Obama Wins Iowa Caucuses, MSNBC And CNN Say
Both networks just projected an Obama win right now, based on a combo of entrance polls and current precincts reporting.
Chris Matthews just described Obama's projected win as "deliverance."
Comments (100)
DRinOH wrote on January 3, 2008 9:30 PM:YES!!!!!!!!
I forgot how effing good it feels when the right guy actually wins the election. Congratulations and on to New Hampshire!
slcathena wrote on January 3, 2008 9:32 PM:DRinOH, I KNOW!!!!
YAY!!!!!
FIRED UP!!! READY TO GO!!!
I'm literally in tears of joy right now. Amazing.
Michael wrote on January 3, 2008 9:33 PM:This is just the beginning
On to NH
Ni Daye wrote on January 3, 2008 9:35 PM:You win, by how much? Yawn...
brm wrote on January 3, 2008 9:36 PM:Exactly deliverance
From the Bush-Clinton era
WOOOOOOOOHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!
Taste that? That's vindication. I hope Hillary limps in at 3rd, haha, so much for inevitability!
Anonymous wrote on January 3, 2008 9:38 PM:If he was a white senator with one year his candidacy would be a joke. Liberals trying to feel better about themselves by affirmative action voting.
telcontal wrote on January 3, 2008 9:39 PM:Chris Matthews just mentioned that papers in Rangoon will be rejoicing to hear about Obama ...
I've some news for him. America's position in the world will not change an iota unless there is a fundamental change in US foreign policy and even Democrats are still running right to that platform.
Reza Aslan,an articulate Muslim thinker really summarized all the issues involved in this article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122801899.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
Ack, could Bill Bennett be any more offensive? Obama wins a 95% white state because "he never brought race" into the occasion. "He's not Sharpton or Jackson." So he won because people forgot he was black? Ack, someone shoot that gambling addict fool.
Gregor wrote on January 3, 2008 9:39 PM:Like I said earlier this year, once a voter gets a chance to see Hillary up close and personal, the outcome is not good for the junior Senator from NY.
I whacked more money to the Obama website this afternoon.
Go, man. Go.
Anonymous wrote on January 3, 2008 9:40 PM:You're a troll but you're right, if Obama was white, the Dems wouldn't be nominating the sure-fire loser.
AB wrote on January 3, 2008 9:40 PM:Does Chris Matthews remind anyone else of Fred Williard's character in "Best in Show"?
whowouldjesusbomb? wrote on January 3, 2008 9:43 PM:very nice
now poor NH is going to get barraged with Hillary and Bill's traveling spin machine, that's gotta suck for them..
Now Obama just needs to win there and seal this deal!!
A new page in America history starts here people!!
Anonymous wrote on January 3, 2008 9:43 PM:I can't believe they found a stool that could support that fat hypocrite Bennett.
slcathena wrote on January 3, 2008 9:45 PM:Gregor, I'm shooting them another $50 tonight. I'm so excited. I can't even hear the trolls today, the cheers have drowned them out.
It's a 7% gap right now, and getting bigger. There is no way to spin that as a tie.
john mccutchen wrote on January 3, 2008 9:45 PM:A whole new ballgame
Jim Martin wrote on January 3, 2008 9:48 PM:DRinOH wrote on January 3, 2008 9:30 PM:
I forgot how effing good it feels when the right guy actually wins the election.
What makes him the right candidate?
Randy Chuliani wrote on January 3, 2008 9:49 PM:
Edwards is toast.
In keeping up with the class shown by his supporters here (snark), I just want to congratulate Obama and his supporters for their well-earned and great confidence-building win in the Iowa caucuses.
By all means, on to New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada primary elections and see what the registered Democrats have to say.
If they say "Obama," then I'll work for him and support him. He's another fine candidate as is Senator Clinton IMHO. I'm still convinced that when all the primary elections are over, the Democrats will have said "Hillary."
Helluva start for Obama, though. Again, congratulations!
DTM wrote on January 3, 2008 9:50 PM:I've seen a lot of people tonight raising Obama's race, alternatively arguing it makes him unelectable and that it gives him an unfair advantage,
Interestingly, in truth this whole campaign dates back to Obama's Keynote Speech at the 2004 Convention. That was Obama's introduction to the party and the nation, and he really hasn't changed his style or his message since then.
So, maybe this is not really about his race. Strangely enough, maybe it is about a very good politician with the right ideas and the right message for his time.
What a concept!
Anonymous wrote on January 3, 2008 9:50 PM:I'd be curious to see how many Republicans registered as Democrats so they could vote for Barack Obama as the Dem. nominee, will that be reported?
That RNC guy was in an awfully good mood on the TV as well he should be.
Anonymous wrote on January 3, 2008 9:51 PM:If he's the nominee, sure hope you're right DTM.
Jenna L wrote on January 3, 2008 9:52 PM:YES!!!!!!!!!!!!! YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YESSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
....biggest turnout ever
....Obama ahead by 7 points
This is magic. Thank you Iowa.
Greg DeLassus wrote on January 3, 2008 9:52 PM:This is just the beginningOn to NH
Exactly. I could not be more pleased with the results (at least at present, with Obama far in front, but Edwards second and Clinton third), but this is just the beginning. Iowa alone will not win this for us. It is not too soon to start getting things ready for Super Tues.
Dave wrote on January 3, 2008 9:53 PM:I'd be curious to see how many Republicans registered as Democrats so they could vote for Barack Obama as the Dem. nominee, will that be reported?
Exit polls say about 3% of Dem caucus-goers were Republicans. 44% went for Obama, 32% for Edwards, 10% for Clinton.
BluePuppy wrote on January 3, 2008 9:53 PM:"by all means, on to New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada primary elections and see what the registered Democrats have to say."
That's exactly right. Independents and American-hating, granola pooping, Kumbya Naderites made the difference. Clinton will be loaded for bear in N.H., S.C. & NV. Enjoy it while you can. Remember McCain beat Bush by almost 20% in NH in 00. Same thing here. Your guy can't win with Dems.
AB, you mean he **isn't** Fred Willard's character?
Johnny2Bad wrote on January 3, 2008 9:54 PM:Anonymous wrote on January 3, 2008 9:50 PM:
I'd be curious to see how many Republicans registered as Democrats so they could vote for Barack Obama as the Dem. nominee, will that be reported?
That RNC guy was in an awfully good mood on the TV as well he should be.
Yep. A Republican wet dream. A young black liberal northerner.
Woo Hoo.
Anonymous wrote on January 3, 2008 9:55 PM:If he was a white senator with one year his candidacy would be a joke. Liberals trying to feel better about themselves by affirmative action voting.
Maybe if you were to vote for him. After 7 years of Bush with 1 left, people in Iowa obviously want a change. Not only that, but people there want it BAD and enthusiastic about it. Anonymous wrote on January 3, 2008 9:55 PM:
Thanks Dave, as I suspected, Obama is the candidate of choice for Republicans, easiest to beat.
ceci wrote on January 3, 2008 9:57 PM:I cannot remember the last time I was this happy!
There is hope. The torch has been passed to a new generation!
This will intensify my efforts in my St. Louis neighborhood. Missouri will "go" for Obama on February 5th.
Yeah!
Joe Lisboa wrote on January 3, 2008 9:57 PM:That RNC guy was in an awfully good mood on the TV as well he should be.
Your ignorance is showing, "Johnny." The last thing the GOP establishment wants right now is Aw-Shucksabee bagging the nomination. Have you even bothered to read the business-right coverage of his campaign? They loathe the guy. The WSJ couldn't hide their disgust if they tried.
Methinks you're projecting your own warped issues here. Just let it go, son.
Dave wrote on January 3, 2008 9:58 PM:Or maybe he's the candidate best able to cross over and appeal to moderate Republicans, bringing them into the Democratic Party. That would be a terrible, terrible thing, wouldn't it?
Dave wrote on January 3, 2008 9:59 PM:Hey Hillary: Guess who's coming to dinner?
c wrote on January 3, 2008 10:02 PM:Good grief, I honestly didn't expect more than a percentage or two edge.
And all of y'all making assertions about the general election should start dealing with the data that show Obama doing much better among independents and Republicans than HRC or Edwards. His victory tonight is due to his ability to bring more people over to our side.
There were plenty of excellent white candidates running, so it's not like anyone uncomfortable with the idea of a black guy as president didn't have alternatives. If Obama can win NH too he'll have won hotly-contested races in two of the whitest states I know of. I think that pretty much puts the myth to rest.
Kucinich for prez wrote on January 3, 2008 10:03 PM:Obama owes Kucinich big time for the 2nd choice endorsement.
M Miller wrote on January 3, 2008 10:04 PM:That RNC guy was in an awfully good mood on the TV as well he should be.
Yep. A Republican wet dream. A young black liberal northerner.
Woo Hoo.
So Hillary Clinton wouldn't be their dream? They are going to smear him for what you talked about, smear Edwards, and smear Hillary. They already have tons of stuff ready to smear on her so people hate her like they do and try to make turnout worse than it could be (as opposed to voting for them).
Quite frankly, I don't care to hear them take people's mind off of the reality of nowadays and yell about things CONSTANTLY about what happened in the William Jefferson Clinton administration. That's why I can't support her.
Not only that, but I'm sick of political machines. We have the biggest one you can imagine (or close to) already.
john mccutchen wrote on January 3, 2008 10:05 PM:Obama beat Mrs. Bill among women
BluePuppy wrote on January 3, 2008 10:05 PM:"he's the candidate best able to cross over and appeal to moderate Republicans, bringing them into the Democratic Party. That would be a ...terrible thing, wouldn't it?"
His health care is Romney-lite, so yeah, that's a thought. Actually, he's not going to be elected president so there's nothing to talk about.
Chino Blanco wrote on January 3, 2008 10:05 PM:The only candidate to break 30% in Iowa?
Cy Guy wrote on January 3, 2008 10:05 PM:W00T!
I'm sending in another $37 and change tonight ($1 for every percentage point he pulls in).
FIRED UP!
READY TO GO!
This will intensify my efforts in my St. Louis neighborhood.
Excellent. Maybe our paths will cross someday as we are both canvassing in St Louis for Obama. :-)
Chino Blanco wrote on January 3, 2008 10:10 PM:Oh man, tracking the intrade numbers over the next 48 hours is gonna be fun ...
Liam wrote on January 3, 2008 10:10 PM:This was a fantastic night for the Democrats. A record turnout bodes well for the party in the general election. We have three strong candidates to select from. That is a good thing. We need to have them test each other, because we need to nominate the one who is best at competing, so that we send the best campaigner up against the Republicans. Good luck to all three candidates. Let us treat them all with respect, and now on to New Hampshire.
Anonymous wrote on January 3, 2008 10:10 PM:What a great night! A dazzling turnout as expected. But wait....where are Tara, Kefa, Colin PowPow and dcshungu this evening? Still whining about the ARG poll with Greg Sargent.
Turn out the lights Hillary. The party is over. The train has left the station.
bnb wrote on January 3, 2008 10:13 PM:Once again the press is ignoring the impact of Kucinich's endorsement.
Adrian wrote on January 3, 2008 10:15 PM:Ha! Some prick troll whining about affirmative action voting. This from the repulsive folk who voted for the illiterate cokehead putz Bush jr.
Go Obama!
Dave wrote on January 3, 2008 10:15 PM:Well, bnb, entrance polling only showed about 1% supporting Kucinich on the way in, so I'm not sure he had a huge impact. Every bit helps, though--and I suspect we'll find out that the second choicers (not just from Kucinich, but from Biden and Richardson too) swung massively toward Obama, in an anybody-but-Clinton sentiment.
waka waka wrote on January 3, 2008 10:18 PM:One word, my friends...
w0000000000000t!!!!!!1111!11!1!!!!11!!
M Miller wrote on January 3, 2008 10:18 PM:Obama owes Kucinich big time for the 2nd choice endorsement.
With all due respect, you mean his 1% versus Richardson's 6% and Biden's 4%?
The Des Moine Register was right in the 2004 Dem caucus with the order of winners, with the the order and spread of the Dem and Rep races this year.
2004: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3919028
If you read the stories here, you can see that the almost everyone is sending or thinking that their voters' second-choice is Obama.
DemAC wrote on January 3, 2008 10:20 PM:Well congrats to Obama, the college kids turned out to caucus after all. Nice for him.
Now, on to New Hampshire and the first primary with the first actual voting. Where I sincerely hope that Hillary Clinton wipes the floor with both Obama and Edwards.
Gregor wrote on January 3, 2008 10:21 PM:Time to wash that GOP filth out of Washington, out of the nation's mouth. Tonight, Democrats started building the fire hose to do it.
Turn that freakin' water pressure on.
Go Obama. Go man. Go.
waka waka wrote on January 3, 2008 10:22 PM:Just now listening to Edwards' concession speech -- He's STILL talking about his grandfather and the mills???
Come on bro, run on something contemporaneous. I KNOW how bad you want to be president, but seriously. Seriously!
Clinton's only polling about 3% ahead in NH. That's not anything like the cushion she'd need to bounce back from a third-place loss in Iowa. Anything could happen, of course, but I can't imagine the mood's very good over at her HQ right now.
bnb wrote on January 3, 2008 10:25 PM:Possibly, Dave, but Biden and Richardson didn't endorse Obama. I think some Kucinich supporters may have decided to go to their second choice soon after the endorsement, and thus entrance polled for Obama. Goofy system in Iowa.
colonpowwow wrote on January 3, 2008 10:26 PM:anonymous @ 10:10
Do you read as well as you gloat? See my posting at 9:49
Too bad you're not 1/10th as classy as the guy you support. That's very irritating to a lifetime progressive Democrat like me who also happens to support a fine candidate.
Lis wrote on January 3, 2008 10:26 PM:Thank you, Iowa. Obama's supporters around the country will never forget your efforts.
Peace,
Lis
Kucinich may not have swung a lot of votes directly from himself, but I think his semi-endorsement may have helped Obama with people who liked Kucinich but were choosing between Edwards and Obama because they viewed Kucinich as unviable.
So, I think Obama supporters should indeed thank Kucinich, who as far as I can tell acted purely on principle, and not in exchange for anything.
bnb wrote on January 3, 2008 10:29 PM:With all due respect, you mean his [Kucinich's] 1% versus Richardson's 6% and Biden's 4%?"
Where did you get these numbers?
colonpowwow wrote on January 3, 2008 10:32 PM:Liam:
Classy post. I know we've sparred snarkily-nasty at times, but you've inspired me to try to be nicer.
I said "try to be."
PEACE
stlounick wrote on January 3, 2008 10:32 PM:Greg, our paths have already crossed. :)
Keith wrote on January 3, 2008 10:33 PM:Great night for Obama (looks like a 9 point win over Clinton and 8 points over Edwards). Just enough time to pat each other on the back and get back to work.
Obama '08
kozmik wrote on January 3, 2008 10:33 PM:lol. Keep on digging Ni Dayne. You just missed your moment to show some dignity and instead became a sore loser.
Some people never learn, cause the mind is a terrible thang.
kozmik wrote on January 3, 2008 10:35 PM:And thanks to the people of Iowa for such an excellent turnout. You should all be proud of that turnout, no matter who you supported.
c wrote on January 3, 2008 10:37 PM:Sure. Thank you Dennis Kucinich, and thanks to the Richardson and Biden campaigns if they lent a hand. Thanks to all the independents who turned out -- stick around and help us build the party.
Thank you Iowans.
Eight points. I think maybe we've got a President.
Anonymous wrote on January 3, 2008 10:39 PM:ColinPowPow - you are so full of it. You have been nasty to our candidate all week. But of course we will gladly welcome you to the fold. Welcome aboard the winning team.
DTM wrote on January 3, 2008 10:40 PM:DemAC,
Just imagine if the Democratic nominee could also generate record turnout for the Democrats in the general election.
What a concept!
Anonymous wrote on January 3, 2008 10:40 PM:9 points! WOW!
BluePuppy wrote on January 3, 2008 10:40 PM:Well said DemAC. Hillary will NH. Obama will fade. Edwards will drop out.
Don't stress. We know she's the best candidate.
M Miller wrote on January 3, 2008 10:46 PM:bnb wrote on January 3, 2008 10:29 PM:
With all due respect, you mean his [Kucinich's] 1% versus Richardson's 6% and Biden's 4%?"
Where did you get these numbers?
--
Sorry, I should've clarified. The Des Moines Register's poll for the Dem Caucus in 2004 and this year and the Rep Caucus this year did a pretty good job compared to most of the others with the order of the results and the % distance between the candidates. I didn't check the '04 Rep. Cauc.
The numbers for this year:
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071231/NEWS09/71231042/-1/caucus
The numbers for 2004:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3919028
I guess actually maybe none of the other candidates besides Kucinich made any deals, or will admit to it, but you can tell it helps. Just the news going around that Richardson and Biden did make deals helps Obama. See
http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2008/01/obama_adviser_appears_to_admit_to_deal_with_richardson.php
and
http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2008/01/still_more_talk_of_deals_this_time_between_obama_and_richardson.php
Congrats to Sen. Obama and his supporters, i never thought he could pull off the big turnout he did to win. Heres to you senator and on to NH.
David wrote on January 3, 2008 10:48 PM:Sorry DeadPuppy. The inevitability veneer is broken. The fact is that tonight Obama proved:
(1) that he is more electable in the general and can bring many more independents and new typically non-voting Dems to the polls than anyone
(2) that he can win against a formidable attack machine on par with the GOP's
(3) that the color of his skin is meaningless in a red state that is 95% white
The country finally took a step forward tonight and I for one am thankful for my children.
Chino Blanco wrote on January 3, 2008 10:49 PM:Thank you Iowa! You rock!
Thank you Obama! Your GOTV rocks!
Ni Daye wrote on January 3, 2008 10:52 PM:I am watching Huckbee giving a speech. Now I realized why Obama won. Iowa is a wacky place if Huckbee could win there. No wonder Obama did so well. Let's see how well Obama does elsewhere without these college kids. Don't forget IA has never voted for a female congressperson, a female senator, or a female governor!
Greg DeLassus wrote on January 3, 2008 10:54 PM:... a lifetime progressive Democrat like me who also happens to support a fine candidate.
Indeed, yours is a fine candidate. While I prefer Obama, I will simply be relieved to have any of our current candidates instead of its present occupant.
NCSteve wrote on January 3, 2008 10:55 PM:Colon, your classiness meter seems to be a little selective tonight. But hey, entirely understandable. Rough night and it takes a lot of pluck for you to be posting at all tonight. I doubt I could do it if he results were flipped.
Josh now says 218,000(!) people turned out for the Democratic caucus. (Shame on the DMR for using that "unprecedented turn out model" Mark Penn complained about). Regardless of whether they were old time Democratic activists, former independents or kids who've never voted before, every last one of the them is a registered Democrat now, just like all (or most, anyway) of us, and yet all some of you can do is whine about it as if there was some secret gang initiation they were supposed to go through before they got to count as "real" Democrats. Tsk.
So, on to New Hampshire (where indpendents can vote in the Democratic primary without even changing their registration, P.S. and btw.) No one's asking you Hillary supporters to throw in the towel, but could you guys please at least stop citing ARG polls when you poll troll now? It would spare you a lot of ridicule from Obama, and probably Edwards, supporters.
Bravo NCSteve! Once again the DMR proves to be the most accurate poll in Iowa.
Anonymous wrote on January 3, 2008 11:00 PM:And don't forget Greg Sargent in there, the leader of the ARG proclamation fan club!
roo_P wrote on January 3, 2008 11:04 PM:No gloating, no sour grapes.
Just a big HURRAY for Obama!
Ni Daye wrote on January 3, 2008 11:10 PM:I officially claim I hate Obama. How arrogant is this man! He thinks he can be the leader of the only superpower of the world two years out of Illois senate. The man can surely talk but talking does not solve problem. Gimme a break! I hate this pompous guy and am seriously thinking about not voting for him if he makes it that far.
Ni Daye wrote on January 3, 2008 11:12 PM:Where is this study guy looking when he gives speech? The man appears looking at the guy. Incredible!
Ni Daye wrote on January 3, 2008 11:14 PM:Obamaniac, you have won nothing yet:---
CNN is projecting this split of Iowa's 45 Democratic delegates, based on tonight's results:
Barack Obama: 16, Hillary Clinton: 15, John Edwards: 14
He's making a good speech (and the kids are adorable). Mostly in the 2nd person - you said, you did, you want, you need. It's interesting if you watched the setup: kind remarks about Republicans, lots of remarks about ending division. He's speaking directly to independents, and figuring that if he can do that, enough rank and file Democrats will come along too.
Who knows what'll happen in the next month. But if he gets the nomination, he'll need zero message-retooling to make this a national campaign.
blackstar wrote on January 3, 2008 11:34 PM:the best speech of Obama's campaign.
us Obama supporters are 1 for 1. on to the other early primaries it is.
NCSteve wrote on January 3, 2008 11:53 PM:For all the folks expressing their deep concerns that their precious party is being hijacked by hoi poloi indies:
The turnout number is now 238,000(!) and counting. The entrance polls show only 20% of them were independents and only 4% Republicans (the latter equalling roughly the percentage of Republicans I've met in my life who I would consider more or less sane). Obama won a plurality of the people who came into the caucus as previously registered Democrats and, uh-oh, won 35% (vs. Hillary's 30%) of the women.
Looks like some of you folks are going to need some new rationalizations.
roo_P wrote on January 3, 2008 11:58 PM:NCSteve (or anyone else),
You have links to the stats somewhere?
dajafi wrote on January 4, 2008 12:02 AM:Stay classy, Clinton supporters.
(That's sincere to colonpowwow, who again shows himself the adult among a collection of bitter-enders, cultists and dizzying spinners; a big fat tttptpthththtt! to the rest.)
Iowa has seen what the rest of the country hopefully will now grasp: there's no "there" to be found with Sen. Clinton. Running as a quasi-incumbent, she got the big thumbs-down from more than 70 percent of caucus-goers... including 69 percent of Democrats. You can "blame" independents and re-registered Republicans all you want; the truth is that the wife of the most popular Democratic politician of his decade won less than a third of Democratic support.
Maybe New Hampshire voters decide "screw Iowa," and/or all the indies there flock to McCain; failing either of those scenarios, I think the air is going out of the balloon.
Know hope. Thank you, Iowa!
Marty wrote on January 4, 2008 12:25 AM:Thank God the Iowans made the decision most of America was thinking. Change must come. And Miss Hillary was certainly not that. With Billy trailing behind her, most wondered who was running.
Thank you,thankyou, Thank you,Iowa
"Iowa is a wacky place if Huckbee could win there. No wonder Obama did so well. Let's see how well Obama does elsewhere without these college kids."
Yep, you're right. Iowa is the only state in which college kids can vote. It's a wacky place.
Seriously, are the Hillary supporters getting even more stupid?
Michael A wrote on January 4, 2008 1:11 AM:Wow, just wow. Thank God. Maybe we can get our country back and do something for a change. Wow. I'm still shaking. I can't think of anything more to say. What a shock. Back to the talking heads.
DemAC wrote on January 4, 2008 1:11 AM:DTM wrote: Just imagine if the Democratic nominee could also generate record turnout for the Democrats in the general election.That could easily be arranged as all three of Obama, Edwards and Clinton obviously can draw huge numbers and have sophisticated GOTV ops. DTM wrote on January 4, 2008 2:44 AM:
DemAC,
But of course the person who wins elections is the person who draws the highest numbers.
Kefa wrote on January 4, 2008 6:59 AM:BO won round 1.....now on to round 2.
random wrote on January 4, 2008 7:22 AM:The naysayers are quickly spinning that Obama will falter under frontrunner scrutiny. But an article in todays Washington Post suggests that Obama may also gain from closer exmaination of his substantial legislative record and community experience in Illinois.
In "Judge Him By His Laws", Chris Peters (a Washington journalist,founding editor of the Washington Monthly, and former state legislator) sees and reports impressive hard evidence of Obama's character and ability in his legislative record.
Peters concludes: "I do not think that a candidate's legislative record is the only measure of presidential potential, simply that Obama's is revealing enough to merit far more attention than it has received. Indeed, the media have been equally delinquent in reporting the legislative achievements of Hillary Clinton and John Edwards, both of whom spent years in the U.S. Senate. The media should compare their legislative records to Obama's, devoting special attention to their heart-and-soul bills and how effective each was in actually making law."
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/03/AR2008010303303.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
All the Hillary supporters (paid staff), who love to post long lists of showboat, deadend legislation she has sponsored should also post independent analysis of RESULTS and what her record says about her characther and ability... IF THEY DARE.
Michael A wrote on January 4, 2008 10:34 AM:Don't hold your breath random? I've been asking for months and months just one freaking thing that would be considered an accomplishment for the american people, not her political hide, and I got zippo. Throw in the iraq war vote and her record could be considered awful. On the other hand, the clinton attack machine went over obama with a fine tooth comb and tested and vetted him for the country. You have to give them credit for that.
All that being said, today is a new day and its really, really exciting. I'm sensing 9/12 may be getting here soon.
colonpowwow wrote on January 4, 2008 12:18 PM:Dear random:
As the poster of the long list of "showboat, dead end legislation that she sponsored," just a couple of comments:
1. It's not showboating to do your job in the Senate for your constituents, like authoring legislation or calling your subcommittee to order to pass pertinent legislation.
2. It's not dead end by definition if it ends up in being enacted as law - as did what is contained in those lists. Since most of this was bi-partisan legislation done in a time all three branches of government were filled with her political enemies, doesn't that make any kind of statement re her character, abilities and work ethic with you? Armed service legislation, child protection legislation, environmental protection legislation, labor legislation, women's rights legislation, medical legislation - none of that stuff important to you?
3. It's too bad that you're not 1/10th as classy as the candidate you favor who has now impressively (no snark) gathered the first 17 delegates he needs (as opposed to her 13 delegates).
Remember, your candidate needs all the Demoratic voters enthusiasm in the GE, not just yours. Thanks for steeling my resolve to work harder for Hillary Clinton (unpaid - your insight is laughable).
colonpowwow wrote on January 4, 2008 12:33 PM:Oh, one more thing, random - a clue for someone who needs one apparently -
If the bill the Senator authored ends up with the word "Act" at the end of it, that means it's passed both houses and was signed into law by the President, you know, like everything I had on my list that had her name in the title (meaning she co-authored it).
Could you post a long, boring list of legislative accomplishments from your chosen one? We'd love to see it to compare. Again, I'll start you off:
Clinton-Obama National Medical Error Disclosure and Compensation ACT
Michael A wrote on January 4, 2008 1:03 PM:Hi colonpowwow, sorry your candidate lost. Think about the future though. Can you imagine if in november the dems and dem voters outnumber the gop 2 to 1? Talk about a huge landslide and mandate. Wow!!!
Mike Belgrove wrote on January 4, 2008 2:27 PM:One of the writers on a site I blog for talked a about Obama's win. Of course he first had to explain was a Caucus was to our readers, lol.
Honestly I hate to play the race card but I'm very surprised to see Obama win in a state like Iowa. Maybe the world isn't as racist as I thought. I'm feeling like if he can win there he can win anywhere.
