Cmmon Jack, he speaks so well...

Well, if he can make it here, he can make it anywhere:

http://www.spc.edu/pages/719.asp?item=4303

I think any of the top 3 dem presidential candidates can beat any of the Republicans. If the primaries are any sign, the Dems are going to be able to turn their voters out at a better rate than Rep.

I think any polls that do head to head in states where there hasn't been much campaigning don't mean a whole heck of a lot. Ohio's primary isn't until March 4th so none of the candidates have spent any time there, McCain's strength is based more on name recognition than anything else.

"I still don't think he can win"

That's my worry, too--though I basically like the guy. My first choice is Edwards among the "major" Democratic candidates, but I think he would have to overcome the same basic difficulties in attracting a majority of votes. Republicans have been exploiting fear and greed for a long time in their appeals to generally disengaged voters, and it will be difficult for any progressive candidate to alter the moral and social climate sufficiently in order to win on a national level. In other words, it's no easy task to overturn the Reagan legacy.

Just because he can't win doesn't mean he can't become President.

I'm starting to enjoy the process again, even after Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid turned out to be such incredible losers. I find myself hoping that - barring martial law and a postponement of the elections - we're around one year from a major upgrade, even if we elect Howie Mandel president.

I would love to see the demographics on those polls. Are they capturing the 18-35 year-olds who don't have home phones? How about the first time voters who are turning out in droves in Iowa and New Hampshire. And registering by the thousands in South Carolina.

Clinton was still the presumptive nominee as late as October. And until caucus night in Iowa, people still thought it would be a tight three-way race. There are still, what, 9-plus months to go? But you're throwing in the towel. Why? He drubs two of the candidates. Is neck and neck with the Baptist preacher who's given to some weird behavior. And McCain will have to overcome this. The debates will be Kennedy-Nixon all over again.

The coming Clinton 527 attack will be instructive as to how he handles the Republicans.

Too bad, Jeb isn't running. Hopefully, Bloomberg enters the race as an independent and crashes the party for you more-taxes-is-good-crowd.

I can only hope that we get an improvement over the past seven years, but honestly, is that even guaranteed?

Can YOU say President Huckabee?

Stan said:

"If the primaries are any sign, the Dems are going to be able to turn their voters out at a better rate than Rep."

First of all, the primaries are not any sign. Second, Dem voter turnout is vastly overrated if 2004 is any indication. Weren't the Dems supposed to be the most angry and fired up voting block in history then? How'd that turn out?

Come the General Election, if Obama is the Dem's candidate, experience is going to become a HUGE issue.

Butch,
I'll take your 2004 analogy and see you with the 2006 congressional elections and recent elections in VA and Kentucky. The Dems in those elections turned out their base and had independents on their side. Now I'm not even sure Obama's going to be the nominee but let's say he is, I don't see him losing because his opponent has been in national politics longer.

Which Republican running in '08 has prior experience being president?

Sorry, but the Republicans this cycle are a joke. Guiliani's 9/11 shtick is pretty old, Huckabee is basically the Republican's giving up on winning anything outside the Confederacy and the Plains States, Thompson, I just get sleepy thinking about him, Romney's claim to fame are being governor of Mass. (that'll excite the Rep. base and heading the SLC Olympics(another base getter). I think on paper McCain is the toughest opponent but the Ol' Straight Talk Express hasn't aged too well since 2000. His pro war stance is going to hurt him with independents and democrats who historically have thought highly along with his buddying up to Bush( an incumbent who is in the mid 30's for his approval rating).

I worry about that, too.

But I also worry that he'd be shot.

What a great race this is shaping up to be. By Nevada, Edwards may fold. At that point, Edwards, the fighter against greedy corporate America, may be wooed by Obama, the "all-inclusive one". The two should be having discussions right now about coalition. An offer of an activist VP role would suit the fighter well and provide a platform for economic reform (trickle down just did not happen). It will take a fighter to reign in the influence of big biddness. From Nevada, it will be a two on two battle between the establishment v. "agents for change". C'mon, don't rain on my parade. Change will prevail

Well, this repub turned independent likes what he sees in Obama. I am sick of the establishment, I'm sick of the last 7 years, and the eight before that. The political establishment needs to be dumped out, upended, cleaned and rebuilt. I think Obama might be the guy.

Whether or not he'd be a good President, Obama is just as much the "establishment" as any other candidate.

Stan:

I'm sure you thought the guy sitting in the Oval Office right now was a "joke" - or worse - in 2004. All he did was garner the most votes in our Nation's history and beat his opponent by 3,000,000 or so. And that was when the Republicans were supposedly fed up with the war as well.

Comparing off-year elections to a Presidential election is apples/oranges. The party of the White House occupant almost always loses Congressional seats. I think dubya was the exception to that rule in 2006.

Huh. Going native.

It has been brought to my attention that Mr. Obama does not believe in saluting our american flag. We have enough problems in this world without hvaving a candidate that doesn't believe in our flag. I don't understand why he is even running for office.

Linda

Yeah, and I also heard that his middle name is Hussein. Isn't that "Allah" in some Arabic language? Or maybe that's Akbar? In either event, why is he even in America?

Anyone who writes "American" with a small "a" has to submit to capital punishment.

Yeah. One of Dubya's talents is that he he's great at saluting. What more could you possibly ask of a president?

Funny that he was so much better at saluting than the guy running against him who wasn't 'AWOL' from his military duty.

If the utter meaningless of a political poll -- especially one coming several months before an election and before the candidates have even been chosen, and with a margin of error of +/- 4.3% -- is not abundantly clear by now, well, there may be no hope.

Plus, the idea that someone can't win Florida if they don't win Ohio is demonstrably false. George Bush the elder lost Ohio by 2 percentage points in 1992 and yet won in Florida by 2 percentage points. And in 2000, Al Gore lost in Ohio by 3.5% points and won in Florida (though of course it was stolen from him).

you're forgetting the fact that McCain isn't liked by them Southerners....in his own party.

We have enough problems in this world without having a candidate that doesn't believe in our flag.

That's really strange. I seem to recall taking this very blurry picture of Obama standing in front of an American flag that would make Hank Hill weep back in September at the Oregon Convention Center. He doesn't believe in our flag? Do you believe everything that shows up in your inbox? How's that Nigerian transaction working out for you?

Snopes also has video of Obama reciting the pledge.

Senator Obama has my vote and sticker on my car. Mrs. Clinton has miles to go, is wearing thin with her high drama. Read one of Obama's books, read one of President Reagan's!

Talk was batted around describing how crest-fallen bonkers the rightwacko zombies would get if they didn't have Hillary to kick around any more. Poll numbers were batted around pre-signaling she'd be gone after New Hampshire.

Holy shlamoly, Madame H's numbers in N.H. went richter erratic, tooootally unexpectedly, and by golly, she's ba-a-ack and cui bono?: the rightwacko zombies -- they don't lose their security punchingbag.

Sa-a-a-ay, wait a minute, what Diebold machines count those N.H. ballots? You guessed 'er, chester. Not that anyone noticed, but there was lots of documented fraudulent ballot-counting machinations in Ohio, (and Iowa, and New Mexico, and Nevada, and Tennessee ... did I omit any?), back in 2004 'flipping' tallies for Dubya the King rightwacko zombie, tallies outside the margin of error contravening exit polls, and massive mind-training to inculcate the reflexive knowing that when seeing poll numbers and tally numbers in dubious disparity, then the polls are always wrong, and so on. Point being: those 2004 fraud-the-vote machines are still around in 2008, in many states ... such as N.H.

There continues (selling books) this contingent of webworkers who are most knowledgeable and researched-up about the tricks of ballot count machine fraud used in 2000 and 2004 by the rightwacko zombie election perverters. This BradBlog figure is a prominent player in that group who knows ballot fraud when he smells it. For myself, I just don't reject their information out-of-hand; it seems reasonably fair to include their possibility in the list of possibilities to consider, for explaining how unexpected erratic happens.

So meet the guy, an unabashed rightwacko zombie supporter, and campaign donor, who owns and operates ALL the ballot counting machines in New Hampshire, ALL Diebold; (though an unmechanized 40% of precincts count by hand).

At this link, scroll down to the bottom, see a video, of Mister Shyster I-am-not-making-this-up Silvestro 'testifying' -- and form your own impressions. (Or simply go on with your mind made up and don't bother collecting small facts.) Immediately beneath the frame for the video, the blog links to its latest ballot tallies (things going 'goofy' in the Granite State tonight, much to the Hillary-haters' relief) and observers' analyses.

I read somewhere that New Hampshire's primary allows crossover voting. Is that right? If so, it does cast the results in a somewhat different light, with or without voting machine shenanigans.

New Hampsters have Election Day-registration! to vote!, (as do some other states), which almost is too radical for my blood. Ya' gotcher pro's, ya' gotcher con's, who knew?

And apparently, N.H. has two ballots, with two different slates of candidates. You walk in, (register if necessary), and choose your ballot, and take it behind a curtain and have your way with it. So, yeah, "crossover" voting; Democrats could choose to put lipstick on a repugnant ballot -- no experience required, or, requiring no knowledge -- not that there's anything wrong with that ... but they never do.

My understanding is that Independents in NH can register for either party on election day and that Independents make up 40% of those registered to vote there.

All three Democrat candidates have pretty much the same political positions. It's interesting to note that in order to differentiate themselves from their opponents they've all grabbed onto an identity "shtick". (Remember "Gypsy?" "You gotta have a gimmick. . . .)

Hillary would be as the first female president. Obama would be the first African-American president. And John Edwards would be the first metrosexual president.

And John Edwards would be the first metrosexual president.

You obviously don't know much about John Quincy Adams.

Though from Cameroon,I strongly believe in change for America and Senator Obama has the capability of doing so.He will not only positively cause a change in the US economy but other social issues like housing, education and health.
More to that, his multi racial origin will bring a chage to some of the US forieng policies and positively affect the view the rest of the world has against the US.He can as well casue some of the greatest enemies of the US to become her very strong allies.