CNN

ill vote for obama rather than hilary because she is a weak women she can handle the irak war ...thats my opinion i was in the war i know.

obama is good respectful leader he rocks ill vote for him...

Neither Obama or Clinton are the candidates of change but they definitely are the candidates that will preside over the destruction of the Democratic Party which will cause the formation of a completely new political party.

Hmm, there goes the flip-flopping Hillary again. She starts out with her message of 'experience' against Obama as Obama continued with his message of 'change, undivided America', etc. Now Hillary can't stand it that Obama gets the cream, and so now, again, she follows Obama, changing and stealing his message of change, and the media wrapping their arms around 'her new' change campaign. Oh brother! She just keeps on following Obama.

The rest of the world thinks we Americans are very superficial. Otherwise, we won't vote to have our current president in power. Since when inexperience became a virtue in this country? If someone is inexperienced, he/she can say I have a new approach. I am trying to bring change to your company or organization! Sound naïve? This is exactly what we are doing for selecting the most important person—the president of our country!

The reason Obama repeatedly brag about his opposition of war in Iraq is because he has nothing else to talk about!! Does he have any accomplishment to talk about? Did he introduce any bills in the US senate (State senate does not qualify him as the leader of the United State of America) that have been past? Has he been a leader in any legislation?
He is already the least experienced and least knowledgeable among all running. After eight years of an administration that does not know anything about policy, 2008 will be the last chance for US to correct its course if it has any hope to be among the top five strongest countries in the world in next decade. Electing another inexperienced person like Obama, US will have no chance to comeback later.

Obama is an inspirational speaker but has zero qualification as our leader. If we really vote such a man into white house, it really tells how low our national intelligence is after eight years of a dumbest president we have ever elected.

If this woman gets the nomination, Though they are PRO HILL now, there gonna tear her apart, they have so much dirt on this lady man shes not gonna get 1% of the independent vote, I hope and pray that the democratic party dont make the same mistake they made in 2004, Barack is being tested now and i sincerely beleive that he is meeting the challenges with commen sense and good solid facts. Just rember, the country is split and the few independants that out there can be influenced.

Only a fool would vote for either one of these candidates.

We'll have change with either candidate – to health care, our troops in Iraq, oil dependence, etc. What everyone must realize however, is that those changes are touted by practically every Democrat gunning for the nomination. And once elected, a handful of those changes actually will become reality.

In that respect, very little differs between the front runners, aside from minor characteristics of their policies. To tout this element of someone's health care plan or that element of someone's alternative energy strategy is simply getting wrapped up in the axles. The bigger picture here, is the overwhelming message the candidate offers – what motivation if you will, they have for running.

I see Obama's message of change as a genuine effort to bring about good to this country, Hillary's... more a product of ambition than anything else. Obama's charting new territory in terms of not accepting corporate lobbyists' donations, and he actually has a track record of soliciting change in Illinois. That's the true sort of change I'd like to see. The change Hillary speaks of – the transfer of power from a Republican to Democrat, and the accompanying general policy – is likely to happen regardless of who wins the primary nomination. Vote Obama for real change.

OBAMA '08

The word "change" is overused in political campaigns. It's another vague word that people take to heart, thinking that things will actually change in THEIR OWN LIVES if someone else is sitting in the White House.

Hillary is just a much more well rounded candidate. Obama is hype, talk and spin. How many republicans has he taken on? Hillary and Bill have been beating republicans for decades and they will do so again in 08.

Honestly, I've never been excited much by politics in my life. I've always grumbled but felt there was really nothing I can do. I voted, and that was about it.

Never before have I realized what I do now, that there is such an extreme difference in the candidates of this election, and so much at stake, I simply can't stand on the sideline and not actually make some hard decisions.

One person has inspired me to do this. Sincerely. It's only because of him I'm typing this now.

Barack Obama has made me care about my country again. He's actually inspired me to pay attention, to put down my beer can, turn the t.v. off, and start speaking, start reading, start getting involved.

If he can do this for me, simply through his words, his ideas, his imagination and passion, I can only imagine that I'm not alone on this and that there are probably a bunch of other people out there that think the same way.

There's a stark contast here between him and the other candidates. I BELIEVE Mr. Obama will do what he says, and say what he will do.

i don't get that vibe from Hillary Clinton. I've seen her around the block, I've been there and done that. She wouldn't be a bad candidate for President, but she wouldn't inspire me to get up a half an hour earlier than I usually do to read the news either, as Mr. Obama has done.

Our nation needs inspiration. It craves it. It needs unity and progress so badly that it's about to come apart at the seams if it doesn't get it soon.

Another eight years of divisiveness, neglect and anger simply won't do. the entire world is at risk, and we're leading the charge into oblivion simply by not paying attention.

When I didn't know who Obama was, I figured I'd probably be okay settling for Hillary. She'd do a decent job.

Then, when I first heard Obama, and began to follow his career, I realized I may actually NOT have to settle. I may just have found a leader that can bring people out of their self imposed exiles and start our country moving again. HE CAN DO THIS.

The only thing stopping us from taking our country back is ourselves. Our inaction, our apathy, our resignation that we simply must settle for the status quo. It's killing us and it's been killing us since even before Bush came to power. As Obama said, Bush perfected the problem, but he didn't create it.

Bush only came to power because we sat back and figured somebody else would do our fighting for us. I was horribly, horribly and regretably wrong.

I feel just terrible I didn't get involved years ago. But again, I didn't have Barack Obama to wake me up and make me pay attention to the issues around me. I didn't have a Presidental candidate that I actually truly, honestly believe could change this country for the better given a desk in the white house.

I have been paying attention and that's how I feel.

Have you been paying attention? Or simply reading the sound bites and relying on the candidate you already know.

What you know... is nothing compared to what you can know. Truly start paying attention and I'm confident that you too can realize who the best President of our country will be.

Barack Obama. 08

You are so correct Beth. It is beyond me how Hillary has pulled off this hugh ploy about her "vast" experience. I can't see how she is more experienced in her own right than any of the other candidates. I am sure she is less honest than most other candidates.
I certainly would not use her as an example for my daughters to look up to.
A doormat to her husbands infidelity.
A scheming manipulator for personal gain.
A power hungry flip flopper.
Please not her as our first female.
No more of the same old crap.
Obama/Edwards 08

As a woman, I'm tired of hearing how proud and excited I should be that Mrs. Clinton supposedly has a serious shot at becoming president. When a woman who represents my views works her way up from the bottom rungs of the political ladder to a serious presidential candidacy, I will vote for her. Mrs. Clinton has risen to prominence simply by being Mrs. Clinton. That's nothing to be proud of, and if we rewarded her for it, we'd only be sending a very old and very negative message to girls and young women: your success depends on who you marry. Marry an ambitious man and you just might get to share his power. You can't do it by yourself, so don't even try. Just ride your husband's coattails as far as they can take you. Why this is historic or inspiring, and what it has to do with strength or intelligence, is beyond me.

Get real people! Hillary Clinton has spent -LESS-, not more, time as an elected official than Obama has. She has more 'experience', if you count being the president's wife (does that mean his mistresses also have experience? haha), being the governor's wife, and volunteering to help a campaign thirty years ago as EXPERIENCE, you have an entirely convoluted idea of what it takes to be President.

Change doesn't mean switching the President's name. Change means shattering Washington politics, driving it in a -brand new- direction. Clinton is synonymous with Old Government. She doesn't want to talk with other countries, she still wants her palms greased by lobbyists, and she has a history of voting for same-old-government politics like the Iraq War and a horrible immigration bill!

Hillary is the current leader as the candidate most likely to change her mind...

The president runs under a personal campaigning party title which is managed with hired constituents.

The candidates for governorship do the same, a personal party not affiliated with any other state or candidate.

-

What party was George Washington in? The party system only came into use after the founding fathers passed.

-

War exists as a zone; warfare can be engaged but war alone can not be; when warfare is engaged with a format of civility it is like a competition; with rebellion, renegade action, and finally insurrection: zones of war become battle fields or violent conflict. One can not go to war, but one can go to a war zone.

In calling the American political civil argument ‘a civil war’ it could be argued that the phrase itself taken out of context started troop movements and the first engagements.

-

Just as with diction one can not prevaricate from government fundamental contracts and not expect catastrophic collapse.

-

Change is not required truth of purpose is.

Clinton's experience is really not spectacular, and her relatively proud acceptance of lobbyist money does not indicate the sort of change we need.

Obama represents a far more fundamental and, frankly, exciting change of pace. I would pick him any day if he could make good on even just half of his promises.

What is everyone afraid of? This is a woman that is intelligent, strong, very eloquent and with good solid ideas on getting things done for this country... isn't that the premise of "Ask not what your contry can do for you, but ask what you can do for your country"? Changes in America will not happen overnight, Obama and Edwards will not revolutionaze the country, they still have a congress to contend with with constituents with different views and NOT a clear majority, what makes everyone so sure that the republicans will play nice and not filibuster everything an OBAMA or EDWARDDS administration will throw their way... political cash? see how good that did for Bush?, let's have a debate of ideas, not of slogans and let's recognize who the real people are that will affect change for this country... I personally would love to see Clinton/Obama 08, however I would settle for Clinton/Biden 08 just as well... two people that know and understand what it will take to make the right changes in America...

Just so you know Hsu is missing – please contact the DNC on what you should do with the story

To Chelsea, Vista CA

You perceive that her experience will lead to profound choices, which is possible. Your second criteria, voting for her makes American history, the same bodes true for Sen. Obama, but is not a reason to elect a president.

What have we gotten from the experiences?
Obama also would be making history, Chelsea!

Here goes Clinton copying everything Obama says or does for about the nth time.

Previous examples:

–Clinton said she was reading a book that Obama kept mentioning on his campaign trail.
–She made some adjustments to her website that made it look incredibly like his.
–She engaged in her 1 million supporters drive after Obama did.

I suppose that is what happens when you have nothing on your own plate – no new plans on the issues, no vision on which to run, except that you want to be president, and no political courage with which to boldly carve your path without the aid of your husband.

Clinton's lack of real ideas is transparent. Her move to copy others is pathetic. I hope the American public will come to its senses and see her for what she is.

Clinton's a candidate for change?

Please read below as it looks like business as usual as we can add this guy to the LIST of people who are afraid to testify against, run to another country, go to jail for or lastly end up dead in compliance with these fine people:

California businessman Norman Hsu, a former New York apparel executive and major contributor to Democratic candidates and causes, failed to appear for a bail reduction hearing Wednesday, leading to speculation that he again is a fugitive from the law.

Hsu's attorneys say they do not know his whereabouts, and that their client did not surrender his passport.

Hsu turned himself in to authorities last week after more than 15 years on the run from a felony conviction of grand theft. He admitted to defrauding investors of $1 million in a bogus investment scam.

He failed to appear in court for sentencing on that 1991 conviction, a revelation that prompted high profile Democrats - including presidential candidate Hillary Clinton - to return thousands of dollars donated by Hsu.

Between senator Clinton and Obama, I would pick Mrs. Clinton for 2008 white house, because of experiences. Due to the profound and precious experiences( all time cultivated), she/he will know how to make effective changes for this nation. In short, the siginificant changes are based upon profound expereinces. Right now, the expereince is no.1 crtiteria to be considered !

-Her experience leading up to her candidacy will not lead to changes...all her experience lies in the same halls of Congress that has produced much of the outrageous level of corruption and unethical behavior this country is plagued with. Her election is more likely to carry the same...don't be fooled by nostalgia; Bill will not run the country again...and from my memory Hil conducts herself nothing like him...DON'T BE FOOLED

We're not ready for a female or black president.

who is the candidate of return, who will end the civil war?

The Government needs to reset to the original terms of the bill of rights. Remove the presidential candidates from this discombobulating formal political segregation to be placed back as individual formal candidates running as administration heads for hire of one united nation.

Remove the party system entirely from the Senates and the Congress. Create a proper legislative body and abide by the congressional apportionment; set by what one person can read when communiqués are received in the format of true registered mail, deemed priority from their legislation, and as general from the electorate; and always read first person for true representation. The senators scheduled to meet in formality with union representatives, guild masters, religious heads of state, and the bureau chiefs on a regular basis.

Governors running just as the presidents: as individuals for hire.

The United States presidential office, the United States senate, The United States Congress, the governors office of… These are the titles of co-operative government party.

I agree with the first three postings here. Hillary's experience label will lose its glue shortly....

Wait, I'm confused...she was pushing her experience and now she's for change?

Didn't we hear that already? Oh yeah, Bill Richardson noted in the last debate that with him you truly get a two-for-one; change and experience.

If HRC can't even come up with an original campaign meme, how can she lead America in the 21st century?

Reality check:

35 years ago, Hillary Clinton was a law student.

I have friends in law school. They study very hard, take part in political advocacy during their free time, and go out drinking afterwards.

I had no idea that this was preparation for the White House.

35 years ago, Joe Biden was elected to the US Senate. But, apparently, Clinton supporters believe she is more experienced than he is.

The Clinton campaign will tell the "35 years of experience" lie over and over until people start believing it.

The media is playing right into her hands.

If the first female elected is as horrible a politician as Hillary Clinton, then we won't see another woman elected for a long long time.

Why would you waste such an opportunity on an inexperienced housewife who can't even keep her husband happy at home? How will she manage this country if she can't manage her own household...or maybe watching her husband repeatedly cheat only to turn and look the other way is exactly the style of government she intends to run. Corruption and Clinton both start with C.

I pray the Democratic party knows when it has a sure thing and doesn't waste such an opportunity to promote change by electing someone purely concerned with her own interests.

Bill was one of the worst Presidents of this era. His mistakes were the causes of all the turmoil we still see today; that means the Middle East, the growing defecit, and immigration problems caused by his failure to invade choosing only to bomb Iraq, lack of commitment to US workers (NAFTA), and lack of concern for illegal immigration. The 90's set us up for this horrible era, why do we want that to happen again?

ANYONE but Hillary in '08. I'd take Cindy Sheehan even lol.

Oh by the way, experience doesn't = success. Experience doesn't = leadership. Experience doesn't = change.

Let me answer the title question.
EDWARDS
EDWARDS
EDWARDS
His whole campaign is based on change.

Between senator Clinton and Obama, I would pick Mrs. Clinton for 2008 white house, because of experiences. Due to the profound and precious experiences( all time cultivated), she/he will know how to make effective changes for this nation. In short, the siginificant changes are based upon profound expereinces. Right now, the expereince is no.1 crtiteria to be considered !

Second, voting for Mrs. Clinton makes American history, and every woman in America should be proud of a female president if elected. It reprensents lady's value in this society and this nation !

As an African American I will vote in Michigan for Hillary Clinton She is the most EXPERINCED one.

The 35 years of experience HRC keeps talking about are a locked up secret in the Clinton Library.
How can you brag of something you dont want others to see. Someone needs to press for the release of these documents.

Obama has no expirience when it comes to war or anything relating to "leading our country" This is what a JR. person is... what part do you not understand????

What Strength and Experience is she talking about? The strength and experience to vote for a War that never should of been authorized and not apologize for it. The strength and experience to make a mockery of the Democratic party in the 90s and lead to huge losses in Congress by not compromising on her health care bill. The strength and experience to be a washington insider and claim that she is not influenced by lobbyist money. The strength and experience of serving on Walmarts board of directors and not doing anything to stop the anti-union activities.

People need to wake and see all these lies she is feeding people.

Hillary is the status quo, someone so partisan that nothing would get done in Washington, she will drag down the entire Democratic party, and that national wave toward the democrats will be very short lived. We will lose congress, and it will take years to get it back. The Republicans want Hillary to be the nominee, there is scandal after scandal after scandal they are waiting to bring out about her.

Who do I sound like? I will not talk with rogue nations, we should not allow more trips to Cuba for their families. Lobbyist are real people too. Kinda sounds like Bush to me.

There needs to be real change in Washington, not a slogan by a candidate who has done little or nothing in her short Senate career (other than authorize a war).

Hillary is such a copycat.. Now she is the changed agent. What kind of change except for being a woman. She is a dirty politician trying to steal Obama's theme. Only real change is Obama 08

Actual candidate of change: Edwards.

Hillary, yes, I agree with you that one should vote for you – if we all want "ugly politics as usual"! I am sick of it – I want Barack Obama – a fresh new face with no political dirty laundry!

Its dying it really is because the more they hear Obama the more they tend to agree with the "naive" senator. Its funny that thats the only thing she can attack on Barack. He's a stand up dude with a lot of power backing him. [..] near all of the advisors under the clintons forigen policy team is Obamas. If that doesnt tell you anything then i dont know what will

This question is CLEARLY a no-brainer. Obama, hands down, is clearly the agent for change.

Hillary represents old-school politics (special interest money, hollywood, vast right wing conspiracy, etc). She condemns Obama for anwering a hypothetical question (talking to foreign leaders) and then she says, hypothetically, if terrorists attack it will help Republicans. She's for the War, then against it. She's vocally cut-and-run unless she's speaking to a group of Veterans where she says the surge is working.

Obama, will making a few stumbles, appears to be honest, genuine, and represents a fresher approach.

Bush-Clinton-Bush-?? More of the same = Clinton. Change = Obama.

She is first lady for 8 years, all of a sudden she has experience? Lets all be honest, if it wasn't for Bill she would be nowhere.

Hillary's Strategy

Triangulation (politics)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Triangulation is the act of a candidate presenting his or her ideology as being "above" and "between" the left and right sides of the political spectrum. It involves adopting for oneself some of the ideas of one's political opponent. The logic behind it is that it not only takes good ideas away from your opponent, but that it insulates you from attacks on that particular issue. It is a tactic commonly used in third way politics.

1. Origins during the Clinton years-
The term was first used by President of the United States Bill Clinton's chief political advisor Dick Morris as a way to describe his strategy for getting Clinton reelected in the 1996 presidential election. Morris advocated a set of policies that were different from the traditional policies of the Democratic Party. The idea Clinton used behind some of these policies was to be "more Republican than the Republicans." These policies included welfare reform, tax cuts for the middle class and balanced budgets. One of the most widely cited capstones of Clinton's triangulation strategy was when, in his 1996 State of the Union Address, Clinton declared that the "Era of Big Government is over."

2. Use after Bill Clinton-
Triangulation was emulated during the 2000 presidential election in the Bush campaign's use of the term "compassionate conservative". The subsequent Bush campaign, however, returned to the 80's tradition of focusing on appealing to more partisan voters using so-called wedge issues.

Other leading politicians who have successfully used the method include Tony Blair with "New Labour" in the United Kingdom and Fredrik Reinfeldt with "The New Moderates" in Sweden.

Hillary Clinton used triangulation politics in her 2008 presidential primary run to arrive at the conclusion that deauthorizing the Iraq war, rather than cutting off funding, is the best method to mollify her original vote to authorize war while essentially failing to compel any change to the war policy

Is this what we want America?

Bigger government and a bigger tax bill. Guaranteed changes from both...

Can someone please tell me what 35 years of experience the junior senator from New York is referring to? It's time to put an end to the experience myth.