Obama, Clinton Debate Each Other »
Posted By not2needy 1 year, 9 months ago in NewsLOS ANGELES - Democrats Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton kicked off their final debate before Super Tuesday contests on a cordial note, and reached out to backers of former rival John Edwards in their scrappy chase for delegates.
Read Full Story at news.yahoo.com »
384 Views Share Story 59 Comments Report
Submitted By:
not2needy
Hi And Welcome
I am a Christian, Wife, Mother of one son, Liberal, and retired social worker. I enjoy my computer, gardening, reading, cooking and ...
Other Related Articles:
Why not submit a story?
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentShowing 150 of 193 Comments (view all)
-
Neutral
not2needy1 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA:
Obama called Edwards "a voice for this party and this country for many years to come." Clinton saluted both Edwards and his wife, Elizabeth, as setting "their personal example of courage and leadership" in their advocacy for the poor.
I hope it's kept civil!
Reply-
Neutral
ecotourusa1 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
sniffle...
:(
this bleeding heart stuff is starting to get to me.
it's the root of our demise. (I used to be democrat all my life, and I jumped ship to vote for Ron Paul in the primaries)
I'm disgusted the herd is heralding clinton, obama and mccain...just what the media wanted from us.
please wake up AMERICA!!! DON'T YOU SEE WHAT WE ARE DOING?
Reply
-
-
Neutral
greenmac1 year, 9 months ago
-
Neutral
not2needy1 year, 9 months ago
-
Neutral
Blackacereturn1 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
second - Seems to me like you should have ask that question of bush. lOOK AT THE MESS HE HAS MADE, AT LEASE WITH HIL THERE IS A TRACK RECORD OF A GOVERNMENT THAT WORKED NOT ONE THAT INCREASE THE DEBT BY 3 TRILLION IN LESS THAN 8 YEARD. uNDER HER HUSBAND WE HAD ONE OT THE BEST ECONOMIC PERIOD IN THE HISTORY OF OUR NATION. lET'S SEE WHAT BUSH DID....UMMM NEVERMIND THIS IS TOO EASY. lOOK IF YOU HAD ANY BRAINS YOU WOULD SHUT DA HELL UP, IF I VOTED FOR BUSH I WOULD!
Reply -
Neutral
Blackacereturn1 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
War on Terror, there is a war on terror being waged by whom not bush? The war in Iraq serves for one good, all the terrorist went there, less planning, The Americans were right there in the open to pick them off like flies. And I am sure Hill will do whatever it takes to stop terror if she won!
The stupidity in that question is this...you on the right act as if the terrorist are only after you and yours. They don't care if you are Repug or DEM they don't care about your race color or creed the only thing they care about is that you are an American so i cant see how it's more important to the GOP and less important to the DEMS.
It's a Dumb question!
Reply
-
-
Neutral
not2needy1 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Also FTA:
"I want to acknowledge a candidate who left the race this week who did such an outstanding job ... elevating the issues of poverty and the plight of working families all across the country. And we wish him and Elizabeth well," Obama said.
Clinton said the Republicans are "more of the same" and, gesturing toward Obama, she said, "We will change our country.")
Could that mean that which ever one is nominated, would chose the other as their VP!?
Reply-
-
Neutral
Beau78901 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Somehow I doubt that either would choose the other as his or her VP, n2n. VPs ar often chosen to broaden a candidate's demographic. I wouldn't be surprised to see one of them choose Bill Richardson, though, unless they were saving him for Secretary of State, which will be a really big job in the next adminstration.
Reply -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
AlphaGnosisComment removed: Hard Banned9 Replies
-
Neutral
jordan111 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well, it's over. And I enjoyed watching two grown up's after all these years of childish nonsense. I was also in awe of this debate. A black man and a woman, debating for the nomination of their party for the Presidency of the United States. It's gratifying to have lived through the times I've seen, & live to see such change. Wow.
Reply -
-
Neutral
TimALoftis1 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
good debate on the issues. Also a historic event. I had a lump in my throat at the onset... seeing a female and a African American sharing the stage knowing that one would be nominated by the Democratic Party for President of the United States.
As to the winner...overall probably a draw. Both candidates made their points quite well.
seeing the two there made me think ahead to as what Wolf Blitzer eluded to as the 'Dream Team'. My guess is that if senator Clinton wins the nomination she might very well ask Obama to join her. As for Obama asking her? I am not so sure...he may choose Richardson instead.
Reply-
-
Neutral
ETproductions1 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I suspect that Obama would turn to Clinton first, and only consider others if she is not willing to be #2 on the ticket, or if it's a near ties and Edwards ends up being able to broker the convention with his delegates, and he wants to be the VP. Candidates always choose the running mate that is most able to help them win in the general election.
I doubt it will be a brokered convention. I further doubt Edwards wants another turn at running for VP. If anything, I'd guess he'd like to be the Attorney General. And I think he would be light-years better than Gonzales or I-can't-say Mukasey in that slot.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
ETproductions1 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Clinton clearly has more experience than Obama. She's older. But if that's the single best argument she has for the Presidency, she looses to McCain.
Looking back over history, who were our great presidents? George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, FDR.
George Washington had no experience in Government. Before his term, there was no government to have experience in. He was clearly a gifted leader. His ability to write and to speak helped him take a rag-tag group of rebels and rally them to defeat the most powerful army on earth at his time.
Thomas Jefferson had some experience in state government and as an Ambassador and VP, but he was mostly a farmer.
Lincoln's claim to governmental fame was a failed bid to win a seat in his state's legislature and a rather disastrous single term in the US House of Representatives.
FDR's experience was limited to a stint as a state legislator and being the assistant Secretary of the Navy.
Reply-
Neutral
ETproductions1 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Now, what characteristics did all these leaders possess that pushed them head and shoulders above the rest? They were uniquely gifted at writing and speaking. They could rally support to a cause. They faced extraordinary challenges, and managed to rally the American people to surmount those challenges.
With all the bewildering problems facing America today, things that have grown worse under both party's management, we desperately need a leader who can think independently and who can speak and write. The LAST thing we need is another politician who puts a finger into the wind and shifts positions according to each new poll.
Reply -
Neutral
1-2-Oscar1 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You forgot FDR's four years as governor of the nation's largest state. Several of the programs he made successful on a national level, such as the CCC, were expansions of things he had done as governor of New York.
Washington, as head of the Continental army, had more executive experience than anyone else in the new nation in 1789. As commander he had to deal with the political realities, too, in seeking support and appropriations from the Continental Congress. He had also served in Virginia's House of Burgesses. Jefferson had been a strong and innovative governor of Virginia. By the standards of their day they were both among the MOST experienced men available.
Reply -
Neutral
Mdiar1 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You could have mentioned the youngest President in US history, Theodore Roosevelt! Bull Moose '08! He also had very little experience, serving as a Governor and a Representative for a bit, and then VP for a few months. Theodore Roosevelt is consistently ranked among the top President's. Oh, like the other Roosevelt, TR was also Assistant Secretary of the Navy. Figured I'd give you another example and another Roosevelt!
Reply
-
-
Neutral
pcknowledge1 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This was an excellent debate. They both made an effort to bury the hatchet & present a united Democratic party, especially by saying positive things about Edwards as well. Still managed to point out their individual differences on policies in a cordial manner.
I do think they would get many more votes & most likey win the election for the Democratic party if they ran together. As President & Vice President.
Reply -
-
Neutral
Justice4All1 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The key issue for me is who voted to give Bush authority to go to war. Obama is the only one who voted against it and he did so at a time when it was politically unpopular. Clinton took the easy way out.
I would like a president who makes tough decisions and does not follow special interests. Obama is the only one that fits that description.
Let's don't forget that Hillary stood by Bush on his war until it became politically unpopular.
Reply -
-
-
-
Neutral
slate1 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yeah it was historical in many ways. But it's a long way to November; don't count on you winning as a done deal, though it looks likely. Ten months is a very long time in politics.
Good luck, to those still in the race, which happen to be six people the last I looked.
If we do have a historical president next year, may it be the first black president. Which to me isn't as important than having someone that's not just part of the 'old' guard more so than the color of his skin.
I didn't see the debate, and what I've seen in this thread was that it was a semi-love fest, but what did they say? What ideas did they have, and how did they say they would put them into action? Was it a discussion about the future or was it yet again another 2 hours of saying that Bush is bad? Can someone talk about those issues a bit?
Reply-
Neutral
Mdiar1 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The "Bush is bad" comments got the most applause, particularly a comment of Clinton's. Still they did a very good job and kept it very cordial, they outlined there differences and I'm starting to reconsider Obama as a better orator then Clinton. Obama doesn't seem to have the level of technical skill in speaking that Clinton does though I think Obama is still superior in the overall department, he is able to invoke more emotions and make you believe him far better then Clinton still. I just noticed he used a few fillers and Clinton didn't seem to.
Reply -
Neutral
MajJohn1 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You're absolutely correct, nothing much was said, it was a love feast full of how they disagreed with the current administration and more importantly which one disagreed more. We didn't learn much. This should be expected at this point. They aren't really running against each other any more. They know that one of them will lead the party in the fall and it's important to begin the attack on the other party and not each other. Desperation may set in after super Tuesday but for now all is lovey dovey. Someone will slip up in the weeks to come and then watch out.
Reply
-
-
anioklyComment removed: Spammer25 Replies
-
-
-
-
Neutral
Underparr1 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If you are really for the poor and working people you will vote for Sen Clinton. Maybe she will allow Obama to run as her VP. That would give him a chance to learn, get some seasoning and prove himself. As it is right now, wrong or right between his lack of experience, his race and his name(Muslim upbringing) he is what the GOP is dreaming of. I know to many people, who for one of those three reasons will not possibly vote for him. If he could spend 4 or 8 years as VP he would learn and prove himself one way or another. If he wins the primary this time the Democrats are toast.
Reply -
-
Neutral
NelsonR1 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There will be a Democrat in the Presidential office and further most Republican incumbents should be sending out job resumes.
Uncomfortable with Obama's and Hillary's stance on immigration so the populous must make them see light with Amnesty accomplishing a strain on the medical, social security and all the other social programs out there. We cannot afford 12 to 13 million illegals becoming Americans all at once. By the way Barack was wrong on this issue, African Americans have been hurt by illegals and he needs to go out into the real world while Hillary did vote for the war.
Either one, anything but another Republican and Bush may he go to the hell that spawned him.
Reply -
-
Neutral
endtyranny1 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It was a great debate. Obama showed that he's got the substance it takes to win and even though I'm no fan of Clinton, I'm really starting to warm up to her. The only losers were the moderators/sponsors. After the first half I thought it was going to be a debate on the issues, but then they spent the rest of it trying to bait them into attacking each other. They both looked so presidential and showed that all this "animosity" is all media hype.
Reply -
Neutral
jovial1 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I'm in a win-win situation. No matter what candidate the Republicans try to put out there,(unless they put Ron Paul) they're going to get spanked. What's refreshing is to here that some Republicans would go as far as to cross party lines and vote for Obama. I like Obama, but I'll take Hillary if she wins the Democrat party. Anything is better than the same old drumbeat of "cut my taxes", "breadcrumbs for the poor", "surge the troops", "attack Iran" , "go shopping", "stack the court with evangelical judges", "no government healthcare for the needy". So needless to say, I feel my efforts haven't been wasted here on Netscape/Propeller. People are finally starting to listen. God Bless America.
Reply -
ML2007Comment removed: Retracted by user
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.