Having read through the comments it seem that CNN is just as bias as ever. Very few comments were printed that was favorable to the Republican party. I have come to the conclusion that anything or anyone that they favor or support would be a good reason to vote against. The silent majority of the American people who are patriotic, proud and believe in their country will make the ultimate decision as to whom will be our next president no matter what each of these liberal clowns think or say.

If Obama is elected, you can expect this nation to fall to the Muslims. Obama says he is a Christian, but if you investigate his background, you will find many interesting things. He was raised in terroist training camps and Muslims religion, and look out if Clinton gets in. If she is elected, Bill will be "appointed" to her Senate seat. That means he will get his presidental retirement and senate retirement and so will she and both will be entitled to Secret Service protection. They charge the government $10,000 a month to house Secret Service personnel now.

Come on Fred Thompson, get it in gear and let's show 'em how it's done!!

Ilived in Arkansas during Clinton's rule. I am surprised that he hasn't done away with obama by now, like many poor souls in Arkansas and others in Washington who were ex members of the rose law firm.

The clintons are through, peroid. Obama with his schooling in Indonesia will end his career also. The republicans are stupid also. One or two who try to look presidental and all lack a full set of brains.

I predict an independent will run and win.

I think this is dead on. Come on people listen to the canidates. They BOTH say the same thing! They are running on different tickets to try to split up the votes enough to keep the other guys from taking enough hoping they will drop out in defeat. In the end they will join forces with their voter base and BAAM instant win. They are just testing the waters right now to see who is going to be more popular. Who ever is the most popular will be president the runner up will be vice president. The democrats can NOT afford to loose this one.

GOD I HOPE SOME DAY THE PEOPLE / VOTER'S HERE IN AMERIKA FIGURE OUT THAT 25% OF THE POPULATION IS TELLING 75% WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO DO AND HOW THEY ARE GOING TO DO IT
WE FIGHT FOR THE RIGHT TO BE FREE AND SEE WHAT HAPPEN'S NO ONE GIVES A S- ITT

I am sick of both the Clinton's and the Bush's. This great country has suffered tremendously on every front at their hands. We have been ruled by two families for the last 20 years, it is time for a change.

i dont care who runs on the democrat side, im going with them,you rebublicans have had enough time to fix what you broke and have only broke more including most of the americans pocket books.

Schwarzenegger 2012 cannot happen because he was born outside of the USA and its territories. TOO bad!!!

Oh sure, Mr. NZ! You speak for all 5.7 billion people outside the United States, how could we silly Americans forget that?!

…Luckily it doesn't matter what foreigners think of our politics because they have no say when it comes to elections. Hillary is going to lose because she is a woman and people really, truly hate her (which cannot be said for other candidates on such a widespread scale). However, the Republican candidates are also looking pretty feeble so far. Obama is the obvious solution.

And Schwarzenegger 2012!

from an international point of view you guys need to choose Obama, the GOP's reputation, thanks to Bush, is shot, and i can tell you from a non-american that people around the world like how Obama thinks. Third and finally, Ron Paul has no chance, as much as we think hes great, the republicans dont. They will not support him over Romney or Guliani.

Ok, for the people that mention obama as hitler and the people that need to al gore to step in. they need to get a life. Al Gore wants attention with Global Warming, and he is very stupid. So far, Barack Obama is the closest thing to a president. but the republican side have no good selections, whatsoever.

Though I pretty well agree with Newt. This is the same guy who took his marbles and went home when the Republicans decided he was a liability as Speaker of the House.

He sees himself as much more credible that the country sees him.

It utterly amazes me that SO many Democrats have read and sent in DISPARAGING COMMENTS ABOUT NEWT.

Do they think that making nasty remarks about Newt will stop him from running?

THEY ARE SCARED TO DEATH THAT HE WILL!

God Help The US.and its Citizens..if anyone other than Ron Paul gets in.
4 more years of anyone who "doesn't get it"…will take our country RIGHT OVER THE TOP and destroy it Totally. Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate who can change it! Wake UP Americans…it is NOT about whether a Candidate is a Republican or a Democrat anymore..they have become one and the same….it is about their Platform. Everyone else has hidden agendas short of Ron Paul

Newt? Your party is over, baby. Who cares what you think?

I would vote for the only two I know are in touch with reality Gingrich/Giuliani 9-11-2001 was no myth and if these threats are not taken seriously and dealt with by countries that would liked to see us destroyed such as Iran then we the people of the United States will have signed a death warrent for countless Americans.

As an Iraqi War 2 Veterans (twice over 2003 and 2005), I feel that it was it was this WAR and my involvement that shaped my opinion Policy wise. It also helped ignite my Alignment with the Democratic Party, however with this slap-fest happening so early into the Race…I suppose my main concern are the people who Genuinely are positioned to run for President. Senator Clinton and Governor Richardson certainly seem to be the only people worthy for this Run and for me it’s a constant struggle between the two since both have Executive Experience.

"Obama the next Secretary of State? Thats an even more hare-brained notion that Obama as the next President. The man is all hot air and no substance. His claims that he has been against the war are easy to make as he was never in a position to vote one way or another. How do we know what he would have done had he been a sitting member of the legislature when it was time to make that vote had he then been a sitting Senator? Hindsight is always 20/20. Obama has made ONE exceptional speech and all of a sudden he is the second coming? He has yet to have an outstanding showing in a debate, or on the campaign trail. Come on folks, take off the rose colored glasses. He is a good man who, with some seasoning might be up to running for President one day. But today he is clearly not ready.
Posted By AJ; Montpelier, Vermont : July 30, 2007 8:20 am"

AJ, read either one of Obama's books, and tell me he's full of hot air. his writings, his speeches, his voting record, his actions, ooze compassion for what he believes in.

i personally feel obama/edwards or edwards/obama would be most likely. anyone who thinks obama doesn't have enough experience should go look at john f. kennedy's experience before becoming president, he didn't have much more than obama.

Forget about Hillary Clinton. America needs new leadership. Listen to Bill Maher: "An Edwards/Obama ticket is a sure winner"
- Bill Maher on The View (April 16, 2007).

Everyone keeps saying that Clinton and Obama lack foreign policy experience…its funny i can think of someone who got elcted with absolutely no clue when it came to foreign policy and his name was George W. Bush.

Unlikely prophesy. The vice presidency 'aint worth a warm bucket of spit' as 'Cactus' Jack Garner once said, i dont think Obama would be willing to subdue to the Clinton campaign. A better bet for him, if he isnt the Dem candidate would be to clock up some more Senate experience. If Hilary runs, its more likely to be Edwards beside her in my opinion.

Gingrich is a quitter. Has everyone forgotten that, when his colleagues failed to re-elect him Speaker of the House, he resigned from Congress completely? His babyish pout forced the people of his district to finance a special election. This narcissist should be ashamed to be seen in public at all, much less threatening to run for office.

Clinton/Obama is the way to go. If they can get it together, they can take the white house by storm.

Obama - Mark Warner, fmr Gov of Virginia as VP. Formidable

Look for a Clinton/Rendell ticket so Democrats can keep Pennsylvania. If Rudy wins the nomination, PA will likely go red otherwise.

I am presuming that Hillary will be the Democratic nominee, and if that turns out to be the case, there are many compelling reasons I think she will choose Bill Richardson as her VP candidate:

1) Foreign relations experience - In a wartime era (and eventually post wartime), foreign relations experience cannot be underestimated.

2) Executive experience - Although not at the national level, Richardson has a solid track record as Governor of New Mexico.

3) He appeals to the growing Hispanic population - Hillary will want to capitalize on this sizable voting block.

4) He hails from a Western state, which nicely balances out Hillary's east coast slant - Will also likely add a favorable block of voters who will appreciate the west coast representation.

For all these reasons, I predict he will be the VP choice.

I think that Hillary/Obama ticket is silly. Actually I almost could care less who gets the democratic nomination out of the two of them. There are some people they as their running mate and on their cabinets that will get them elected.

Mark Warner: The Former Govenor of Virginia has an 80% approval rating when he left office and he convinved a Republican legislature to raise taxes and correct a budget deficit a Republican Govenor left. I wish he was the nominee for President, he is very electable, and would actually do well. He would be an excellent VP, although he will probably just take John Warner's senate seat in Virginia or run for Govenor again, setting himself up to run for president again

Wes Clark: Brilliant Man (Rhode Scholar). He might have some foreign policy experience, just a guess. I mean being a 4 star general during the Bosnian conflict might do it for you. Great Secretary of State and potentially great VP if Mark declines the job.

Colin Powell: Although it is highly unlikely he will venture into the public realm, he was the only person in Bush's cabinet with an approval rating over 50% after his first term…and he LIED to the world. He would bring in all the moderates. He would make a good VP or Sec of State again. Its not likely he would accept either position. Although his sound bites about the war, and American foreign policy are great.

Basically Hillary or Obama, or even Edwards probably can not win without some serious help. The gentlemen above could get the votes the need.

I really do not see the Republican party as dead because of Bush and the administering of the war. They could do a great job. Ron Paul scares me to death, and if he were to have a social conservative on his Ticket who has some decent foreign policy experience, the Democrates could very well lose.

The Clintons should take the next bus to Arkansas.

it's interesting that so many postings here are criticizing Newt for having espoused his opinion on a Clinton/Obama ticket and say his observations are irrelevant which implies that the posters are somehow more accurate or meaningful in their observations.

Only about 2% of the opinions offered on these blogs can be taken seriously and have the chance to affect how someone else thinks. Don't take yourselves too seriously.

I would be pleased if any of the candidates introduced a real solution to poverty. According to the Borgen Project, the United States has allocated 522 billion dollars to military spending when it only takes 19 billion to end starvation worldwide. Our means to solve this gives us no excuse to ignore this any longer.

WHO IS Newt Gingrich? BETER QUESTION IS WHO THE HELL CARES?

Thank God!!! This is brilliant, I hope this does happen.

After reading what Gingrich is saying, it seems he really doesn't want the position of President of the United States of America. If I'm understanding his remarks correctly, he only wants to run if there's a "vacuum" or one of the other republican candidates doesn't look as if they can win or debate against Clinton. So, does Gingrich really want to be President of the United States Of America or just try to obtain the office because he doesn't want another political party to have the position. I would have to believe a person who actually wants a position of such importance would be going for the position post haste and not waiting to see if the other candidates have a chance or not. If Gingrich really thinks he could fare so much better than the rest of the field, why not go ahead and run, unless he really doesn't want the position but would take it if he feels forced. My thoughts now are this is not the best candidate to lead the nation. I believe it's okay to think out running for President of the United States, say to make sure you have a shot at the nomination of your party or your family will be behind you, with Gingrich, it sounds like he already believes he would win the nomination, but doesn't want it unless he feels the republican party can't beat the democratic party. I'm sure all the other candidates believe they can win also, but they are going for it with that belief. We as the people of the United States can only hope whoever gets the position will be in the race for the good of the people, not because they thought thier political party couldn't win or even worse, for the big personal gains.

who in the hell would want hillary clinton as our president. her strategy is no different from any neoconservative and she wants us to pay for education in OTHER COUNTRIES. how about taking care of our dumb schools here first?

Clinton-Obama or Obama-Clinton?!? At this point, I think that's a political odd-couple.

If a democrat is elected president, I wouldn't be surprised to find at least 4 of the current Democratic candidates in the administration. Similarly, calling on Al Gore to head up the EPA…

The best campaign slogan the republicans are hoping and wishing for 2008 is ' Hillary Clinton'. Even Rupert Murdoch held a fundraiser for her. Watch out dems, all this pro-hillary coverage in the press is a set up. Last election they convinced you that Kerry was electable, this year they are pushing for Hillary to get the nomination. They know who they want to face.

Clinton and Obama would be a formidable team — UNBEATABLE!

Don't go away mad, Newt. Just go away already.

The republicans would love nothing more than a Clinton/Obama ticket. The idea of an African American male and Caucasian female "shacked up" in the White House seems a bit taboo. As politically incorrect as that line of thinking is, it'a not far from the truth.

I have a bumper sticker on the back of my car that reads: Clinton/Obama 08, even though I know the likelihood of that is slim to none. It's representative of my disdain for the current political climate. It's my belief that both candidates represent change, although some believe Hillary to be business as usual.

Obama or Clinton would suffice. However, the candidate with the most electability is neither. John Edwards stands a far better chance in the general election, so of course Newt Gangrene "predicts" a Clinton/Obama ticket.

Interesting opinion but I think he's wrong. A Clinton-Edwards ticket is more likely.

I think Newt wants a Secretary Spot in the Clinton Administration come 2009!

How could Hillary be president? She would be too busy keeping her eye on Bill and the Interns.

Clinton/Obama would seal it!! I'm not sure if it will happen obviously, however, Republicans have NO shot at the white house this next term. Bush made sure of that. Get use to it people because Mrs. Clinton is going to be your next President of the U.S.

I do believe that Gingrich should run. His experience as speaker of the house is the kind of leadership that we need on the republican side. I really believe that the current field has no one that is going to beat the democrates in the 08 eleciton. The best winable ticket that i can think of is a Gingrich/Huckabee ticket.

Racism and sexism are still huge issues in America. As such part of me doubts whether the US is willing to have a female president and a black vice-president (or vice-versa). There are many who would love to see this and would welcome it, but will they have enough votes?

That said, there's no better time than now to try this experiment, since the Republicans are ripe to be kicked out, given Bush's unpopularity, the fact the US usually does swing to the left after spending time in the right for a couple of terms, and the fact the Reps have no real heir presumptive waiting to go. Giuliani is no longer as beloved as he was following 9/11, and while Thompson would be interesting to watch, I don't know if he has what it takes. Normally the governing party would be grooming the VP to make a run, but Cheney is in no shape to do that.

Clinton as president and Obama as vice makes sense, because the Dems would like to follow the Republican pattern of 1980-92 and get at least 3 successive terms. To do that, they need an experienced leader to take the first 2 terms (Clinton), while seasoning and grooming the VP Obama to take the back 4 (or 8, as the case may be). Previous experience has shown that VPs that fade into the background or come off as comic relief (such as Dan Quayle, Walter Mondale, and Al Gore back in the day) are usually unable to get the presidency. So they need someone who is high-profile and a true rival for the president. That also gives the people confidence that should the president need to step aside, the VP won't let things fall apart. Ego is a good thing.

The other Dem candidates simply don't have the impact or name value as these two (though I like that one guy's staring-into-the-camera campaign ad).

Well, duh! Newt is going out on quite the limb, eh?

What Newt is failing to mention is that none of the GOP candidates are exciting their base, and a stalemate before the convention is a possibility for the first time in 30+ years.

If anything, the Democratic ticket should be Obama/Clinton. Obama is a much better equipped contender, leader and any other comparison to Clinton.

While, I agree that Hillary and Obama both have huge egos. Hillary sees herself as the all-but-certain candidate for the democratic nomination. She will use Obama as a running mate to bring over swing voters from the Republican party who hate her. The Obama side of the ticket will have a "softening" effect to her candidacy. She sees Obama as a way to lock her in as the next President. Nothing else. Remember the harsh words between Kery and Edwards during the nomination? Amazingly, all was forgiven once Kerry was selected. We'll see the same thing here.

Hillary's experience is not overated. the last debate proved that Ms. Clinton has a wonderful command over the issues. Obama on the other hand looks green. I consider myself a left liberal and I am truly confused as to why so many people are bemused with Obama. What is his vision? What are his goals? He seems to evade questions of substance and rarely offers a plan that seems reasonable or sound. I'm also confused as to why people see him as a visionary. he has been labeled a "progressive" but his ideas are quite modrate.Look it up!! Hillary is more "progressive' than Obama when it comes to social issues . Voters often leave little time for research instead they respond to impulse. it scares me that Obama's 'youth" garners so much attention. He scares me because of his lack of inexperience and his intentions seem questionable. He is a former community organizer and a short term senator and now he's running for president? Seems strangely opportunistic, at least Hillary, Richardson and even Kucinich have earned thier place on the stage. Hillary do not go with Obama in "08.

I think it is great that Newt has predicted those two for the Democrats next year. They have a good chance of winning and let's face it if they do win, they can't do a worse job of messing things up than George W Bush.

"Gosh, Damien, in case you missed it, Hitler already IS in the White House, in fact there are a slew of them running around professing patriotism and practicing their own brand of politics “we know best and we are right, so shut up and TRUST US!” That’s working well, isn’t it? Don’t know about you, but I feel less safe than in 2001, my families’ finances are less secure, and in general, the US is going down the tubes. Plus the rest of the world has lost respect for us. I just want somebody who will restore America’s good name, get control of the budget (raise taxes on the wealthy) and get us out Iraq and not into Iran! I somehow don’t think that person will be a Republican."

Right, lets raise taxes, that will balance the budget in the short run sure, but that also encourages less people to pay by hiding their incomes. Also, that will invariably hurt the middle class. Remember the AMT (supposedly supposed to force the "rich" to pay), that is destroying middle class families?

How about this instead (I know this is radical), but how about the government stop spending so much god damn money? That would balance the budget and allow people to keep their money..

I think it is great that Newt predicts Hillary and Obama for the presidential running couple next year. What could be better - the first white woman to run and the first black vice president.

well, let's start with NEWT. I like hearing him speak on "history", the man knows his stuff, but he has no chance, I mean he has a "history" as well, lest we all forget, ahem. Ok, Clinton and Obama would be great, and winable, but I think it's more likely to be clinton/edwards…i despise trial lawyers, but Hillary and Edwards seem to get along much better than Obama. All hail the american queen, haha. Our country needs serious leadership, at a serious time, let's stop arming the world and feed it and love it instead!

I like the comments about Obama and Clinton and others not being qualified to be president. Like that's ever mattered… look at Bush. You can't tell me you honestly think he's worked his way up through government and had the experience coming in. Family name put him there and he's been flying by the seat of his pants. At least these candidates (on both sides) seem to have more experience from the start!

Putting CNN's and Hollywood's opinions aside for one moment, let’s get real people. There is absolutely NO WAY the majority of American Voters will EVER elect a woman OR a black man president. That's just the way it is. 24 can have 'em, but in reality it won't happen in our life time, it just won't. The Democratic Party is shooting itself in the foot, the leg the arm and eventually the head. Putting them both on one ticket is political suicide. Sorry.

I hope and pray that Newt Gingrich won't get into the race for President. We don't need someone that was kicked out of government. We need someone with integrity. When I see Newt Gingrichs name mentioned as a possible running mate or contender, I cringe. I vote either Republican or Democrate. I would never vote for Republican with Newt Gingrich included in any formate.

It is rather strange for a potential republican candidate to make publicly such a prediction about the OTHER party. My only explanation is that the republications fear the rising of Obama and they are trying to influence the public's mindset to nominate Hillary for the republicans to beat.

I am afraid that the former Speaker of the House is incorrect. If Clinton does win the nomination (the primaries haven't even started yet), she wouldn't pick Obama. Even if she won the nomination and offered the V.P. slot to him, I would suggest to Obama to reject it and stay in the Senate.

At this point, I wish there would be a greater review of the lesser known candidates such as Mike Gravel on the Democrats and Ron Paul on the Republicans. These two are more true to what the parties once stood for.

Even Barack Obama (as #2!!) could not rescue Hillary Clinton from defeat in November. If, instead, Obama decides to take along Clinton, that might still work. But why — unless the GOP nominates Giuliani or Bloomberg runs as a third party candidate.

[...] Newt says I am right. [...]

Don't fret about it all. I know the media is owned and only spit out what they are told to. The sad reality the news writers and anchors are mindless twits. They read screens of pre typed messages to fill our minds and alter our way of thinking.

I have a feeling all the candidates that are most covered all have ties into this system. So be happy the rich are giving you a choice this time! Whether you choose man, woman, white, black, mulatto, fat, short, you are being given a choice no matter how pre medidated it is.

In the end you will all be put into economic slavery and will love it because you choose to ignore the pulse of the country. You must all become less before becomming more.

Obama the next Secretary of State? Thats an even more hare-brained notion that Obama as the next President. The man is all hot air and no substance. His claims that he has been against the war are easy to make as he was never in a position to vote one way or another. How do we know what he would have done had he been a sitting member of the legislature when it was time to make that vote had he then been a sitting Senator? Hindsight is always 20/20. Obama has made ONE exceptional speech and all of a sudden he is the second coming? He has yet to have an outstanding showing in a debate, or on the campaign trail. Come on folks, take off the rose colored glasses. He is a good man who, with some seasoning might be up to running for President one day. But today he is clearly not ready.

I predicted Obama being Hill's VP 2 years ago — that combo will be unbeatable.

Everyone mentioned in that article belongs to the Council of Forgein Relations, they all are in it together, to take your freedoms away from you because they believe you so stupid you do not deserve them, this is true just research a bit.

Only outsider Dr. Ron Paul offers a path to liberty and freedom.

We'll find out who is going to be nominated soon enough. Why isn't there more discussion about who should be nominated. Why don't news organizations ever discuss candidates' plans for solving a specific problem? This is doing a real disservice to America. Horserace journalism is amateurish and pedestrian.

I've been predicting a Clinton/Obama ticket from the onset of Obama's stated intent to run. It's a no-brainer, but of course such must be considered exactly that since Newt has finally reasoned that much out.

Susie I love you right know

[...] Fox: Perhaps the title is a bit unfair but take a look at this. [...]

[...] >>Read More  Posted in Hillary Clinton, Obama, Elections | [...]

Newt's prediction is not a surprise, or news for that matter. But if we're playing this game, I'd go for the long shot: Biden / Obama. Age/wisdom plus freshness and the future. Both smart, one the most experienced of all twenty players, and the other the one you'd like the whole country to hang with.

First I must say that I am embarrassed to call Damien from Belpre a fellow Ohioan. You should be ashamed to compare Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama to Hitler and Osama Bin Laden. Have you no respect for the millions killed during the holocaust, and those who have died at the hands of the terrorists on 9/11.

Now on to my point. I think that this week showed that Hillary Clinton is increasingly becoming frustrated with Obama challenging her all but assumed front-runner status. I sense that Hillary cannot stand that Obama is so close in her rear-view mirror. I think that Gingrich would like to see a Clinton-Obama ticket, because he believes it will rally the Republican base against the ticket, in support of the Republican ticket.

I think that Clinton has a very long and tough road ahead. I think that while many of her positions are centrist, many independents and most if not all Republicans won’t vote for her under any circumstances and polls show that she has very high negative numbers.

Obama on the other hand has much lower negative numbers, and is probably better suited to win a general election victory by tapping into the independents. He, however, has a problem with experience, he has no executive experience, and while he has over a decade of legislative experience, even more than Hillary, he is perceived as too inexperienced.

This could all be a mute point if in fact Al Gore jumps into the race this fall. He could easily pull off a win in the Primary, he has executive experience, he was right on the war in Iraq from the beginning, right about global warming, and he is viewed as much more of a moderate than Hillary or Obama. Whether that is actually true or not isn’t as important as how he is actually perceived. A Gore-Obama ticket would be the best possible winning ticket in 2008 for many reasons. It would combine experience and centrist views with a sense of new hope and a new kind of politics.

EDWARDS/RICHARDSON 2008 is the best shot for the Dems to take back the White House and is one of the most attractive tickets we've had in decades. Edwards will emerge the frontrunner late this winter (just as Kerry did in 2004) after Clinton and Obama knock each other out and he wins the Iowa caucuses. He is also THE only Dem who has a shot at carrying some Southern states in the general.

Gingrich needs to get back on his meds!

It'll be the Obama/Clinton ticket that retakes the White House…

You can take that to the bank!!

The Clinton/Obama ticket is a definite lose. Mr Obama has star power,but he has a-lot to prove. I don't know if America is ready for him. It will be interesting to see how that pans out. The Clinton/Bush thing has got pretty played out. It's really time for a change. Gen W. Clark would definitely be a suitable VP no matter who wins the nomination. Thank God there's still a year before the GE,because the Dems look real doomed right now. But one thing we do not want to do is count Hillary out. I'm sure she has a-lot of Clinton-tricks under her sleeve.

Who cares what Gingrich thinks about the probable Democratic ticket? Why is this considered news-worthy?

Al Gore!?! Al GORE??? Give us a break…The man gets cause and effect backwards for his own charts in his own movie about his favorite subject…
…what morons!

Gingrich may be right. With both Obama as her Vice-presidential running mate, and hubby Bill to lean on, she'll probably be able to run for President. When the shouting is over, however, SHE is the one who could be President. God help us, and God help the United States of America.

Why does the American media still seek out this overrated, disgraced politician to solicit his expert opinions. Yeah, takes a real rocket scientist to predict a Clinton/Obama ticket. Next.

Clinton will be the democratic nominee. The Democrats at heart trust Bill. She will loose to the Republican candidate. It will be close, but it will be another scenario just like Bush won against Gore. The country is simply not ready to trust the non traditional to run serious issues on war and economics. If the Democrats really want to win, Edwards is the best choice.

RON PAUL? Anyone?

How can Newt mention John McCain without even referring to Ron Paul once? John McCain's campaign is about to fall apart while Dr. Paul's is on the upswing. And there's no need to mention Giuliani, Thompson, and Romney, they are blinded by special interests.

To Marsha from Portland: Obama's negative comments???? Excuse me? Miss Hillary started with the negative comments, not Obama. And no way will there be a Clinton/Obama ticket. We've HAD the Clintons in the White House….NOT AGAIN. And all polls show the only Democrat able to beat any and all potential Republican nominees is Barack Obama. He is the one person that can finally bring positive change to this country. I don't think Al Gore will enter this race…so an Obama/Edwards ticket sounds good to me. I will write that in before I'd ever vote for Hillary Clinton.

Calling the candidates name alreay, must me a republican. If you can not beat them make fun of them. Not gonna work.

If Clinton and Obama are on the same ticket..it will scare too many people. A woman and an African-American..I'm all for it and would definitely vote..but America is not ready..and that is sad.

what does gingrich know re who would be the running mate of Clinton? If anybody would be her running mate, she would ask and be very grateful to get Governor bill richardson from New Mexico.

None of the candidates will choose Edwards for VP ….Kerry made that mistake and look what happened.

I would never vote for Hillary even though I tend towards the left of center a bit. She is a war monger. Obama I would vote for as long as she was not on the ticket. Ron Paul is the only true Constitutionalist though, and will get my vote.

Bill Richardson will be the VP candidate on the ticket. His experience, his hispanic heritage, are very important qualifications. But whomever is elected President, they will serve only one term. The next president will be a "transitional" president, such as Jimmy Carter. America wanted a clean break with the vestiges of Vietnam, regardless of who was elected. America now wants a clean break from Iraq and will elect anyone willing to do that. Once that person is elected, America will realize its mistake; the pretenders to the throne will fade away, and a true leader will come forth, like Ronald Regan.

First, you can be sure that anyone running for President has more ego than your average bear, including Obama. That's fine- they will need it.
Second, don't take this 2008 election for granted for the Democrats- the past two elections should teach you that. Get out and work for the party of your choice and maybe the Supreme court will stay out of it this time.
Third, I personally favor Clinton, but ALL of the Democratic contenders are head and shoulders above the "formidable" Republicans. I like Obama
but the fact is, Obama, as sharp as he is, will spend the first 4 years learning what Clinton already knows. I'd like to see Richardson as VP or perhaps Sec of State. And enough about Al Gore already. He had his chance and
frankly did not do that well in an election where he was positioned, in my opinion, for a fairly easy win.
Finally, I would urge you to vote for the candidate with the voting track record and experience you most admire. As with horses, so with candidates. If you vote for a candidate for reasons of looks, or rumors about black boxes, or parking tickets not paid, or other
silly things where you try and divine their inner soul by silly extraneous things, particularly alot of rumormongering stuff, you are apt to bet on the wrong horse.
Oh- Newt - we would all have been better off if he had stuck to teaching history.

It will be Edwards/Obama.

More and more Democrats everyday are realizing that Hillary is not the one to defeat the repubs. She is NOT Bill Clinton, but rather a cheap knock-off.

Hillary may be considered a front-runner today, but just remember Dean, last time around. She will fade, long before the nomination convention.

It will be Edwards/Obama OR Obama/Edwards, unless the winner checks out Gov. Napolitano's record in Arizona. SHE would make a FINE VP.

Us Democrats might be abit slow, but we're not stupid. Hillary can't possibly make it.

Edwards will take the Iowa primary, and Obama will take SC. NH leans to Hillary now-a-days, but I think they will eventually wakeup and change their thinking.

Personally, I would like to see Edwards/Napolitano, but an Edwards/Obama ticket would defeat the grand O-L-D party, as well.

No! Hopefully Obama will use his good sense and not want to be VP to Hillary Clinton - he is much too good for her. We need Obama/Richardson! Down with Bush and Clintons!

This story is only indicative of the incompetence, laziness and general lack of real news reporting that goes on now days. Our country has gone so far down hill in 30 years that an administration that makes Nixons' gang look like pranksters is given a free pass to almost totally destroy our Constitution and rule of law because our 'left leaning media' is too busy writing pablum stories about celebrity and shallow nonsense.

Gingrich predicts Clinton-Obama ticket? My garbage man predicted that two months ago. What a genius!

Duh! Tens of thousands of political wonks have recognized the possibility of a Clinton-Obama ticket for months and months. Gee, you could have asked John Edwards or any of the other Democratic Party candidates. So, Gingrich deserves a headline from CNN for this prognostication? It must be a slow news day. Pitiful excuse for a report. Weak.

Clinton and Obama are mini-neocons disguised as neo-libs. Gingrich is a neocon stooge (He doesn't come from the same commie background, but he desperately wants to be one of them). The only way I would vote for either Clinton or Obama (or both) is if Gingrich runs.

Whoever wins the Dem nomination should consider Retired Gen Wesley Clark as running mate.He would be a SMART CHOICE for VP.If Al Gore is not willing to jump into the race thats fine with me.I get so frustrated,I mean what lengths do we need to go to BEG him to run ? One of the previous writers is right when they said the '08 Election is a "freebie" for the Dems. None of the candidates on the Republican side are really inspiring. Dems will only have themselves to blame if they lose in '08. I have issue with Sen Clinton .Has America not grown tired of the Bush-Clinton-Clinton-Bush Dynasty ? Four or Eight more years of Clinton ? Is this the best we(America ) have got ? IOWA,NEW HAMPSHIRE, NORTH CAROLINA, you are the torch bearers–SMART CHOICE ,NOT NAME-RECOGNITION THIS TIME..

Who is Ron Paul? Is he with the Green Party?

"Someone, anyone, please, please please, oh gawd please, at least pretend I am a little bit relevent!!!!! Just the littlest bit, please???????" — Newt Gingrich, 30 JUL 2007

I'm still deciding whether I would like a Clinton/Edwards or a Clinton/Biden ticket. Maybe she'll pull someone else amazing out of the woodworks. I hope it isn't Obama. Before, I would have been all for it, but his recent negative politics has left a bad taste in my mouth.

Couple month ago, journalist asked Obama about Clinton-Obama or Obama-Clinton ticket, Obama asked which order are you talking? Newt felt something about Democrats but Obama is not enough for VP yet, he needs to take a decade for practise, otherwise he will confuse all of politicians at Capital Hill. Republican has no chance to win the White House if Hillary get the ticket, that's why Republicans support Obama, it will be a piece of cake to beat Obama in General Election not with Hillary. My personal opinion, Obama is not qualified as VP or Secretary of States yet because there are bunch of smart, experienced and humble guys in this Country. Wait and see, Hillary will choose her running mate very wisely, she will surprise you and me. I can't wait to see first female President of USA.

I've suspected a Clinton-Obama ticket for months. Who knows what it will really turn out to be, but the Kabuki dance these two have been doing with each other smells of media consultants and smoky back room political plotting.

What polls do you people read? Every poll -Newsweek, CNN, NYT, etc… has shown that every leading Democrat beats every leading Repbulican, by about the same margin. In fact Hillary Clinton fares slightly better than Obama and Edwards. I think a Clinton/Obama ticket would be a great mobilizer for the base of the Democratic party, that is if the left-wing will realize that they can't have their way all of the time and get out and vote this time! I will predict a Clinton- Romney matchup, unless Thompson somehow gets his act together soon. Guiliani, like McCain, is too far at odds with the Christian base of his party, though he would probably give Hillary a run for her money in a general election by grabbing moderate voters. But, the far right is not going to put a pro-choice, anti-gun NY liberal on the ballot! Personally, I am a moderate democrat who supports Mrs. Clinton, although I would consider voting for Mr. Guiliani. I am so tired of you people on the left wing whining and complaining about Mrs. Clinton's war vote or her critique on Mr. Obama on meeting with dictators, or her failed health care plan. At least Mrs. Clinton tried to do what was right for the country and I give her credit for taking a tough stand on issues, especially being that she is a woman and the Washington DC atmosphere towards women. You lazy liberals can't even get off your lazy butts to vote! Had you voted in 2004 we wouldn't have had 3600 dead Americans in George Bush's illegal and immoral war. You liberals are just as guilty because you didn't vote in 2004 as are the right-wing nut jobs who voted for a fascist dictator like Bush/Cheney. Bring moderation back to America! Put the Clinton's back in the White House!

"Newt Gingrich" ceased being relevant when he was shown to be a complete, and utter hypocrite and disaster for the republican party.

Why is he not serving burritos at Chipotle? Lying, disgusting windbag.

"John Edwards represents the Democrats’ best hope for capturing the White House (as Bill Maher said)–he is drawing support not only from Democrats, but also groups that typically vote Republican, because of his populist appeal. In addition to his electability, he is the only leading candidate who is not taking money from lobbyists or PACs, and has the most detailed stands on the issues.

Unlike the other leading candidates, John Edwards is straightforward and candid, and not afraid to go after corporate abuse and greed"

Posted By Kathy Callan, Palo Cedro, CA : July 29, 2007 2:38 pm

actually Kathy, obama is the candidate who is not accepting the PAC money and openly rejecting the "old politics and corporate greed" Almost everything you said described Obama rather than Edwards.

First Newt called the GOP line "pathetic" but now it is "formidable" although he may have to step into the vacuum. I call that pathetic.
As for Clinton/Obama, it is good for political theorists but not likely.

If the Dems want to take the election for sure, I agree–Al Gore. However, he might be too smart to step into the messy Bush aftermath, especially with all the good stuff Gore has going on right now.

Who cares what Newt Gingrich thinks - he's an immoral hypocrite - was it the woman who became his second or third wife that he was having an affair with while leading the charge against Clinton for immorality?

Michael Savage has been talking about a Clinton-Obama ticket for months. Why is it news now that Gingrich says it?

People are just getting carried away with this so-called Obama Clinton mania. Let's get real.Although is true that no one is ready to be President until they are elected,these individuals are good Senators but are a long way from becoming President.Both do not have executive and forein policy experience.Hillary Clinton was first lady of Arkansas and later first lady of US ,but that does not give her executive experience.

Obama can be the next Secretary of State.Being a Senator for too long would not work in his favor. This is because too many voting records on controversial issues could work against him .John Kerry's twenty-year senate record could not help him win in 2004.There is time for everything. That is why I am urging my fellow Democrats to seriously consider former Vice Pres Al Gore with Gov Bill Richarson or Retired Gen Wesley Clark as the running mates. America now needs some one with strong national and foreign policy experience.

Strategically, rival prognostication in support of Clinton would suggest that she is considered to be a losing proposition against the likely Republican candidate. Therefore, either Obama or Edwards (most likely Obama given his current front runner status) is actually considered to be the most realistic threat in the final election. A meaningful interpretation of Newt's prediction would therefore lead one to believe that he is predicting Obama to win the democratic ticket.

Hmm, why would anyone care what a disgraced, hypocritical has-been like Gingrich thinks? Why does CNN and other news agencies waste their energy on this nobody? Go away, Newt, we had enough of you the first time around.

It will be a Clinton Edwards Ticket

Barack Obama all the way for 2008!!!

The GOP's wishful thinking. They know polls show in any match-up wiit a top Republican. Clinton can more easily be beaten than can Obama.

If it comes down to HRC/'Bama against Rudy/Whoever, I'll be voting for my first Republican President ever. My MoveOn colleagues are shocked, and I only explain my reasons as the "totality of the circumstances". I still believe either unelectable Dem frontrunner is a death wish, but both are signs of insanity.

I see that Gingrich's ego is alive and well.

Also, the fact that so many democracts like mccain is the reason he wont be nominated. i think giulianni is going to win the bid for the republican spot.

I'm not sure about obama but I don't think Richardson would want the spot next to Hillary.

I'm not sure about Hillary but I don't think Obama has an ego.

I do think that a Hillary-Obama ticket is just what this country, and the world for that matter means.

I just hope the democrats don't screw this up. This is such an amazing opportunity for historical change on so many levels.

They'd better win too, because if they don't there be no end to the "Stolen Elections" accusations.

Gosh, Damien, in case you missed it, Hitler already IS in the White House, in fact there are a slew of them running around professing patriotism and practicing their own brand of politics "we know best and we are right, so shut up and TRUST US!" That's working well, isn't it? Don't know about you, but I feel less safe than in 2001, my families' finances are less secure, and in general, the US is going down the tubes. Plus the rest of the world has lost respect for us. I just want somebody who will restore America's good name, get control of the budget (raise taxes on the wealthy) and get us out Iraq and not into Iran! I somehow don't think that person will be a Republican.

Why does this man still get a forum? He's violated Congressional ethics, violated his party's "moral majority" ethics, and is a dinosaur from the Congress that led us to Tom DeLay and the rest of his hypocritical ilk. Please do not give this person the credibility he doesn't deserve. CNN surely must have more relevant speakers to quote.

If the Republicans want a Nomination they better start working on another candidate for the race. Romney, Giuliani and Thompson are three lame ducks and thankfully Newt won't make the third.

I wouldn't take any thing that Newt said seriously. What possible experience does Newt have to run for President or to even make credible predictions on the race? The other three Republicans running don't have enough experience as a threesome to win the race. Thompson is a Joke.

I feel quite confident given the Republican Candidates thus far the Democrats will be in office. The only question is which one.

These three are wasting big Corporations bucks as after Bush and Cheney's Reign only the blind and brain impaired would put another Republican in office.

Clinton? Obama? Romney? Giuliani?
oh, fer cryin' out loud.
Has everybody forgotten Co-President Hillary and her 'haven't got a clue what the average citizen has to go through' health plan? Or kissing off Arkansas for the higher visibility of New York?

Obama - Assuming he actually *is* old enough, what other qualifications does he have?

Romney? Giuliani? I doubt either one would be able to squeeze his ego into the Oval Office.

It's way past time that the country stood up and said "Keep the politicians out of our government - we want people who care about America more than themselves and their political party."

I know they're out there, somewhere.

By the way Why is the title "Gingrich predicts Clinton/Obama ticket" when 99% of Gingrichs comment in the story is about the republican race. Why does CNN use every little chance it gets to insunuate ideas in Clinton's favor at the detriment of Obama?

This is not a genuine analysis but a dream by the republicans that they wish happen. They know Hillary is so much dispised by hard core republicans and large number of democrats tired of Bush/Clinton presidencies they will win the presidency if any republican runs against her in the general election.

Gingrich is promoting Hillary Clinton because he knows, as do the other Republicans, that she is the easiest to beat in a general election. She has very high negative ratings among Independent and Republican women.

John Edwards represents the Democrats' best hope for capturing the White House (as Bill Maher said)–he is drawing support not only from Democrats, but also groups that typically vote Republican, because of his populist appeal. In addition to his electability, he is the only leading candidate who is not taking money from lobbyists or PACs, and has the most detailed stands on the issues.

Unlike the other leading candidates, John Edwards is straightforward and candid, and not afraid to go after corporate abuse and greed, as he did when he was a trial attorney. The last thing the Republicans want is a Democratic candidate with such wide appeal who fought corporate abuse his whole life. That's why we need John Edwards in the White House.

Gingrich represents the Death of America. Newt stay out of it. Just as your Contract with America, you are completely out of touch with what needs to be changed for the good of the nation's interests. Your time is over.

there is no way in heck that Obama will get any nomination in this race… never mind with Clinton.

How can Newt be so stupid as to discount Ron Paul. EVERYONE IS DISCOUNTING RON PAUL! Even though he is #2 in the republican race for raising campaign fund and he's the most liked candidate on the internet!!!!

RON PAUL 08!!!

Bill Richardson has the most diverse experience of any of the candidates, Democratic or Republican. Any of the Democrats who get the nomination would be wise to choose him as their VP. I don't see Clinton if nominated choosing Obama, he would steal too much of the spotlight.

Thats true Jim Chicago,i will not see Hilary chosing Barack as her running mate as she believes he clearly has the potential to pose a threat to her authority as president.Like most presidents in the past,she will certainly choose someone she perceives to be a lame duck.I see her chosing Richardson,Edwards etc.Someone that will submit to her

Clinton won't choose someone who has more charisma to be her running mate. She wants the spotlight on herself. It's more likely that someone like Evan Bayh or Brad Henry will be her VP candidate, that is, IF she gets the nomination.

Clinton/Obama ticket will be the lost of the democratic party in 08. they have a free ticket, and are experimenting with a female/black candidate ticket.

to this day, there is still way to much sexist/racist in this country, and due to that they will loose. which will be pathetic considering that this election is almost a freebee on the part of the dems.

Al Gore needs to step in.

I find the idea of a Clinton/Obama ticket highly unlikely, and I am not sure even Mr Gingrich believes it will happen. It sounds more like an offhand comment meant to fire up the republican base than an actual predication.
The likelihood of Richardson being on the ticket, however is quite high, regardless of who the frontrunner is. Of course, you never can predict those things - who would have thought Kerry would have made such a stupid choice for V.P in 2004?

Well Bruce in SF, before you blog you should practice your writing skills. Evidently you went to school during a Repulsican era when schools they fully funded!

Newt is just fishing. This guy is smarter than one might think.

Newt save the U.S from hitler and osama I mean Hillary and Obama Newt 08

I highly doubt that Clinton and Obama will ever get put on the same ticket. I'm all about putting two power houses together however, I don't think the world can deal with two egos the size of theirs. I'm rooting for an Richardson / Obama ticket.

Newt is as out of touch as McCain. None of those idiots has a chance against Hillary OR Obama, or even Edwards or Richardson for that matter. To be fair, neither does Newt.

Ron Paul will take it all in 08! Freedom IS popular.

IF NEWT GINGRICH IS CORRECT IN HIS ANALYSIS THEN THIS WILL BE A SURE WINNER FOR THE DEMOCRATS IN 08. HOWEVER I THINK THE DEMOCRATIC TICKET WILL BE CLINTON/RICHARDSON.

Hilary has blew it. I think she was going to benefit from working with Obama with all his wit but because she is intimidated by him and wanted to score cheap political points, she chose to attack him with lies and poor fabrications she has lost his trust. Her experience is just overrated and she is arrogant. She will learn her lesson soon.