Alright, whatever Kevin. Joined the next president a little late, but you don't get away that easy. But whatever, glad you're on board.

Yes...and what impact may this have on the rioters in Keyna?

Obama is just alright with me,
Obama is just alright, oh yeah,
Obama is just alright with me,
Obama is just alright....

I don't care what people say .. . .

Couldn't have said it better myself, Mr. Drum.

If only he weren't a young, chariasmatic, naive (see Krugman) black man, I'd be happy about it too.

Kevin, not a supporter of Obama, but I congratulate him for his victory. With his recent attacks on universal health care mandates, unions, and trial lawyers, I think he's already doing a good job of running to the middle in order to win the general election. I still disagree with his dovish foreign policy, but a merger of his domestic policies and Hillary's hawkish foreign policies would be a great match up.

Well, the Obama bandwagon could use a Drum ;)

Kevin, are you sure it's not the bandwagon effect you're feeeling? It's nicer to be with a winner - is this perhaps why you were with Clinton before (she was hands-down favorite before) and are now switching to Obama after his Iowa win?

I've been leaning back and forth between Edwards and Clinton, and I found myself really happy that Obama won.

I still really like Edwards, and would be fine if he got the nomination. But Obama mojo is infectious.

I love Al. He's so clever, dropping in how Obama's hatred of all that is good and holy in the world makes him happy for the success of his campaign. And how, though he wishes Obama was as much a Arab-hating militarist as Hillary, he still is heartened by the results. It's so good that you're commenting to help America pick the best next president, Al!

Welcome aboard the Obama train, Kevin. Glad to have you.

I must say, as a right-leaning independent, that was one great speech. He knows how to strike a common emotional cord and was a least partially responsible for an impressive turnout. So does the Hillster go strongly negative now or after New Hampshire?

Two good things about Obama:

1. None of his electoral votes would come from the old south. His administration would owe the Christianists nothing.

2. Electing Obama would be a very loud signal to the rest of the world that the U.S. is turning its back on the Dubya years. We might even earn some respect back, eventually.

Pat Robertson and Bob Gephardt won Iowa one year. How'd that work out for them?

If Obama can infect Drum, the world is no problem.

This Obama guy is special. I've been saying it for years. Its the kind of person you only get once a generation, and I don't blame people for being skeptical because there are so many frauds out there. But at some point the reality just hits you upside the head. I'm cynical as hell in general but watching Obama give his speech I would have jumped out of my chair and marched through the streets if thats what he asked for.

obama is an authentic leader.

think about where he has come from and what he has accomplished. not through money, lineage or family... he is the real thing.... fucking awsome!

1) Edwards and Obama best on "least likely to kill foreigners in unprovoked wars".

2) Hillary and Edwards best on health care.

3) Obama most likely to lose to a non-insane Republican, if one exists.

4) Hillary second most likely to lose.

5) Edwards has a hokey accent (c'mon, I'm from the south, the drawl is an exaggeration).

6) Hillary would be great, since she's a woman (ceteris paribus).

7) Obama would be great, as a (half) black guy, ceteris paribus.

8) Hillary allying herself with the "liberal" hawks is almost unforgivable. She's be my pick without having done that. The AEI, NYT, TNR, Washington Post, Brookings, etc., have picked her as the best candidate to continue their war against Arabs. I have to guess whether her sucking up to these neo-cons is just for favorable treatment in the press or for donations, or if she literally IS a hawk. And since killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people makes potential healthcare reform seem petty, she loses my vote.

Whoever the next president is, he or she had better have a damn good Cabinet and executive team. There's a whole lot of mess to clean up.

So there's the concern - if Obama wins the nomination, and the Presidency, who is the Team? I would expect that within the first six months of any new administration, China or Russia will pull a stunt to create an international incident (remember the spy plane collision with the Chinese fighter in early 2001) to test the readiness of a new American leader. This was always the most compelling point about Hillary, that she would bring in the old Clinton stable and "be ready on day one". This is not to imply that I favored Clinton, I didn't.

These little tics that Obama displays, like repeating the Republican talking points ("Social Security crisis") bothers me, because it indicates a lack of critical thinking. It's going to be very important for the next president to evaluate policy options carefully and set priorities with a realistic frame of mind vis-a-vis what he or she can achieve legislatively, especially given the Republicans track record.

Obama's "greenness" is my biggest worry.

Obama's team, especially on foreign policy, is a good mix of experience (some old Clinton hands) and provocative "new" thinkers (like Samantha Power). I think he's the best Dem behind Biden on foreign policy (and don't think Biden wouldn't be a possible SecState in an Obama administration).

I will vote for and support the Democratic nominee.

But, I don't feel comfortable about Obama for at least a few reasons. First -- Donnie McClurkin in SC (I am an open lesbian). Second -- please don't forget he beat Alan Keyes in the senate race (Alan Keyes!). Third -- the calculated "non-votes" when he had the opportunity to take stands on important issues. Fourth -- as pointed out above he's on record with some right-wing talking points ("Social Security Crisis")(uh... Medicare?). Sure, he's charming. Sure, he gives a good speech. Sure, he's "positioning himself". I haven't seen a leader yet. And, I haven't seen a leader who will fight back against the no-holds-barred Republican slime machine that we know is coming. I hope I'm wrong.

Perhaps a lot of potential supporters didn't quite believe it was possible, and the amazing turnout tonight tells you it is. Welcome aboard.

"And the idea of a young, charismatic, black guy as our next president is pretty damn inspiring."

Half a hurray for Barack (not a Muslim) H. (really not a Muslim) Obama (very much a Christian).

Sorry Kevin, the "liberal" blogosphere protests too much that Barry ain't a Muslim.

On substantive issues, Edwards is the man.

As Howard Dean might have put it--I do wish he'd represent the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party.

FWIW, I still have all the same issues with Obama that I've had all along. But all I can say is that on a gut level I felt pretty happy to see him win. I don't know why. Maybe it's just the bandwagon, or maybe I just got sucked in by his speech. Who knows?

This has happened to me before. I've had other occasions where I'll construct intellectual arguments for one thing or another, but when the time comes to make a decision I suddenly change my mind. I don't know if this is one of those cases, but it might be.

Maybe it's because he's a Democrat, he won tonight and ultimately any of the Democratic candidates would be better than what we've had the past eight years?

I've been waiting 7 long years for someone to give the speech Obama gave tonight. Anybody could have done it, but he nailed it. Thank Zeus he did. He may not get there, and he may disappoint us if he does, but at least he laid it out there for us to hear.

I am with you in a lot of ways, Kevin. I have been on the fence (I like all the Dems pretty much), but the feeling I have tonight is unexpected relief and joy. Real joy, the kind we Dems don't get to experience often. I'll give it a few days to see if it's real, but it feels awfully good.

"any of the Democratic candidates would be better than what we've had the past eight years?"

He ain't John Kerry. And his wife looks fabulous. What's not to like?

Obama graduated Harvard Law as president of the Law Review. He went on to be a civil rights lawyer and teach constitutional law at University of Chicago. After Bush it would be nice to have a president who knows the constitution well enough to teach it at University of Chicago. He beat a big Democratic field including machine candidates and much better financed outsiders in the 2004 primary. He won 64% of the vote in DuPage County, which the local Republican machine likes to brag is the most Republican county in the country when Kerry only pulled 47%. My own Republican congresswomen Judy Biggert alluded to me that she herself voted for him. Kirk Dillard my Republican state senator, former DuPage County Repub chairman and McCain supporter actually appeared in a campaign ad for Obama.

Obama is the real deal and has been his whole life. He wasn't a sunny optimist 4 years ago who morphed into a fire breathing populist today. He doesn't say one thing to a group of supporters on an Iowa campus and another to a group in a New York boardroom. What you see is what you get. You want the huge mandate it'll take to get real change? Obama is your candidate.

Geez, Huckabee and Obama.

Those Iowa caucus voters really can pick 'em, can't they?

Though they had plenty of opportunities, both sides picked candidates that did not vote for the Iraq war.

Quinn: Maybe it's because he's a Democrat

He is? Then how come his positions are Republican-Lite? Edwards actually sounds like a Democrat, but at least the chosen Republican-Lite isn't the one that's a mindless hawk and related to a former president.

ultimately any of the Democratic candidates would be better than what we've had the past eight years

As would Mickey Mouse. Please, raise the bar.

both sides picked candidates that did not vote for the Iraq war.

Yeah, because they both did not HAVE a vote for or against the war, right?

Really, both sides chose the most naive, inexperienced candidates available.

Truly a proud moment for democracy.

Hey I blogged about my experience caucusing tonight in Iowa over at WTWC. It's a pretty human look at the caucus process.

I have to say that I was surprised by the results in my precinct tonight. Over 200 people showed up, and half joined the Obama group. My wife and several other Republicans joined us. I respect Paul Krugman's opinions of the relative merits of the Edwards and Obama health plans, but I'm not sure the minor policy details make much of a difference when it comes time to check your gut and make a final decision. I've had a chance to see Obama in Iowa City and Cedar Rapids, and you just feel fired up leaving the pep rally. He may not be a left-leaning fighter, but you do get the impression he can bring people together to achieve change. He seems like a leader who can bring out the best in America, and it's been a long time since we've seen our country at its best.

I'm glad you decided not to miss the opportunity after all.

As I've expressed elsewhere... Hope is good. Change is good.

But what are we hoping for? What kind of change are we talking about? I can't think of a single thing Obama's proposed that's bolder than what Edwards or Clinton have, and in many cases, he's been more cautious.

Unless he means that Barack Obama himself represents hope and change, I don't see what's underneath all that soaring rhetoric.

Orange, you're right that Obama's positions may not be as progressive as Clinton's or Edwards', but that's in the details. I've got his 60-page "Blueprint for Change" booklet, and it has all the standard Democratic platform stuff - healthcare reform, trade reform, energy independence, greenhouse gas reduction, etc. His goals to get the troops out of Iraq are not as ambitious as Richardson's (16 months vs. immediate). I'm just saying that getting someone in there who can advance the Democratic agenda is the main thing, and I don't want to spend the next 11 months hearing about Edwards' expensive haircuts. I think Obama has an electability factor that can't be ignored.

Kevin, instead of voting for a young black man, you can vote for a youngish black woman and real change.

Cynthia McKinney may well get the Green nomination. And, since I'm likely to vote Green....

Obama, like Clinton and Edwards, has no plan to get all the troops out on a definite timetable. His plan, like theirs, has caveats.

When people call Obama inexperienced, are they comparing him to Biden or Richardson or Dodd? Fair enough then, but Edwards and Clinton don't seem to have much on him. What are their enormous acheivements aside from casting a vote for war which they now regret (my mistake, Hillary doesn't).

Or is it meant that Obama is politically inexperienced? Again, compared to Biden or Richardson that is fair criticism, but Obama has competed in and won far more political contests than either Clinton or Edwards, including this one last night. He has been doing it for a longer period as well.

He has won Iowa, and if he loses New Hampshire it will probably be by only a hair. The man knows how to turn out voters, he's even better at it than the person married to Bill Clinton. He can probably win nationally, against the God Guy or the Money Guy or one of the Perpetual Warfare Guys. Any of them seperately or all combined together into the ugliest Voltron imaginable. Go Barack!

Elliott in IA: I see what you mean. I guess I worry that while Obama is a mainstream Democrat in many ways, once in office, he'll shy away from confrontation to get things passed. We all know there will have to be big fights to get anything done no matter who the next president is.

If Obama runs on a platform of cooperation with Republicans, and runs against universal health care in the primaries, calls labor unions "special interests", and doesn't make a case for standard liberal policies while campaigning, he won't have the political mandate to get these things done even after he wins. Bush pulled a bait-and-switch, but I don't think that's Obama's plan.

On substantive issues, Edwards is the man.
Posted by: RS on January 4, 2008 at 12:28 AM | PERMALINK

By sentiments exactly.

I stopped listening to radio and tv many, many months ago -- choosing instead to obtain news through print and online media. Obama's charisma has lessened in that span. My opinion of Clinton has remained about the same (very cautious, wary), and my opinion of Edwards has improved measurably. I am not advocating refraining from actually seeing someone speak or listening to them – observing mannerisms communicates much. But it has been an interesting (and somehow more dispassionate) experience.

If Edwards is truly on his way out – I think it is a shame. And I have been absolutely disgusted by the media roping off the race to just two contenders. Irresponsible.

Obama's never done anything nearly as obnoxious as the manner in which George W. Bush made his fortune (abusive eminent domain and taxpayer subsidies), or how John Edwards made a good chunk of his (making false claims to juries regarding the cause of cerebral palsy), so he wouldn't enter the White House with the distorted view of the world which often accompanies such methods of fortune attainment. That really is a positive attribute.

On the other hand, he has no record of achievement to speak of as an executive overseeing a massive bureaucracy. Of course, the only guy who does is Romney, who has proven to be a transparently phony politician. They are all phony politicians, of course, but to be so transparent is to be really inept. So much for ol' Mitt.

Out of this crowd, why not Obama? The swooning that ostensible adults engage in over a politician is a little embarassing, however, especially when it is due to his skin color.

Serving for decades in the U.S. Senate provides about as much meaningful experience for being a good President of the United States as being a food critic for decades would provide useful experience for running a chain of several thousand restaurants. Les Aspin was a wonderful Congressman, specializing in military affairs, for decades. He sucked as Secretary of Defense. If you are going to elect a Senator to the Presidency, you may as well elect one who has been there one term as one who has been there for four terms.

obama makes me long for the continuation of the bush/cheney regime.

he is an even worse murderous asshole.

just you watch

>>obama makes me long for the continuation of the bush/cheney regime.

Yeah, I heard he is secretly a Muslim and lived in a "Madrassa," too. And, you know, he's black. And many Americans just aren't ready to have a negro in the White House. So, I can see why you called him a "muderous asshole," Hillary.

This is why Hillary will lose. Even Kevin is jumping ship at the drop of a hat....

Ah good to see the old Will Allen back and pretending that he hated the way George W. Bush made all his money. Of course, that didn't stop Will from voting for Bush - twice. Over far more competent candidates who didn't make their money from corrupt land deals. But that's what we get told is "independence." Knowing that your candidate has no experience nor any hope of competence and still voting for him the first time, then when the inexperience and incompetence have led to the deaths of thousands of Americans and tens of thousands of non-Americans - voting for him again.

Hey Will "I'm a proud Bush voter and will stand by my vote for the worst possible candidate in two elections running" Allen, why do you think your ability to pick the least competent person available gives you any special insight into a competent field like the ones the Democrats have?

I've been anticipating an Obama win for awhile, now I'm hoping for dumping my conservative rep. and major dem gains in congress. That Iowa turn out with all those new and young voters is fantastic. Hope your conversion sticks and others bloggers soon see the light as well. The 2008 election has landslide potential.

and I don't want to spend the next 11 months hearing about Edwards' expensive haircuts.

And really, I am sick and tired of people enabling the right wing slime machine by basing their decisions on the fact that they don't want to hear right wing and the media whine about a particular candidate. You may have valid reasons to support Obama, but this is not a valid reason not to support Edwards. And if you don't think that the slime machine is going to come up with a sleazy line of attack against Obama that is going to make you sick for the next 11 months, you've got another think coming.

Not really convinced yet -- although I'm glad to see him win big if for no other reason than to dispel all the crap about race being a negative.

I knew he was good at speechifying for years. What I'd like to see is a good issue based town hall performance or a debate performance where it's obvious he can think on his toes. Maybe someone can send me a youtube link.

I have no idea how effective he'll be as a president. Wasn't particularly impressed with his senate career. I remember a few times he got played by Lieberman/McCain and the rest felt like a presidential campaign.

I think he very well might have the best chance (among the dems) of being elected in November. But this opinion is based more on the shallowness of the electoral process (and media) than anything else.

For the record I'm a Gore/Dean supporter who was against Hillary entering the race. Hillary has grown on me and the universal negative treatment she gets has me asking those questions I used to dismiss out of hand about our attitude toward female politicians. It's out of my hands and I'll vote for any Dem in November.

I don't want to sound overly prescient, but I saw this coming the first time I saw Obama, before the convention speech in 04. I immediately recognized a man who would be president one day.

I just didn't realize how soon. I figured Kerry for 8 years, then Obama, by then a seasoned senator, would take over.

Now I want to go watch that speech everyone's talking about.

If nominated, Obama will almost surely win the presidency. But my feeling is that he will not get much accomplished. And that's too bad since this country desperately needs universal healthcare.

I sure hope that my pessimism is misplaced.

I'm not ready to jump on the Obama bandwagon. But if he's ultimately the nominee, I will wholeheartedly support the collective choice of my fellow Democrats, and will be ready to fight like hell for him. Nuf ced.

Donald, you are reading my mind again. All I can do is concur. Nuf ced.

I have felt cynical and jaded about the Democratic frontrunners from the beginning of this sorry election cycle. None of the frontrunners seems to me to be credible. . Barack Obama has a lot of charm, a good line of patter, and little else that I can see. Madam Clinton is arrogant, seems to have taken the Karl Rove model of campaigning for her own, and is owned by the corporatocracy to boot – it’s their interests she has at heart, not the American people’s. John Edwards looked promising for awhile, but made a couple of blunders that made me really question his judgment. I think Sen. Dodd would have made a good president, but the media has been so bent on cramming Hillary and Obama down our throats that he has gotten almost no coverage.

Barack Obama does seem to have a remarkable organization behind him. I think, however, when the Republican nasty campaigning and dirty tricks go into full swing, he will not be prepared for the accusations of drug use, drug dealing, slurs on his religious background, etc., that have already started swirling – thanks primarily to the Clinton campaign. As John Kerry failed to respond adequately to Swift Boating four years ago, Obama will be forced into a defensive position and mowed down by the same kind of ugliness.

I'm thinking that if Bloomberg/Hagel decide to run, I may vote for them.

Gawd, Kevin, now you're doing it too. Oh, Barack is So charismatic. Let's make him president! I expected better from you. Most of the stuff that I read about the man talks about his charisma, his eloquence. And it's true. He's inspiring when you listen to him.

But what about his record? I did read the piece about him in the WM, and it is one of the few pieces to critically examine his record. Most of the stuff written about him might have been written by cheerleaders. Blech. How about more substance in the media(general media) and fewer fluff pieces????

Helena Montana: "I'm thinking that if Bloomberg/Hagel decide to run, I may vote for them."

And I'm thinking that maybe you should travel to Norman, OK this weekend, where NYC Mayor Mike Bloomberg is meeting with Univ. of Oklahoma Pres. David Boren, Sen. Chuck Hagel and other so-called moderate politicians, and tell them in person that perhaps you'll give them your endorsement of such a ticket, and maybe you might tell others of your decision -- that is, if you decide to do it.

I bet they'll be so inspired by your lukewarm gesture that maybe they'll immediately announce that they're perhaps considering the formation of a new political party that might hold promise for people like yourself, who just can't bring yourselves to vote for any of the other candidates because of your persistent and nonsensical trafficking in public misinformation about those candidates to the point that you publicly delude yourselves into complete political paralysis.

After all, you and your fellow members of the National Caucus of Political Invertebrates probably deserve each other. Maybe.

It's all over folks. It's gonna be an Obama snowball. From now till November, ups and downs included.

General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker better start burning the midnight oil, because that show is coming to an end.

I agree with Fel. I don't like it, but it's Obama all the way now.

Kevin - you've drank the Kool aid too? First of all, how is it the guy is black? His mother is white - she doesn't count? More likely a 'black' Obama appeals to liberals need to feel good about what wonderful people they are even though my hard drinking foul mouthed Irish grandmother is more black than this guy. More importantly though - McCain comes out the winner of Iowa because of Romney's fall and if you think Obama's thin resume and left wing anti-war rhetoric is going to trump McCain's resume and foreign policy heft come election time then you are definitely fooling yourself. Most important of all though - the most frightening person in America today is Oprah and if you kool aid drinking simpletons somehow carry Obama to the White House and thus empower that witch to an even greater degree - my god, the evil that will be unleashed will sicken the heart and mind to an extent that maybe not even a president Huckabee could achieve.

Huckabee and Obama. The country is in deep trouble.

I've been sort of fitfully supporting Hillary Clinton for the past few months, but I have to say that I don't feel any disappointment tonight over her loss.

Thank God that disgraceful right-wing shill has finally been kicked to the curb. The era of Clinton government is over, and not a moment too soon.

When you break down Obama's voter numbers, like Wolf did on CNN - that you had to notice that only 18% of adults voted for Obama. Sorry Kevin, that makes Obama a flash in the pan. He was the kid's candidate. Obama generated the young vote - but that is not enough. He failed to appeal to adults. And the reason why - he talks coporate first policies - just like Bush, corporates first - American people nowhere at all, and that wasn't lost on adult voters, who want real change. These are the voters that make and break elections and the only ones that count.

That's why Edwards is set the take the lead. Because Edwards is the real deal and Obama isn't really offering health care, is edge over to corporations what to raid American's social security. Obama is a sell out and isn't the non-corporate candidate and that is what has all the adults worried. Kids are easily mis-lead but adult voters want real actions, real change and Obama isn't offer real change.

On Huckabee, Josh Marshall was very much wrong about this comment:

On Iowa Josh says: Huckabee was in many ways on his very best terrain. Perhaps the peculiarities of caucusing helped Obama. But his victory strikes me as much more portable outside the state than Huckabee's.

--Josh Marshall

You can't listen to Broder and Brooks - they don't speak for conservative voters anymore and haven't for a long time - indeed the conservative pundits have NEVER been more out of touch with conservative voters than they are now. Conservative voters KNEW that Bush was horribly dishonest and all the bad talk about Clinton won't help Repug pundits sale Bushism because it is now officially a dead religion. As it turns out, conservative votes wanted the real deal - an honest conservative - not a criminal one, so conservative voters went back to their roots, the only thing left tp do in complete corrupt party - a badly needed return to ethics. Remember than in 2004 - the values voters were what supposedly gave Bush his win. The fact that Bush is nothing but an out-right criminal wasn't lost on mainsteam conservative voters. Broder and Brooks don't represent conservative voters, they represent Bushism and all things Bush. Tonight Iowa showed that Bushism is a dead religion practiced by Bushism pundits who pine for the glory days of Bushism and can't get over it.

That is why Huckabee's talked about putting hate away - Huckabee is talking about Rovism and Bush hate, because Bushism is all about hating liberals or anyone that disagreed with him. Bush was not a uniter, he was a divider, and Bush talked GOD but he certainly never applied any true Christian values to anything he ever did or said. So Broder, Brooks, Klein and NRO, The Weekly Standard can go right on hating most of Americans in true Bushism style, and certainly they will continue to do Murdock's will, however, conservative voters have moved on. Repub pundits better learn to like Huckabee alot because he is not going away.

Neo-conservatives are now meaningless radicals once again. Broder, Brooks and NRO are meanlingless pundits, who talking to themselves, because the conservative voter aren't reading them.

And

He is? Then how come his positions are Republican-Lite? Edwards actually sounds like a Democrat, but at least the chosen Republican-Lite isn't the one that's a mindless hawk and related to a former president.

Just because some people think that there is a shortfall in Social Security doesn't mean they want to sign up for the Bush privatization plan. Neither do they believe it's right to mandate that people purchase health insurance, which is a baffling position to me since it plays right into the hands of Republicans who would easily shoot it down while also making it appear that Dems are out to stick it to low to low-middle income families. Yes, it's possible to still be a Democrat and have those positions.

As would Mickey Mouse. Please, raise the bar.

The bar has been raised considerably, IMO.

Great to see all the rats jumping off the Hillary ship this am! Welcome aboard.

Bleagh! My LAST choice for a Democratic nominee. I feel like all those Republicans crossed over to the Dem caucuses and threw the votes to Obama, some with cynical calculations, and some with more idealistic motivations. Maybe he'll start running to the left now, or governing (god forbid) to the left. But I think he has found that appealing to Republicans is how he can win open Democratic primaries, so I would expect more of the same from him going forward.

On the bright side, the massive (OK, let's make that historically large) turnout for the Democrats in the most Republican of all states makes me think the R's will get slaughtered in November. If it was the other way around the R's would be smelling blood and acting accordingly. Unfortunately the Democrat instincts seem to be the opposite. Come on Harry, Barack, Nancy and company! Act like vertebrates and not worms!

My gosh, there seems to be a collective case of the "vapors" around here. I would suggest you all freshen your panty shields, take a deep breath, and get some perspective. The Iowa caucuses are not totally insignificant, but it's a long way from there to the White House. Why don't you wait a few weeks before you get out the annointing oil.

Me-again said "He was the kid's candidate. Obama generated the young vote - but that is not enough.

Apparently, it may be. Iowa's median age is marginally above the national average. If all he needed was the kids to win as big as he did there, he really just needs to keep up the good work in the primaries. And to hang on to those women voters as well.

1. Has it occured to anyone here that the lip service Obama pays to right wing frames is the liberal version of "compassionate conservatism"? In other words - it disarms the opposition and gets hims elected.

2. If Bloomberg runs it will be because Big Money doesn't have a standard bearer in the race. Don't expect progressive policies from a Patrician financial services billionare. Big Money is scared - Huckabee terrifies them. They are being kicked out of the republican coalition and they don't have a home now.

I wish we could stop mentioning that he is "black."

I'm 53, a political junkie, and a life-long Democrat. I'm plenty cynical. But I've never seen anything like Obama. He strikes me as a once in two generations candidate.

I would suggest you all freshen your panty shields...

Posted by: BillyBob

Much better slogan than "Stand for Change."

The new battle cry should be "Freshen Your Panty Shields."

@jussumbody

All those republican voters? WTF? You mean the 3% of voters in the democratic primary who were republicans?

Look at the exit polls: Obama won in every category meaningful to Democrats. He carried all the groups whose approval legitimizes a democratic candidate.

Obama's approval among independents was especially helpful. I'll have to check the data on previous Democratic Caucuses to see how other winners compared in this category.

... if you kool aid drinking simpletons somehow carry Obama to the White House and thus empower that witch to an even greater degree - my god, the evil that will be unleashed will sicken the heart and mind to an extent that maybe not even a president Huckabee could achieve.

Posted by: goosenut

Two more great bumper stickers:

"Kool Aid Drinkers Unite."

"Empower that Witch, Sicken the Heart, Unleash the Evil."

1. Has it occured to anyone here that the lip service Obama pays to right wing frames is the liberal version of "compassionate conservatism"? In other words - it disarms the opposition and gets hims elected.

Posted by: Adam on January 4, 2008 at 9:08 AM

LMFAO. Dream on!

jussumbody:

Iowa is far from "the most Republican of all states". It was blue in 2000, red in 2004 by the narrowest of margins. Please get your facts straight.

The message on the web and in newsprint today about Obama: charm, charm, charisma, charm, wasn't that a great speech, inspiring, charm, intelligent, charm.

The unanswered question: specifically how is Obama going to achieve all of this purported great change and bipartisanship? Where are the specifics? Where's the beef?

Haven't seen any of it yet. Still waiting.

To me, it's the same old, same old. The experienced, knowledgeable, intelligent, articulate woman is thrown over for the younger, inexperienced, unknown man. Yes, we absolutely should break the color, ethnic barrier, but it's very depressing that we are not yet breaking the gender barrier. This country will not overcome the real status quo until it elects a strong woman in a position of true power. Until we do, women will remain slaves at many levels, subtle and overt.
(And the woman-behind-the-man argument just doesn't count.)

It makes me very sad.

… but emotionally I'm as susceptible to the famous Obama charm as anyone.

I now anticipate New Hampshire with heightened interest. That will be an election as opposed to a caucus, which I have a distaste for. Still, my suspicions of caucuses are fueled by the instinct that they normally work against a guy like Obama.

How important the Obama victory is, I can say, but a win is a win. I think it will carry over. The carry over effect could largely die if he were to be soundly defeated in New Hampshire a few day later, but the win in Iowa certainly makes such a defeat less likely.

On the Republican side, I differ with many. Quite a few analysts continue to say that Huckabee cannot win the nomination. I don’t think that’s true. That’s not to say he is worthy. But Republicans are crazy. Many evangelicals do not like Huckabee (call him a liberal), but they will vote for him rather than Rudy, Mitt, or McCain. Many other Republicans will join in if they perceive him as having the best chance of defeating the Democratic nominee.
On the other hand, I do personally know a number of evangelical Ron Paul supporters. He is costing Huckabee some votes.

So New Hampshire will be very interesting for both major parties.

This morning's CNN poll:

Which Iowa caucus winner would be more likely to get your vote for president?

Mike Huckabee 39% 20804
Barack Obama 61% 33106

This may sound frivolous but I'm from Chicago and after living most of my life with presidents who sound like the guy who shot Kevin's great, great grandfather in the knee at Shiloh I'm more than ready for a president who doesn't talk like he's got a mouth full of corn pone.

Edwards' accent is much more pronounced these days than it was in 2004. Makes him sound like a shitkicker who never got out of the mill rather than the U of NC law school grad he is. I don't know if he thought it'd make him sound more "authentic" to rural Iowans or what. Regardless I don't think it'll fly in the South where Democrats are tired of being treated like hicks.

After decades of presidents who either sound like Jeff Davis or who try to politically divide us as badly as we were in 1860 I prefer Obama who sounds more like me. I've had enough of presidents who come from the old Confederacy geographically or in spirit to last me for awhile.

The MSM -- eagerly helping to "catapult the propaganda":

Pseudo-Reporting
by Robert C. Koehler

Many U.S. media outlets were quick to give us a primer on Islamic terrorism in the wake of Benazir Bhutto's assassination last week, even though actual evidence points the finger far more at our ally in the war on terror, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, than it does at the Taliban or al-Qaida.

Indeed, McClatchy Newspapers recently reported that Bhutto, at the time of her murder, was in possession of evidence that Pakistan's military intelligence agency was planning to rig the upcoming election (then scheduled for Jan. 8 ) in Musharraf's favor, supplying, as if it were needed, an obvious motive for getting rid of her.

While there was some good, or at least restrained, reporting by U.S. media as the tragedy unfolded, the main sources of news for most Americans maintain what I can only call a cocked trigger of jingoism, which often goes off before the screams subside and the blood and debris are hosed into the gutter.

"Weird, isn't it, how swiftly the narrative is laid down for us," Robert Fisk observed in the U.K's Independent. Yeah, I'd say so. I'd add: insulting, infuriating, dangerous - this media readiness to act as the propaganda arm of the party in power, to simplify evil as the sole domain of the enemy du jour, to "unite" the country in self-righteousness and hatred of that enemy. ...
__________

So remember, kids: "Al Qaeda ate my homework." (Works almost every time!)
.

Obama is INSPIRATIONAL. Clinton ISN'T. If anything she is the opposite of inspirational, whatever that words is. That should pretty much decide it for all of us.

Do you want someone with magnificent oratorical skills added to all of his other inspiring attributes, to represent us Democrats in 2008?

Obama's victory speech was spectacular. He has that charisma that will suck votes from the KKK.

I've vacillated myself, and I must confess have thought at times that a black man cannot win (even though Obama is really as black as he is white). I see the results from Iowa, I listen to his oratory, and I am no longer a doubter. Obama can win, win big.

We NEED to have Obama as the Democratic nominee for President. Clinton may be capable of winning, but it will be a SMALL and NASTY victory, with little major realignment nationally.

An Obama win on the other hand will be HUGE, transformational, and will create a new American majority.

I am elated.

mmba that fact that Hillary has been considered a major candidate let alone the front runner for so long has opened doors for women whether she succeeds or not. Same for future minority candidates and Obama. When a woman does become president if it's not Hillary she will be standing on Mrs. Clinton's shoulders.

Kim, Obama plans to have "rap sessions" which will immedidately convince the Republicans to see his brilliant point of view. He will also "rap" to the "folks" and unite everyone because after all he has a "fresh face" and God knows how important it is to have a fresh face and rap to the folks about hope and change.

Charisma that will suck votes from the KKK

Best battle cry yet!

Big Money is scared - Huckabee terrifies them. They are being kicked out of the republican coalition and they don't have a home now.

Not quite. Big Money is about to be welcomed to the Democratic Party with open arms. Hillary Clinton made her peace with Big Money long ago, and Obama's "unity" message is meant for Wall Street as much as anybody.

Eventually, the rural evangelicals will control the GOP and upscale urbanites will control the Democrats. The ones being left out in the cold are the traditional progressives.

A useful perspective on the Iowa result.

Political history a warning for early-season winners

Regarding the presumed "finality" of these early primary "wins":

Let It Start Now
The New York Times | Editorial

The candidates have spent a year and tens of millions of dollars in Iowa, and Thursday night the first actual voters offered their first assessments. Some candidates and their strategists were hoping the caucuses and the New Hampshire primary next week would settle the race, weeding out the contenders for the two major parties' presidential nominations. Watching the campaign in cold, snowy and mostly empty Iowa, we were hoping for something else - that this year's Iowa-New Hampshire rush to judgment will be the last. ...

We don't question the enthusiasm or the commitment of the people of Iowa and New Hampshire. But Iowa, where a huge turnout amounts to less than 10 percent of the population, is about 92 percent white, more rural and older than the rest of the nation. New Hampshire has a non-Hispanic white population of about 95 percent. Iowa's Democrats are more liberal and more protectionist than the nation's Democrats. Its Republicans are more conservative, and religiously driven, than the nation's Republicans. And yet, The Boston Globe reported that Mr. Romney spent $7 million on ads in Iowa. That's nearly $4 per registered voter.

We do believe that the time has long passed for both parties to not only break the Iowa-New Hampshire habit but also end the damaging race to be third, with states pushing their primaries closer and closer to New Year's Day. ...
.

Obama reminds me more of RFK than JFK; let's hope he doesn't end up the same way.

I am very proud of the Iowans who voted for Obama.

Markg8, I totally agree. Edwards' accent is the number one reason I can't stand him. (Number one of a long list, admittedly.)

I'm a Southerner, and I know there are much more pleasant sounding southern accents. Fred Thompson, for instance, sounds melodious.

And you're right about Southerners not wanting to be branded hicks. That's exactly why I got rid of my accent when I moved north.

I decided Hillary wasn't really on the side of the people when she complained against raising the income cap for FICA contributions, "One trillion dollar tax increase" or whatever. That's *inexcusable* Repiglican scam talk, and Barack smacked her down accordingly. That matters more than "experience", and being First Lady isn't the same as real governing experience anyway.

Kevin, is it possible that your lightened mood is because this dog and pony show is finally on the road and moving? It seems that for so long we have been subjected to vacuous debates and dumbshit cable TeeVee pundits pulling their opinions out of their asses that, to finally see real people involved in making choices is a relief. Let's not forget this is also the first official act in the process of replacing George W Bush and Richard B Cheney as top dogs. I can't think of anything more mood lightening than that. (Okay, impeachment would send me into euphoria.)

I am still not on the Obama bandwagon. Many who have posted above this comment have already stated many of the reasons why.

Having said that, I am a proud Dem and will vote Dem in the general. Clinton, Obama or Edwards will get my support when the time to vote comes.

KathyF: I don't want to sound overly prescient, but I saw this coming the first time I saw Obama, before the convention speech in 04. I immediately recognized a man who would be president one day.

LOL. I met him seven or eight years ago at a DL21C event and thought, "That guy's damn smooth." Didn't get a presidential vibe, but did think we'd be seeing more of him.

Kevin Drum: But all I can say is that on a gut level I felt pretty happy to see him win. I don't know why. Maybe it's just the bandwagon, or maybe I just got sucked in by his speech. Who knows?

It was a damn good speech, very well delivered. But beyond that, maybe you're feeling good about what is a historic first and a major departure from the past. Nothing wrong with that. Obama isn't my first choice--I differ with him on many policy positions, he is not the courageous reformer I think we need, he annoys me with his pandering, and if my candidate's still in on Feb. 5 that person will get my vote--but last night a 94% white state went for the biracial guy for president of the United States.

That is a remarkable turning point for everyone who cares about race relations and racism in this country, and it should be appreciated in and of itself regardless of how each of us is hoping the primaries will shake out. Will Allen can sniff in his usual pointless way about "ostensible adults swooning over his skin color," but the simple fact is that we've never had a serious black candidate for president, and we've assuredly not advanced to the point of color blindness in the U.S. Whether or not one's an Obama fan, this moment is worthy of marking.

Where are the specifics? Where's the beef

Regardless of which of the Big Three Democrats wins the nomination and election, progressives, liberals and leftists will be disappointed with their performance by 2012. The only real accomplishment that has any possibility of being achieved is Americans will have elected an African American or a female to the presidency. Although that is too little for me personally, it would be a remarkable accomplishment nevertheless.

Brojo's pretty well summed it up.

The fact that none of you support a repeal of the 22nd Amendment in this national time of crisis demonstrates your hatred of America.

The fact that none of you support a repeal of the 22nd Amendment in this national time of crisis demonstrates your hatred of America.
Posted by: Red State Mike

So Bill Clinton could jump into the race and win? Be careful of what you wish for, dunce.

Huckabee and Obama. The GOP is in deep trouble.

Fixed it for you.

"I don't want to spend the next 11 months hearing about Edwards' expensive haircuts."

Posted by: Elliott in IA on January 4, 2008

-----

[Try that crap again, and you will not be welcome to post here any longer. --Mod]

Actually, Noel, I was writing as early as 1999 that Bush would be a terrible President domestically, due to the manner in which he made his money, and I voted in a primary for the first time in my life, for a candidate I largely oppose, McCain, specifically because I didn't want to see a guy who made his pile via subsidy and eminent domain get nominated. I said so at the time.

I do have some regret for not having voted for Gore, and absent Gore putting out a 200 page outline of his admiration of central planning, I may have, as sick of anybody connected with the Clinton Administration as I was. Oh well. I still wouldn't vote for John Kerrey if you put a gun to my head.

Anyhow, I know you feel a need to attack me personally whenever I post here, which is typical of the mindset of the kool-aid sippers who visit this forum in such large numbers. If my lukewarm support of Obama is so bothersome to you that you are compelled to respond to it, so be it.

I would suggest you all freshen your panty shields...
Posted by: BillyBob

Much better slogan than "Stand for Change."

The new battle cry should be "Freshen Your Panty Shields."
Posted by: Econobuzz on January 4, 2008 at 9:15 AM | PERMALINK

ROFLOL!

Well, MarkH, why not make your own historic moment by correctly reading and describing a poll for once? As has been pointed out repeatedly, Obama won in nearly every Democratic subcategory, despite your misinformation to the contrary.

Between your posts, Chrissy's strangers-to-fact diatribes and RS' hilariously ironic "Barack's a big old secret Muslim--Edwards is the man for substantive issues" post upthread, it's getting increasingly difficult to believe that most of the biggest Edwards fans around here aren't plants trying to scare off support for JE. Y'all sure aren't doing him any good with this shit.

Edwards: FDR criticized Hoover for failing to balance the budget. FDR isn't a true Democrat! He's a conservative, not a liberal!

*knock at door*

Harold Ford: Hi, we're here from the DLC. How is our old boy doing?

Edwards *whispers*: Not now, I'm trying to convince them I'm the biggest baddest liberal of them all.

Ford: Yeah, whatever. Here's your check. And thanks for your war vote, by the way.

Edwards: Ummm... must stall... have too much blood on hands... lost debate to Cheney... Oh! I know! Mandates are the same thing as universal healthcare. That's what has been driving liberals to work towards universal healthcare for generations, mandates! That's the cornerstone of not just liberal healthcare, but of all of liberalism. Yay mandates! I know mandates are why I, the very bestest liberal ever, became a liberal Democrat who has never done anything to enable conservatives. Now watch this drive!

MarkH,

Your comments stink, really. I guess I should leave it at that but I can't, so I'll try to persuade you. Obama offers a path to change devoid of the anger that Edwards represents. This change may be much more achievable when delivered in a package of inclusion. Think about it.

If you think the average American wants more anger, and will vote for it, given a choice, you are the one smoking something. As I said previously, Obama offers a way to build a transformational majority, a path to build a solid majority from within which the changes you desire can actually be derived. That is unless you want to keep grinding your teeth and be angry and pissed off and listen to Rush Limbaugh gloating for the next 8 years.

I can't help but add that the racist undertones of your comment (especailly the Osama bit), are a real disappointment to all Democrats, who see you as proof that the racists aren't always on the other side of the aisle. You need to examine your bigotry carefully, you might be surprised at what you find.

He gives a good speech, but after that the suit is entirely empty.
Posted by: MarkH on January 4, 2008 at 11:04 AM | PERMALINK

The man has organized an incredible campaign at a national scale (500,000 donors--compare to Edwards), created a consistent popular campaign message, inspired more voters than ever to vote Democratic in Iowa, and gave one of the best political speeches most of us have heard in years, and your argument is that Obama is an empty suit. Not very convincing.

I watched Hillary's speech last night and the more I watched the more I disliked her.

I want to like her. I especially don't want to dislike her because of any misogynistic traits in my personality.

But she has zero charm; I don't get the sense that she likes people. And that's ugly.

Barack "Osama" Obama? Gimme a frickin break. He gives a good speech, but after that the suit is entirely empty.

Sore loser much?

I, for one, saw this meltdown coming. Thanks for not disappointing me, Mark.

All of the "Obama wouldn't be here if he wasn't black / a man" comments are rather silly. Name me a single person in either party today who can give a speech as good as Obama. Youth and charisma is the reason JFK beat Nixon (remember JFK's remark that television won him the presidency). It was Clinton's biggest asset. The moment I decided to back Obama was when I saw a video of him in 2002 discussing how we was against the Iraq War in part because he didn't see how we could keep the Sunnis, the Shi'ites and the Kurds from killing each other. Have Clinton and Edwards given any indication that they knew what a Sunni and a Shi'ite were when they voted for the Iraq war resolution? When people backing a candidate who was so easily duped on the biggest issue of the decade (after all, a smart liberal like Barbara Boxer said voting against it was the proudest vote of her career) say the guy that got it right for the right reasons is naive and has nothing to offer, I just have to laugh.

Ok, just listened to Obama's speech. The first half was fun. The second half sounded too much like "church".

Not saying that sounding like "church" is a political mistake. Would like to go beyond that though. There's a big fight ahead.

This is a no-brainer as far as I'm concerned.
As a young kid who stuffed envelopes for Bobby Kennedy, this is the first time in forty years...think about that, 40 freakin' years!...that someone has come along that actually inspires people.

100,000 more Democratic caucus-goers than last time. And they said that young people could never be inspired to participate.

Sir Hillary couldn't win the women's vote, she got trounced by the Independents that crossed over, her support by newspapers and unions meant nothing, as usual. A full forty per cent of Dems wouldn't vote for her under any conditions, and that's before you get to the Indies and the GOP.

Dems can't win the presidency on their own. They need crossovers for a majority. Obama will bring them, no one else will.

Edwards is not the calculating, vindictive, earth-scorching politician Sir Hillary is, but trying to win on a populist message after getting $400 haircuts, building a new 28,000 sq. ft. McMansion (that you aren't even home to live in), and earning a half mill representing a hedge fund that targets low income citizens, ain't ever gonna fly.

It's akin to having Biden run on a anti-plagerism platform. Like I said, this one's a no brainer.

P.S. Two words for those that prattle on about "experience". Cheney and Rumsfeld. And keep in mind Obama has the exact same experience Abe Lincoln had when he was elected. It seemed to work out for our greatest President, as it will for Obama.

little ole jim from flashes of blue country: Not saying that sounding like "church" is a political mistake. Would like to go beyond that though. There's a big fight ahead.

Yes, absolutely.

And if Huckabee gets the GOP nomination, what I really am not in the mood to see is Obama and Huck trying to outpreacherize each other.

[Try that crap again, and you will not be welcome to post here any longer. --Mod]

Posted by: MarkH on January 4, 2008 at 11:04 AM

What the hell was that deletion about, exactly?

I've seen things said on this site a hundred times worse without being deleted. Or was there something I just flat out missed in first reading it?

Was it simply that he said "Barack 'Osama' Obama"? How do you know that that wasn't intended as a commentary on how he will smeared by Republicans in the general election? To me, it just wasn't clear what was intended, given the entirety of his post, where he raised that very issue, as I recollect (and of course I'm now reduced to my recollections).

[I am confident in my ability to interpret intent. It is my job to read every comment on every thread, and in that capacity I get a pretty good read on the people who comment here.]

Anyhow, I know you feel a need to attack me personally whenever I post here, which is typical of the mindset of the kool-aid sippers who visit this forum in such large numbers. If my lukewarm support of Obama is so bothersome to you that you are compelled to respond to it, so be it.

Gee, martyr yourself much?

The sad fact of the matter is that friggin' Will Allen just became MORE irrelevant to the progress of this country from a Republican-made nightmare shit sandwich served on Iraqi pita bread to at least a little hope and whatever else you want to throw in there.

The Will Allens just don't matter anymore. They're sinking into a funk and they're lashing out with grandiose statements about things that are going to churn along without them.

Is conservatism dead for a generation? It sure looks like it is headed that way, what with Richard Viguerie's vicious assault on Mike Huckabee.

filmex: Sir Hillary

What's this crap?

What the hell was that deletion about, exactly?

Some people just don't know how to play nice and debate the issues. I mean, really!

What else you got, MarkH? What else do you have to say? I think you meant to be relevant and engaged. Too bad you ended up on the business end of a moderator-supplied shotgun blast.

Pale Rider,

Excuse me, but I am not MarkH.

I'm just noting my own