    How can Senator Clinton address the country’s needs when her management technique as a Senator is to ignore the population she represents? Clearly she is only running for president for her own interests. I am a woman and I do not trust her.

    January 10, 2008 at 6:14 pm |
  470. Pat, Brahm and Tristan Miller

    Dear Jack,

    We are a Canadian family and just like the rest of the world we are tuned into the American presidential race. Especially Pat the Mother of this family.

    Our question to you Jack is this: Does it not concern you along with the rest of the American people that if Hilary secures a victory for the presidential seat, then the result would lead to only two families controlling the White House since 1992?

    It seems to us that to be President is about good judgement which in turn creates good leadership. And Obama clearly reflects that. When Bush appointed Rumsfeld and Cheney look what happened with such experience.

    The Miller Family

    London, ON Canada

    January 10, 2008 at 7:30 pm |
  471. Dan NY

    What will ultimately decide the outcome of the battle between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton?
    A hard-core plan!
    When asked on how an issue will be dealt with such as the War in Iraq, or the mortgage crisis, Obama gives a thoughtful answer on what he thinks is the best way to deal with the issue. (As least he tries)
    Clinton’s answer is to fall back on “we will have a panel investigate the issue”. This should tell us all she has no answers (other than she does not want to bring our troops home, or address the mortgage issue). Clinton has no plan or desire for change.

    January 10, 2008 at 7:51 pm |
  472. aware

    Authenticity should decide. I have done my research and have proven, to my satisfaction, who meets this high bar. I agree with Linda from West Virginia. 🙂

    January 10, 2008 at 9:20 pm |
  473. Jacob C

    Barak Obama is still the underdog in this battle and will remain so until the end of this process.
    I believe there are 3 things that Barak has to pay attention to and remember.
    1st America will never vote for a president who she might feel will not stand up to defend her. Whenever he is asked about national security, before mentioning anything about the war in Iraq, he should say: I will hunt the alqaida leaders; I will maintain a strong military. I will make sure we remain the strongest superpower in the world .I will bring back home the troop from Iraq but send some to Afghanistan if need be.
    2nd, He should not cede the experience issue to Hilary Clinton. She is a second term senator; she was the wife of a Governor and a President. Where does her " vast” national security experience comes from?
    One can have the right experience or the wrong one such as voting for the war which has cost so many lives and so much treasure.Dick Chaney and Donald rumsfeld have a long experience in foreign policy right?
    3 rd-The biggest mistake for Obama in NH was not replying to Bill Clinton’s attacks who is well liked among Democrats.In this campaign there is air war and a ground war.That’s where the endorsement of John Kerry is so valuable ,he should be sent wherever Bill Clinton is campaigning to counter and to respond to his message.

    January 10, 2008 at 10:36 pm |
  474. Amalek

    I think the fix is in. The the run off will be between John McCain and Sen Clinton. John McCain will win, because of Sen Clinton negatives. Nothing I can do about it.

    January 11, 2008 at 1:56 am |
  475. Liz Rose

    Obama or Clinton? If I was voting for the next American Idol, without question, I would choose Obama. For Commander in Chief–the one I feel most confident in leading and protecting our nation, Hillary gets my vote.

    January 11, 2008 at 4:53 am |
  476. Ruth Cook

    Why is my comment made at 1:32 pm yesterday still "awaiting moderation"? I understood this to be a forum of ideas. My short answer is Hillary will prevail because of the woman bashing that will bring out the vote of women weary of the good old boys' club. That should NEVER include the mainstream media, including you, Jack, and the likes of Bill Bennett – Mr. Book of Virtues.

    January 11, 2008 at 11:07 am |
  477. marie wallace

    When it comes right down to it, the american people who take voting for a president seriously, will see through fluff. As a black female, I don't care too much for a lot of rhetoric. It's all about who has the most experiance.. I care more about what a candidate has done. This gives me an idea what that person will do in the future. I think being endorsed by John Kerry or any elected official is wrong, no matter the party affilliation. Don't get me wrong, I like Obama but I just don't think he has the ability to do the job. Hillary is far more capable to do the job. My community is voting for and praying for Hillary. We also resented O. Winfrey for her role in the campaign. As a public figure that was so wrong of her. I gusse we are only a few who absolutely do not like Ms. Winfrey.

    January 11, 2008 at 11:19 am |
  478. Rick

    Unfortunately I believe it is moot. I don't think that either canidate will win in a nationwide general election. And as for Mike Bloomberg he faces the same thing. I don't think that in a national general election a woman, and african american or a jewish canidate can win. So the question arises which Republican will win and what path will our democracy take. It is too bad we as Americans can't vote for a canidate that will move us in the right direction. The Nascar vote will most likely determine our next president.

    January 11, 2008 at 12:26 pm |
  479. Annie

    I'm a bit disappointed when I hear the media say that blacks in South Carolina will be the deciding factor between Clinton and Obama. So is this saying that African-Americans will vote for Obama just because he is black? Isn't that racism in itself? Is that what the media is saying? I thought we are trying to bring people together here? We need to move beyond people's skin color and start looking at the issues. Hillary will make things happen and we've seen her do it. I'm voting for her not because I dislike Obama, but because I feel she is more experienced AND can bring change.

    January 11, 2008 at 12:44 pm |
  480. Brinn, California

    This campaign is all about change. Obama coined it for his campaign, and Hillary knew she had to convince people that she too, was all about change. So who is really for change? Hillary argues that it takes experience to make change happen in Washington. Obama claims he is the only one outside the system enough to bring about real change. I argue that the only change that can take place within our system of checks and balances is one that is bipartisan. And Hillary cannot bring that change. Republicans do not want another Clinton, and they do not want to listen to another Clinton – they've made that clear. Obama, however, seems to have growing political sympathy, if not support, from politicians across party lines. If we want real change, Obama is the way to go. Once people stop listening to Hillary's smear campaigns and see that, Obama will win this race.

    January 11, 2008 at 2:05 pm |
  481. Ron Mullins

    At $275 million a day, every person in this country is paying a buck a day for that war. So my family is paying $120 / month to ostensibly fight terrorism originating in these petrotyrannies; while at the same time I am writing out a $50 check everytime I fill up my tank to support terrorism. Does any candidate in either party have a PLAN to end this senseless insanity? Will anyone in the media ask this question in the debates? Perhaps the Saudis own all the candidates and the media as well and want this hidden from the American people.

    January 11, 2008 at 2:27 pm |
  482. Ginger

    Well, it seems Mr. Karl Rove is very threatened by Obama and has been referring to him in disparaging and very very close to racial slurs and stereotypes..."lazy, etc"
    Rove wants Clinton I want Obama!!!

    January 11, 2008 at 3:16 pm |
  483. Kim Jones Richmond Va

    It's simple as the ABC's Jack,
    Anybody But Clinton.

    Please wake up America, we don't have time for making feminist or trendsets now to have a woman in the White House. Especially Hillary, if she could put Madeleine's head, she would throw Bill out his own house, like Americans wanted Bill.

    End the dysfunctional dynasty families that have led this country to ruin and robbed our blood and treasure for Oil Barons bottom line. I thought we were turning the page?
    Clinton is not just the same old page, but also the baggage is rated XXX, in their time of serving. Haven't we had enough dirty laundry for two decades.
    New Century, New Face, New HOPE.
    Obama 08, isn't it great!
    He has the fact Sheet on his website: BarackObama.com, check into the blog links they are sending it all over America, to rebut Clinton's mail lies and shrill distractions from the issues when she's caught ducking questions to them.

    January 11, 2008 at 3:56 pm |
  484. tim hammer

    It might not be as complicated as the candidates think, or is it? What the people want to hear is not, WE NEED A CHANGE, it is HOW WILL I CHANGE IT...
    The war, iligal aliens, ( no one will address because of the latino vote ) healthcare.
    infrastructure, china, DIPLOMACY (BUSH doesn't have a clue on this ) the middle class, I can't believe these candidates spend millions on a $400,000.00
    a year job to help this great nation, I don't know if any one of them could be trusted !!!

    January 11, 2008 at 5:41 pm |
  485. Mesfin

    I am following the presidential campaign trail almost all the times. Especially the democratic race is more interesting than the republican one as Obama is the formidable contender in the race. However, I am just wondering that why Se. Clinton is mentioning the name of Barrack Obama in her campaign too much? It may be better to give more attention to outsmart him by disclosing her accomplishments and skills in a way people understand her than trying to lessen his reputation. I am grateful to Mr Obama that he has never given any attention to her negative campaign or to her distorted message, rather he tries to keep her in the race by complimenting and keeping her moral high.

    Listen to his speech in New Hampshire, he congratulated Se. Clinton and said, “She has done a great job!” but she never congratulated him in his winning race, Iowa. I admire him for his wisdom that he is able to control his emotion and even able to compliment his opponent with his full heart. He is emotionally mature enough to be a president.

    Most of the times, Se Clinton copy Se Obama’s campaign mantra words and use it in her campaign. That is embarrassing. This simply indicates that Barack Obama is born to lead and Clinton is born to follow. He talks about change, hope and impress many of us. She repeats it in the next morning and makes it boring.

    Many times, she feels that she win the mind and the heart of the people by worth mentioning experience 1000 times. However, the experience she is talking is not visible in her speech. Listen to Obama when he speaks. You can sense his wisdom in his words. His speech exceeds the imagination of his audience and touch the heart of the people. Her speech sounds as ordinary but his speech sounds as extra ordinary. One can imagine that Obama would be a great leader not only for America but also for the rest of the world, if he can get the chance or the vote of the American people.

    It will be displeasing, if Clinton uses again the new Obama mantra word “Yes we can!” This would reveal that she is born to follow not to lead.


    January 14, 2008 at 5:11 am |
  486. Rick

    I think its a disgrace what Bob Johnson from BET did this weekend , look at how he made his money degrading the black community , booty videos , and just selling out music on a whole, and he has the audacity to say something about Barak, which corporate favor did he owe, or is looking for, its amazing to see whats happening, now Bill i could tell was a sell out after NAFTA, and when he became and ex- president hanging out with daddy bush , its obvious barak is messing up their plan , and they wanna destroy him , by any means necessary...I think this is only round one of a 12 round fight..expect them to get worse...

    January 14, 2008 at 9:47 am |
  487. Bob Maurer

    New "softer," humanizing advertisements were released last week in Nevada and South Carolina by the Hillary Clinton for President campaign.

    After her 30 years of often referenced political and policy experience and two best selling autobiogrpahies, NOW we are gettying the REAL Hillary. So much for experience.

    The Senator says she has NOW, finally, found her voice in the last 48 hours. But it is pretty shrill. Her performance on Meet the Press was either soft nor humanizing – same old, same old.

    "Hard as nails" Hillary tried to take Ombama to the wordshed demeaning Martin Luther King and Ombama's anti-war message as she sought to defend her and President Clinton's attacks on the Illinois Senator.

    Come on folks, we are being spun. Rember the great right-wing conspiracy?

    January 14, 2008 at 10:45 am |
  488. Joubin

    I think it is ironic that the comments from Mr. Johnson comes from a man who started BET, which bettles the ghettoization of African Americans in this country and keeping young blacks down by selling them the rap and the NBA dream, instead of praising the young black men and women who are chaning this country from politics, to medicine, and yes Mr. Johnson, even community organizing. In term of Mr. Obama's drug use, yes, he was honest about his mistakes. But Mr. Johnson, your network at BET has repeatly glamorize drug use and drug dealer life style, so you are hypocrite.

    I also know why Mr. Johnson does not like community organizes, because in many of his redevelopment plans, the major oppositions came from community organizers that felt your company was ripping off the poor blacks. Mr. Johnson, you no different then the house slave who was given a little to oppress other slaves. You are in all terms the Clinton's house slave.
    That is the reason why Mrs. Clinton never stopped him, or criticized him, but back peddled, which is the Clinton way of doing things.

    The Clintons, well, they feel that the only way a black man can bring about change in this country is by being jailed and beaten like Dr. King. The reason Mr. Obama was not beaten and had opprtunites as a community organizer was because Dr. King's work.
    That is also why Mr. Clinton calls Obama "boy" and keeps on putting him down, because according to him, Mr. Obama does not belong in the White House. That is the Clinton's true color, no different then the Cheney and Bush doctorine.

    It is time to bring change to this country and get rid of Political families, and let ordinary citizens.

    January 14, 2008 at 12:21 pm |
  489. Carl

    I just watched John Edwards make a speech and the only thing he didn't offer the people if he got elected is THE MOON. Is this guy so sick he will offer anything to get elected. But if I believed him I would not only vote for him, I'd quit working now and ride it out till he got elected !! It would be nice if he stopped campaigning, and send me one of the millions he is spending to run, he might make at least one person happy, and I would vote for him. I'm having a little trouble wading through all this crap!!!

    January 19, 2008 at 5:08 pm |