What are Democrats to make of the possibility that John Edwards might be their only candidate who beats the entire Republican field? And it’s not just that a new poll clearly makes that case.
Edwards is the only white male in the top tier. Democrats face a difficult question: Is America ready for a woman president or a black president? If not in both cases, then Edwards is their only viable alternative.
Democrats must decide whether to gamble on making history. And Edwards is at the ready in case they decide to play it safe.

Comments
Farrrrrrrrst.
Nice mural in Alberta, Canada.....click on each one foot square to see blow-up
Posted by: sturgeone | December 12, 2007 6:11 AM
oops......link:
http://www.muralmosaic.com/Cochrane.html
Posted by: sturgeone | December 12, 2007 6:15 AM
Not sure it's fair to say that Edwards as nominee would be playing it safe. As far as making history, perhaps nominating a woman or another minority would be just making a point rather than making history. Are we ready for a woman or black president? Sure, I think we have been, maybe just not the ones we're offered as choices.
Posted by: colleen | December 12, 2007 6:20 AM
white men...they've done such a good job.
this morning on the christian broadcasting network two of the creepiest white men Dick Morris and Pat Robertson had a little tea party
that sight especially Morris talking about how god had changed his life...is enough to make one never vote for another white man
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 12, 2007 6:28 AM
speaking of stoopid white men
Shuster has to get over his mancrush on Hucksterbee
...and stop defending him. It sucks and not good reporting
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 12, 2007 6:59 AM
white guy from jibjab
http://www.jibjab.com/view/216898
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 12, 2007 7:10 AM
KGC....
ROTFLMAO!!!
Hey..... sofa-ist..... glad you're sticking around.....
with that comment about what Tweety wanted to do to Frank Rich..... I hereby dub you an official member of CList......
Craig..... what everyone else says...... go see a doctor and get some X-rays....
and then stay the hell off that foot......
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | December 12, 2007 7:18 AM
B'rye in NYC - Have you thanked Craig for today's T'Mix on your boy Edwards yet? Merry Hanakwanzaa. I thought he should've been the nom last time, not Kerry. Now, I'm over him and Hil'ry is definitely my choice. Vilsack as VP?
Craig - After all this time, maybe OTC peas aren't doing the trick & it's time to get the Dr. to RX you some peas.
zoey - If you're reading this, I guess you still have power. I got out of there just in time. Take care.
Posted by: blueINdallas | December 12, 2007 7:33 AM
Oh, yeah. Somebody told me that Biden moved his entire family to Iowa (temporarily) at least a month ago. Now that's dedication. So, Vilsack for VP or Biden?
Posted by: blueINdallas | December 12, 2007 7:35 AM
Well, I can't wait for more people to post so even though this is only 10, I'm gonna say it...
Thaaaarrrteeen!
Posted by: blueINdallas | December 12, 2007 7:36 AM
You know how goopers like to give everything a nickname -- like Mission Accomplished and Operation Mulligan.
Their 2008 campaign effort Coordinate the Hate
http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2007/dec/10/gop_announces_plan_to_coordinate_the_hate
and all this focus on immigration -- an issue but not the priority for 90% of the voters.
and yesterday the maroon Bobo Brooks said we are now in the peace time phase in eyerack and no one cares anymore.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 12, 2007 7:38 AM
So...it's not good to be a white guy today???
Posted by: Corey
| December 12, 2007 7:41 AM
rich white guy is probably ok......poor white guy, not so much......
Posted by: sturgeone | December 12, 2007 7:44 AM
Really? Damn.
Posted by: Corey
| December 12, 2007 7:44 AM
corey - If you're a Republican, it's the very best thing to be. That big tent of theirs is really all that big.
Posted by: blueINdallas | December 12, 2007 7:44 AM
But , I'm not Republican. I guess I'll have to go somewhere else and pitch my own tent. Wait a minute...nevermind.
Posted by: Corey
| December 12, 2007 7:48 AM
Even rich white guys Rudee and Mitt aren't having such a good time
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 12, 2007 7:53 AM
LOL....Imus and McCord are discussing "one more cow".......
the "one more cow", by the way, was excellent........
Posted by: sturgeone | December 12, 2007 7:57 AM
KGC - Loved the video ... Hey kids, gramma and grampa were really hip! Here we'll prove it ... lol
Posted by: Jamie | December 12, 2007 7:58 AM
MoJoe just hit on Matthews problem, "He devours books". He should try reading them instead.
Posted by: Jamie | December 12, 2007 8:05 AM
I was watching Mike & Mike on ESPN2 and Mike Greenberg was discussing his "white guy" taste in music versus his guest co-host Marcell Wiley. Wiley's music was by rappers Jay-Z and Snoop Dogg. Greenberg played Barry Manilow and ABBA. Too funny!
Posted by: Corey
| December 12, 2007 8:06 AM
mornin' all.
colleen, good to see you this mornin'. How's tricks in PA? Wet yet?
Edwards is an interesting candidate - Youthful liberal southern white male. No one like that could ever become president, well, OK, no REPUBLICAN like that could ever become president. Of course, take the liberal descriptor out and you have the description of 3 of the last 5 presidents. Over the 46 years,the qualities Edwards has have been a pretty good bet, so yes, it's pretty easy to see why Craig might call him the white male alternative if the voters decide to play it safe. IMHO, though, in the words of Dylan, The TimesThey Are a' Changin'.
It's OK Corey - good looking poor white guys seem to dook if they can snag the right woman - and since looks are in the eye of the beholder, you may have a chance yet (although history doesn't seem to be on your side). I'd go cougar hunting if I were you, although I'm not sure where they prowl.
OK, gotta go catch up on last night's posts-I think I'll have something to say about the Tweety-Rich and Mojo-Schuster chats, but I need coffee first.
Posted by: pogo
| December 12, 2007 8:07 AM
Tweety and the Mayor of Looneyville refuse to accept that the Plunger isn't all he is cracked up to be.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 12, 2007 8:11 AM
friend of mine from Foat Wuth was fond of saying "Buy him books, and buy him books but all he does is eat the covers....."
Posted by: sturgeone | December 12, 2007 8:20 AM
Mika should point out to beady-eye and tweety that the main reason Giuliani's star had shone so bright on 9/11 was because presidential leadership was totally AWOL....awol something shrub has experience with
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 12, 2007 8:27 AM
KGC.....that's right......it went most of the day with NO response from the administration.....they ran for the hills just like they did from Viet nam......
Posted by: sturgeone | December 12, 2007 8:28 AM
Edwards is the progressive candidate. It seems to me that he's talking about changing the nation from an institutional perspective as opposed to simply changing its "image."
Posted by: Alex | December 12, 2007 8:36 AM
What Colleen said. And we're ready for the first Hispanic president. And we've got a great one running!
blue, I thought it was Dodd who moved his family to Iowa. Could be wrong.
Posted by: dnd | December 12, 2007 8:38 AM
What?! I'm supposed to be p.c. and vote for a black or a woman just
because they're black or a woman??? Get a grip! Edwards is the best
candidate, NOT because he's white and male, but because he's doing
the best on the issues. Your Mix today is disgusting.
Posted by: varney | December 12, 2007 8:40 AM
Craig, I wondered why your face wasn't gracing the last 5 minutes of Keith - had to switch over and watch national treasure - not a bad movie. Craig, like I said yesterday - RICE.
Dex, if Romney gets the nod from the Repugs, I'll be willing to criticize both his war stance and his flip-flops (and his changing positions, too :-),) Anything that might change a vote f rom him to the dem, whoever it is, is fair game.
Patsi, great line lasst night about guys who lust after Hummers having little dicks, Little P does, and does, but then again, he's a little guy, and if his dick ever catches up to his feet...
Sturg, those murals are incredible.
Dex, cute little car-what the hell is it, and can you even get a size 22 foot in it?
MoJo gets more and more delusional as he practices for his show on Fox. Whether waterboarding is torture isn't an open question but whether it is effective is settled? Joe should just shut up - MIka and Schuster make him (well, help him) look like the right wing tool he is. Bear in mind, none of the doomsday terrorist scenarios he suggests have been prevented by info gotten through waterboarding have ever been shown to have been anything more than items on terr'ist christmas lists (or whatever gift lists Muslims have).
I see a new national poll came out puttingHhillary 30 points ahead of Obama, and again theonly candidate with over 50% or her patry's support. Chuck Todd was doing his level best not to have a stroke while trying to fit it into his HIllary is dead woman walking schtick.
Well, interested in your take on the budget kerfuffle in Congress. The WH has coopted McConnell and he's leading vetoes on anythingthat isn't theWH bill. I say shut the government down with a filibustered bill that removes earmarks and funds the war with a withdrawal timetable pending, and send Teddy out to explainit to the press.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/12/washington/12cong.html?hp
Posted by: pogo
| December 12, 2007 9:02 AM
I love this shit - the top 2 (well,two of the top 3) repugs duking it out over religious doctrine. LOLOLOLOL That's the dialog the Repugs offer in this election cycle? Let's see the platform is1>Kickout th ebrown peple and 2. Keep fighting forever in Iraqand 3. What does a true christian have to believe?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20071211/huckabee-mormons/
sturg & KC, it's hard to come out strongly in response to a big event if you're cowering in the corner at 30,000 feet all day.
varney, lemmee 'splain something to you- Craig is a pundit. He poses questions based on his view of what's happening or could happen in the political sphere. He isn't telling anyone what they should do. His first paragraph reflects the Ipsos/CBS poll that came out Monday, and his second paragraph is nothing but factual. After 230 years of nothing but white males as president, how is Edwards not the safe alternative for the Dems if they sense that 51% of the country isn't going to voteagainst a white male? Happily, if that happens, Edwards happens to have good positions on the issues from my perspective.
Posted by: pogo
| December 12, 2007 9:20 AM
Some of you have read comments about my right-wing boss, who really overdoses on Republican Kool-Aid. I didn't mention his recent health problems here because I didn't feel it was appropriate.
This link is to an article about him in the Albany Times-Union and is part of a series meant to educate young and old on treating strokes and other health issues.
http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=645891
I'm happy to report that Chris is back to work and doing well. We're hoping the doctors will eventually convince him that Kool-Aid is bad for him.
Posted by: EdVB
| December 12, 2007 9:29 AM
re: Should Dems pick Edwards because polls suggest he beats all the Republicans?
In 2004 the Repubs beat him up, stole his lunch money, and he ran home crying.
Edwards had another shot this time around to be the "un-Hillary" but he hopped in bed with her and supported Bush's evil Iraq War. AND he has not called for national health insurance, or any other dramatic "New Deal" policy initiative.
No guts, no glory.
And why should primary voters, who tend to be more opinionated, pick a candidate just because a few suspect MSM "polls" have him beating the Repubs? Poll results change all the time.
Pundits watch the polls, voters do not.
Posted by: nash
| December 12, 2007 9:35 AM
Craig,
You're saying out loud, what many of us have said privately. Others commenting this morning have correctly noted that they're choosing candidates based on issues in which the candidate agrees with their own thinking. That's a good first step, but if I was in a smoke filled room at my party's convention, I'd be working to support whoever gives my party the best chance to win.
I've been pushing Joe Biden here because I think he'd make the best President. He can't raise enough money to campaign against the top tier candidates, and money, or rather the lack of it, is the only reason he or anyone else is considered in the second tier.
Posted by: EdVB
| December 12, 2007 9:46 AM
blue,
You were partially correct - Biden's sister has lived in Iowa for several months and his kids are often here to stay with her and campaign.
Dodd moved his family here a couple of months ago so it would be less stressful for the children and his wife. She is a treasure and related how everytime the youngest child would be on an airplane that landed, she would ask if this was Iowa. One time, she asked that really LOUD and even the pilot heard her...he said it made his day.
And of course we have decided to collect state income tax from John Edwards because he never left after the last presidential election cycle. I figure he owes at least 4 years in back taxes :)
Posted by: zoey
| December 12, 2007 9:47 AM
Craig is on to something that I have felt all along. The only chance the publicans have is for the Dems to try something that has never been done before. We need a minority vp first, then go for the big gig.
I think the reason that many blacks don't support Obama is because they know first hand that racism is not yet dead in this country. It will take a couple more generations to finally do away with racism.
Mrs. Clinton will energize the publicans to vote like no publican candidate can.
This election is way too important to take a chance. Edwards Obama is the path to victory.
Posted by: iowarick | December 12, 2007 9:51 AM
pogo: Repubs don't really care whether torture is an effective source of intelligence. They just LIKE to do it. (Or just THINK about doing it.)
Torture appeals to their sadistic impulses which we can see in their support for...
-long prison sentences for drug possession
-wars of imperial conquest
-spanking
Republicans have fantasies about invading foreign countries, locking up the locals for drug possession, and spanking them.
But then, who hasn't?
Posted by: nash
| December 12, 2007 9:51 AM
Chris Dodd and Joe Biden have new ads out and they are very similar. Both ads are head shots of the men explaining directly to the voters why they should be president. I like Biden's ad since this is the first time I have seen him not being the grim reaper. He has softened his tone and uses plain speech to lay out his credentials. The Dodd ad does basically the same thing and captures the one-on-one feel of him speaking directly to the voters.
The John Edwards ad is similar to these two, as well as the Clark for Hillary ad. For the Democrats, Obama has the only ad out right now that is him speaking to a crowd. It makes his ads stand out but I am not sure if that is necessarily a good thing.
I have been watching the news last night and this morning and I have yet to watch Mitt's attack ad. It must not have been a heavy initial buy.
Posted by: zoey
| December 12, 2007 9:59 AM
EdVB: No one had a more important role in placing Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court than Biden. When he was Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee he sat back and gave the Republicans a free hand to savage Anita Hill. The was one of the most despicable abdications of responsibility I have ever witnessed and the outcome was the confirmation of Thomas, one of the stupidest and most virulently right-wing people ever to serve on the court.
Posted by: nash
| December 12, 2007 10:00 AM
Meanwhile, as governor, Huckabee took HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of dollars worth of "gifts" from lobbyists. He & his wfie even set up a "gift registry" for bribes. (I think I'll get him the gravy boat.)
Corruption is a little more blatant in Arkansas.
Is it just me, or does anyone else think that Republican party is SCRAPING THE BOTTOM OF THE BARRELL trying to find a candidate?
Trent Lott, I hear destiny calling you.
Posted by: nash
| December 12, 2007 10:08 AM
"Geez, We can't hate blacks any more, or Jews, gays, or even Mormons. Who CAN we demonize to stir up the rabble in our base? I know...illegal Immigrants!"
-Karl Rove
(I'm not dead. I'm just in my larval stage.)
Posted by: nash
| December 12, 2007 10:14 AM
Nash
One of the Cafferty File questions yesterday was why the Republican candidates were doing so poorly when compared to the Democrats. My answer didn't get read this time, but it was almost identical to one that did.
Bush has destroyed the image of the Republican Party. The national leaders know they are not going to win the White House so they are running candidates that can be wasted with no harm while trying to rebuild for 2012 and 2016.
Posted by: Jamie | December 12, 2007 10:21 AM
Has the USA remained so conservative that the possibility of Obama winning is not likely because of his black heritage? Has the USA remained so conservative that the possibility of a woman winning is not possible because of her gender?
I admire Hillary and I admire Barak. The rest of the world seems to have had no problems with women leaders... remember Maggie Thatcher? There are many other examples. Why would one of the world's largest democracies oppose THAT? This right-wing loony tunes fundamentalist ideology that hampers much in the USA needs to STOP.
Posted by: Thomas Freeman
| December 12, 2007 10:26 AM
"Obama has the only ad out right now that is him speaking to a crowd."
Obama doesn't do well when just talking or answering questions. Making speeches presents him at his best, but they tend to be a lot of noble generalities and short on specifics.
Blacks may be somewhat cool about him since his background has little commonality with their experience. That was the source of the early "Is He Black Enough?" commentary and while Oprah has deeper experience in the community, her current incarnation of wealthy mogul star supporter of African school may still be pushing some of those buttons.
Posted by: Jamie | December 12, 2007 10:27 AM
good point nash. Sometimes I lose my mind and think Repugs are thinking rationally.
iowarick - I think you are exactly right - that Hillary will bring repugs to the polls, and you are exactly wrong, that Edwards-Obama is the only viable alternative. Since John is as white as you get, he won't be causing whitebread repugs to turn out in huge numbers, but you don't think Obama will drive repugs to the polls - to make sure one of "them" doesn't get elected?
Posted by: pogo
| December 12, 2007 10:27 AM
I received an email from one of my friends in another part of the state who is a (white) Obama supporter. She asked, "When people go to their caucuses, who wants to be the person who immediately heads to the 'white' corner?" This is something that never crossed my mind and certainly won't influence who I eventually support but I suppose there could be others guilted into supporting Obama. I hope we nominate the best person but stranger things have happened.
Posted by: zoey
| December 12, 2007 10:33 AM
This is the reason behind the scene Republicans are pushing Obama,They all know this is their only chance to win the presidency!And yes the red necks in America will not vote for a black man .Sad but true.
Posted by: bob | December 12, 2007 10:33 AM
TF, your point is well taken - the answer - let's see what the election reveals about how conservative the US is now.
My earlier prediction that Hillary will win the Dem nomination stands, so your scenario about women as CEO may be tested. Problem is, all it will tell us is whether enough dems support her enough to go to the polls in larger numbers than the repugs who oppose her. In the end, the race will tell us more about what the moderates in the middle are thinking, and whether they are ready for this woman as pres. I think Obama will be sitting at home in November wondering whether he can mount another run at the WH in 2016.
Posted by: pogo
| December 12, 2007 10:36 AM
On a lighter note: Wonder how contentious the Republican debate will be this afternoon? I am kind of looking forward to it. Could this be the return of Alan Keyes? Could he be the one to save the party? Nah...don't think so but the deabate could turn out to be very entertaining.
Posted by: zoey
| December 12, 2007 10:40 AM
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/060890.php
very clever
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 12, 2007 10:45 AM
Zoey- are you supporting anyone?
Posted by: Kathy | December 12, 2007 10:46 AM
Zoey,
thanks for reminding us about the R debate this afternoon. Alan Keyes hum, the R's are really not gonna vote for him.
WRT your trip to Frankfurt Germany in '68. I was working in the Frankfurt airport and I bet I saw you come in and walk thru the terminal.
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: horsedooty | December 12, 2007 10:46 AM
In case anyone wants to don black tomorrow, it is the anniversary of the Gore concession in 2000
Posted by: Jamie | December 12, 2007 10:47 AM
"Alan Keyes hum, the R's are really not gonna vote for him."
The "Ambassador" has dumped too many unpaid bills on Conservative groups in the form of hotel room charges for himself and aides that weren't supposed to be part of the speaking deal.
This tends to make groups grouchy when they consider rebooking much less voting.
Posted by: Jamie | December 12, 2007 10:54 AM
Kathy,
I am undecided at the moment but mostly looking at Hillary, Biden, Richardson, and possibly Dodd because I am interested in candidates with foreign policy experience. My second criteria is a nominee with the overall background, experience, and advisors to hit the ground running on the first day. I forget, did you say you were supporting anyone?
Posted by: zoey
| December 12, 2007 10:55 AM
Hi Zoey-
I am a town chair and have resisted come out for anyone. That said, no one has moved me to want to endorse. I have been mostly for Edwards, Obama's people have contacted me the most and I have interest in him- RIchardson is a distant third. I have a friend in Iowa on the Dodd campaign who I know would love any support!
Posted by: Kathy | December 12, 2007 10:59 AM
Dooty,
Unfortunately you will probably have to watch the R debate on MSNBC with Tweety unless C-Span carries it. Luckily I can watch it on the Public Television channel. I could have gone and watched it in person since the studio is only a couple of miles from my house and I have ways of getting into R events, but I am not venturing out today. The sidewalks are too treacherous for someone on crutches.
Isn't is funny how paths cross in our lifetimes (re: Germany)?
Posted by: zoey
| December 12, 2007 11:01 AM
Bushco still thinks it is the daddy in the international community. I expect a hale and hearty FY from our allies. Gates need to stop listening to Cheney at cabinet meetings - he can't really believe that just because we started these F'ing wars, we can dictate who will bail our asses out when we try to fight on the cheap and screw the pooch over there.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/11/AR2007121102428.html?hpid=topnews
Posted by: pogo
| December 12, 2007 11:03 AM
Nash,
I can't try to defend Joe on the Clarence Thomas hearings because I don't remember enough about the details, but I disagree with your premise. The one who had the most to do with placing Justice Thomas on the Supreme Court was President Bush, who put him forth as his nominee. Although he wasn't in the room, Robert Bork probably played as important a role as any of the senators who were there.
As chairman, Biden would have had control of the process, but I'd think his role would be more about preserving order and fairness for committee members from both sides to get their questions in. Maybe that's naive, but I see that as the important role of a chairman.
I thought Teddy Kennedy was part of that committee, and that he took the lead among Democrats on attacking Thomas's credentials.
I don't remember seeing any of Anita Hill's testimony and only recall news items about that. I thought the key players among the senators were Specter and Kennedy.
If you see that as Joe's biggest sin, I can only hope that he's learned from the experience. That also points out the problem with any senator, who runs for President. Everyone can remember something the guy did or said that they disagree with.
Posted by: EdVB
| December 12, 2007 11:06 AM
The debate scheduled shows it is on Fox followed by Cavuto and Stephanie is scheduled to appear there.
Since it isn't in a cable or network studio, there isn't a problem with crossing picket lines.
There is a replay on C-SPAN 2 following the Senate session and Tonight from Washington.
Posted by: Jamie | December 12, 2007 11:06 AM
Kathy,
For about a week every day when I came home there was an Obama flyer in my door. Somebody was really working it. I have met and talked one-on-one with all of the Democratic and a few of the Republic candidates...except for the fringe candidates. I talked to Kucinich a couple of times in 2003, he didn't impress me much. I don't think his batteries engage unless there is a tv camera around.
I will be running my caucus (ankle permitting) and represent my precinct on the County Central Committee so it is better if I wait until the last minute to decide who I will support.
Posted by: zoey
| December 12, 2007 11:10 AM
Thanks Craig for stating the obvious. I only wish the mainstream media would pick-up on the same idea.
Posted by: Jo Ann | December 12, 2007 11:12 AM
Quote of the Day...
"Peace is the skillful management of conflict."
-Kenneth Boulding
Posted by: Bear
| December 12, 2007 11:55 AM
"What has he done that's so terrible?"
It's not all that terrible ... Just a total lack of talent except for one that has made it possible to stay in bed while making millions.
Posted by: Jamie | December 12, 2007 12:01 PM
well..... IMO, I think this country is ready for a woman president.....
sadly..... I agree with those who think this country will not yet elect a black person for president.....
I'd consider voting for Edwards...... but voting for someone with foreign policy experience is the top qualification on my list....
oh.... and I know I've said this before..... but I can't help myself.....
I'm sick of the phone calls..... they are coming hot and heavy now and we are no longer bothering to answer the phone..... we're not getting up 4-5 times to look at the caller ID while trying to watch Countdown.....
our friends and relatives know to leave a message.... but a lot of them are doing the same thing.... my poor elderly mother is beside herself..... she answers the phone every time it rings like a lot of the elderly..... it might be one of her children.....
as if anyone ever made up their mind who to vote for based on a telephone call........ geeeeezzzzz.....
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | December 12, 2007 12:07 PM
Renee,
I think we're ready for a woman or minority, but I think the first successful one will be a moderate Republican. I'm not saying I think Republicans are misogynists or racists. I'm just sayin'... It's like the Nixon going to China thing...
A couple of years ago when Mark Udall was campaigning for his seat in the House, I got a couple of those robo-calls from him. I called his local headquarters and told them I was planning to vote for him (which I did), but If I got one more of those damn robo-calls, I would actively campaign against him. I didn't and I didn't.
Posted by: dnd | December 12, 2007 12:25 PM
RR,
The beauty of a satellite dish is on-screen caller ID in every room there is a tv. If I am in the kitchen but not watching tv I have it on and the sound muted just to use the caller ID feature. And call me crazy but I don't mind the phone calls, knocks on the door, snail mail, or email...it comes with the territory.
I haven't gotten any persuasive calls yet, though, they have all been invitations to events. Persuasive calls don't work with me but I could see someone like my next door neighbor giving consideration to a candidate based somewhat on a persuasive call.
Posted by: zoey
| December 12, 2007 12:27 PM
How much money have rudee supporters pumped into the Huckster's coffers?
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 12, 2007 12:36 PM
Where to watch/listen to the DSM Register Debates 1:00 p.m. CST today (Republics) and tomorrow (DEMS):
TELEVISION: Iowa Public Television, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News Channel, C-SPAN 3
WEB: DesMoinesRegister.com, IPTV.org
RADIO: XM Radio POTUS Channel 150, C-SPAN Radio, Fox News Radio
REBROADCASTS: The debates will be rebroadcast at 7 p.m. on Iowa Public Television. They also will be archived at DesMoinesRegister.com 1-3 hours after the debates end.
Posted by: zoey
| December 12, 2007 12:44 PM
Craig,
I am so sorry you missed this Hillary Event:
New York Farmers and Rural Development Advocates to Visit Dunlap Livestock Auction, Wednesday, December 12, 2007 at 4:30 PM - 5:30 PM
You could have wowed them with your auction experience and vast knowledge of RFD-TV.
Posted by: zoey
| December 12, 2007 12:49 PM
zoey - You are a wealth of info & funny, too. Glad you still have power today.
Posted by: blueINdallas | December 12, 2007 12:54 PM
Re: K-Fed
Bear's right it's jealousy. But I believe in equality, I'm no more jealous of K-Fed than any other lottery winner.
Posted by: EdVB
| December 12, 2007 1:01 PM
Important pre debate question...
Am I the only person here who is concerned that Pierce Brosnan and Meryl Streep are starring in the movie version of Mamma Mia?
I love that musical and I can't really see them in that movie...what do the rest of you think?
Posted by: Bear
| December 12, 2007 1:13 PM
dnd, Ihave to laugh at the robo call experience you had with Udall. I have gotten a series of non political robo calls related to an extended warranty for the vehicle I drive that is about to be out of the period to buy an extended warranty - since my car and truck are 10 and 13 years old, respectively, I can only imagine they relate to the motorcycle I got when my dad died - it's only 4 years old. Anyway, today, on about the 4th call this week, I actually listened until the end, and it gave me the option to press 9 to say I'd either purchased a warranty or wanted to be discontinued from the "service" of getting repeated calls to solicit me. We'll see. There should be one of those "press 9 to be removed..." options for any robocall.
Ed, chuckle - me, too.
Posted by: pogo
| December 12, 2007 1:15 PM
I would just like to point out that Democrats don't have to win ALL 50 states to be president. They just have to win enough electoral votes to win the presidency. For the 2008 general election Democrats need to win all of Kerry's states or Gore's states plus a western state to carry them over into victory. So the real question is are those states ready for a black or woman president?
Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2007 9:37 PM
Post A Comment