Something missing?
Arriving in and going straight to the evening rally at a school near Manchester, I found myself impressed by flashes of real assertiveness - the kind of assertiveness that convinced many Americans during the course of recent months that she was The Candidate.
An example: a question about Vladimir Putin, the Russian president. President Bush told Americans years ago he had looked into Putin's soul - Hillary was contemptuous: "He was a former KGB man; he had no soul!" Take that, Vlad - plainly Mrs Clinton senses a nostalgia for the Cold War rather than our modern, more complex struggles, and she may be right.
On the other hand, there is something missing: she is competent and tough but she does not inspire. People drifted away from this event and the folks in the overflow hall allowed in to boost the numbers did so too...
Hello, I'm 
颁辞尘尘别苍迟蝉听听 Post your comment
Yeah, Senator Hillary, though may be competent, doesn't inspire like Senator Obama. I get carried away by Mr. Obama's speeches. He has the charisma to land him the job. That's how the president of the US should sound.
The Republicans are pushing for Obama to get the Democratic nomination because they feel, and probably rightly so, that the US will never elect an African American as president. With this article you do your expected part in beating the drum for the right. Hillary is a thinking man's candidate which excludes more than half the voters in the US -- the half that will read your article with glee and delight.
Perhpas, despite her message and her differences and what she could actually do, she is cut from the same cloth as the incumbents.
Obama is not. That is the principal difference.
Just as Blair was to Major et al.
There appears to be a real sense of change in the air and it's growing..
"People drifted away . . . . . "
Tired of listening to the same old same old perhaps?
Is the problem that people just dont trust another family appointment? Bush Clinton Bush Clinton would be just too weird.
Obama is fresh and interesting, Edwards is not yet at the point of over-saturation either.
Despite Bill Clinton seen in a positive light by most Americans, it's a big ask for Hillary to not be tainted by her husbands past.
"The Republicans are pushing for Obama to get the Democratic nomination because they feel, and probably rightly so, that the US will never elect an African American as president"
I am sorry, I just don't buy that at all. The political classes might not be happy about it, but the people? I think they are ready for it.
I think that Hillary is a "doer" like she says, but unfortunately she is married to Bill Clinton who many people do not want to see back in the White House. Obama clearly has the intelligence to make the decisions necessary to be president. I want to hear inspirational speeches from my president not scoldings. As my husband says, anyone will be better than what we have now.
Almost invariably leaders chosen one way or another for their charisma alone turn out to be disasters. We should know better. Obama's charisma does not negate his inexperience. People are focusing on change. Everyone promises change. Change is inevitable whether it is planned or not. But what kind of change? Walking off the edge of a cliff is a change. What exactly does Obama propose besides bombing Pakistan and how will he accomplish it, how will he pay for it? John Kennedy was a charismatic leader who nearly blew up the world over Cuba because his weakness and inexperience made him unqualified to be President. Will America make the same mistake again with one of these political midgets who dominate the political landscape? There's an old saying that nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public. But there's another which says that Americans vote their pocketbooks. Obama does not look friendly to Wall Street as far as I can tell and for tens of millions of American voters, that is all that will matter....I hope.
If John Edwards had had the same media attention as Obama and Clinton as well as a bit more money, where would he be? He will consistently take 25 to 30% of votes in primaries without any press exposure, in addition to this he has performed well in all the debates unlike Obama.
You need to pay this guy a bit more attention, irrespective of who wins the nomination Edwards should be the VP nomination.
You're kidding right? Statements like Hillary's are unnecessarily provocative and risk alienating Russia even further, a prospect that the Western world really shouldn't relish right now. He may be the most undemocratic in Russia's short experiment with democracy, but he remains popular in his home country and is entitled to the respect bestowed on a national leader. Public statements like these reek of Chavez-like ineptitude when it comes to how leaders should behave on the public political stage. The public domain is not a place to personally undermine rivals. Thats why we have intelligence services.
You're kidding right? Statements like Hillary's are unnecessarily provocative and risk alienating Russia even further, a prospect that the Western world really shouldn't relish right now. He may be the most undemocratic in Russia's short experiment with democracy, but he remains popular in his home country and is entitled to the respect bestowed on a national leader. Public statements like these reek of Chavez-like ineptitude when it comes to how leaders should behave on the public political stage. The public domain is not a place to personally undermine rivals. Thats why we have intelligence services.
We have to "turn a new page." We are tired of the same old tricks. It's easy to see why people would walk away. She is Desperate and frustrated. She acts like the presidency is her birth-right.
The Iowa result may have been shaped by Iowans' past record of having never voted for a female Governor or Congressman and mischief by Republicans voting for Obama to stop Hillary.
However, there is no doubting the New Hampshire surge for Obama means Hillary will have her work cut out. If Obama wins here she can still win New York and California and do well in Super Tuesday. Don't forget - it's all about delegate headcount at the convention.
Competent? Yes, Ambitious? Absolutely. Formidable campaign organization and millions in the coffer. So what's missing? She lacks charisma -which Obama has in spades. She comes across as too cerebral. Her luster and intelligence need a more light spin. Relax Hillary, life is more than a calculated response. The nomination is for you to lose it and so far, you're doing it.
We have to "turn a new page." We are tired of the same old tricks. It's easy to see why people would walk away. She is Desperate and frustrated. She acts like the presidency is her birth-right.
There is something to be said for charisma... Hillary has zilch. She may be experienced but I love how hyped i get after seeing Obama speak (and win). he makes me proud to be an American again. that is worth all the experience in the world!
Sen. Clinton's appeal has depended on two things: her sheer competence as a technocratic policy wonk; and her symbolic value as a first woman president. I think she gets greatest traction as a technocrat ("experience") but it's a hard sell when Obama is so much more exciting and is also capable of appearing smart, thoughtful, and deliberative.
What strikes me as most interesting, though, is how limited is Sen. Clinton's appeal as feminist icon. If the polling from Iowa and New Hampshire are generally applicable, few women under the age of fifty -- and virtually no women under the age of twenty-five -- seem to want to vote for her because they think it's important to elect a woman president. Her failure in this regard, and Obama's success in running as a "post-racial" black man, could be an important indication that we are seeing the beginning of the end of identity politics in America.
A nostalgia for the Cold War is the LAST quality desirable in our next president. Being that we live in a Post-Cold War international system where we must recognize that the world is far more complex than a simple good v evil match-up Americans must do everything possible to distance ourselves from the lingering fears wrongly stoked by our politicians during the Cold War.
As for Bob's comment "a thinking man's candidate ... which excludes more than half the voters in the U.S." I wouldn't know where to start...
Hillary is flawed. The Clinton camp is plagued by hubris. Bill's presence reminds us of his presidential judgement so let's hope New Hampshire does the world a favour.
What people see in Hillary is someone that has attacked Obama quite negatively and this reflects upon the political status quo in Washington. The American people are sick of this and the Democratic base wants someone not tainted by the Iraq War. After all, John Kerry voted for the war and the American people had no clear choice and look what happened (4 more years of Bush). Obama is untainted!!!
On the issue of Obama being African American, many whites who wanted to vote for him thought he could not win given the historic past of the nation, but Iowa (98% white) changed this entire dynamic. Now those who were skeptical will vote for him!
The most competent person doesn't always get elected. Case in point, our current 2-term President.
Americans have begun to realize just how ugly the election would be if Hillary Clinton was nominated...and we know that it would be 4 ugly years of investigations and mud-slinging by the conservative talk show hosts and the Republicans if she was elected.
By choosing likeable outsiders (i.e. Obama, Huckabee), I think Americans are saying "enough of this"....we people to start working together.
Hillary is flawed. The Clinton camp is plagued by hubris and Bill's fixed smile reminds us of his flawed presidential judgement so let's hope New Hampshire does the world a big favour
On the contrary, Bob, the Republicans are pulling for Clinton. They know her. They have been making plans on how to run against her for years. She鈥檚 someone they feel they can beat.
Obama, on the other hand, is something new. They don鈥檛 know what to do with him. He鈥檚 a liberal black man that white conservatives would be willing to vote for. I saw it here in Illinois, long before his speech at the DNC, when he was running for the senate. His rallies were often filled with white conservatives who were looking for a change from the then scandal ridden Illinois Republican Party. They may have never voted for a democrat before, they may have never have voted for a black man before, but this guy, Obama, was someone they wanted to vote for. And, he won by a landslide.
I don't want Obama in the white house . If you think the world has problems now you haven't seen nothing yet. You all say that Obama is fresh and you like the way he speeks ,You had better open your eyes. You are right about one thing he is fresh ,but that only means that he has not been in the race as long as some of the others. I turly don't think the south is going to vote a black man for presdent. So there for the rep. will be in the white house four more years. Change it's not Obama!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Unfortunately, one of Hillary's biggest claims to fame is that she was the wife of a US president. During that time she was tasked with reforming health-care, but again unfortunately, her caustic personality failed to win support for her efforts.
Barack's claim to fame is himself: his own work, his own words, his own opinions. How long has it been since US voters were so inspired by a potential leader that they are often moved to tears whey they hear him/her speak?
On the Democratic side, then, we have a choice between (a) an uninspiring but arguably competent socialist and (b) an candidate who inspires hope by talking in vague generalities and by the very fact that he's not 100% Caucasian. Oh, and of course (c) my local homeboy Edwards who just looks really good on TV.
I would say "Oh, well, good thing there are some decent Republicans running" except the choices seem no better there: (a) the anti-evolution preacher, (b) the multiply-married "family" man, (c) the hairshirt-wearing nonpolygamist.
Proof I suppose that "more choices" doesn't mean "better choices".
I think Hillary summed it up best when she said people were looking to have a beer with their president in the last election...We need to move away from thinking charisma and words are going to be enough to break ineffective systems and recreate new ones. As Richardson asked in the last debate, "What's wrong with experience?!"
My vote is for Hillary - someone who can be an AGENT for CHANGE!
I actually think Mr. clinton's speach is more inspiring than Mrs. Clinton's I think her tune/words were too calculated and to cold to make a connection. I am very analytic and well educated and traveled, and I will select one between Obama and Edwards.
This is how i feel;
Most women did not supported Hilary, Why ? Because, she's afterall another Women. Tell me when 1 women supported another women ?
Iowa - 38% supported obama. I agree. If you see it's just 18-20% of total voters of Iowa and in that too, rest 62% people did not supported Obama. So, he actuallly lost Democratic supporters and won Independents and some Dem's & some Rep's. So, it's good for Republicans', but not for Democrats. Obama will won the Nomination, but might loose to Rep's. Cos, when the candidate is announced, you'll find the real Republican machine starts working.
"...she does not inspire." And this is exactly what is going on in America today. Inspirito - of Spirit. It is felt. If it feels Real, it inspires. We are learning and growing here in America: learning that the printed and spoken word has been spun to a knot and that doesn't feel right. Now we are learning to read the words and listen with our Spirit for Truth. Obama inspires because what he says is congruent with how he feels. Hillary does not inspire because what she says is from her head, not her heart. Sincerity would be another word. Mine is Real.
You are correct when you say "something is missing" from Hilary's campaign. All succesful democratic elections the world over are won with a mix of 80 percent emotion and 20 percent logic. A good poltician (e.g. Bill Clinton) understands this and cuts his campaign to suit. A very competent politician (e.g. Hillary Clinton) who has difficulty in stirring people's emotions can be undercut very easily by one who understands instinctively this rule. Hillary's problem is that she is running more on logic than on emotion.(You decide the ratio, but it is not 80/20). As a result she is in obvious trouble.
There's no question ," but as the Wall Street Journal pointed out yesterday, "Mr. Obama has often sounded naive in the extreme in discussing Iraq, Iran and the overall war on terror, and Mrs. Clinton can point out that Republicans are sure to make that argument in the autumn. Mr. Obama's other potential weakness in November is his orthodox policy liberalism." That's surely my own sticking point, but at this point,
Obama seems to be to the right of Clinton and attracting more independent support. The real change candidate is Edwards and it will be interesting to see if he can overtake Clinton if she fails in NH.
the US will never elect an African American as president? Are they not part of the united states? and is it wrong for them to lead?. Hillary keeps talking about experience, I will like to ask what kind of experience has she got? over shadowing her husband?, The US is not a family run company and the people of America are looking for change and they see that change in Obama, has anybody got problems with that? I hope not, is time for unity and change in America and I hope we will make things right this time.
I'm backing Hillary for now, but I, too, sense a huge change that is beyond everyone's control. I sense that Barack Obama's inspirational victory speech in Iowa was the day he became a real presidential contender, much like the day in 1860 when Lincoln delivered his speech at Cooper Union in NYC. The only difference is that Lincoln never had Obama's charismatic baritone voice.
Washington, D.C.
"Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton."
Mr. Webb, you are waaaay behind.
I can imagine Putin dismissing Hillary Clinton, in response to a question about her candidacy, as just the ambitious wife of a former president. But he's too dignified to hurl such a jab. Does it matter what Putin thinks of Hillary? No--just as it doesn't matter what Hillary says of him. It's all so silly.
I just went to NH to volunteer for Senator Obama. There were thousands upon thousands of ordinary people who traveled there, many of them for the first time like me, to persuade the locals. Many were coyly "undecided" yet extolled Obama's virtues and derided Hillary, without prompthing. (We had strict instructions not to speak ill of the other candidates). His appearances at schools saw crowds three times the size that were anticipated.
This is Senator Obama's time. Americans are tired of fighting each other. Obama is the only candidate, Democrat or Republican who is interested in bringing the all sides together to work for the common good. All the others want to continue to fight the other side. Americans want to turn the page on fighting and get to some real, quality progress. That's why he will be our next President.
There is a reason the Constitution of the United States prohibits a person from being elected to office three times and Hillary has openly campaigned under the slogan of "two for the price of one." She's asking us to vote to bring Bill back. We don't need to elect Bill Clinton again (and the majority of American voters will make sure that doesn't happen if Hillary wins the nomination). To suggest that Barack Obama is not a thinking person's choice is plain racist. His nimble mind is his strongest asset (among many).
Where is Bill CLinton? It is obvious that Bill is still popular amongst Democrats, yet he is nowhere to be found - perhaps if he where to help her run she might have a chance in beating Obama. Afterall, people still remember the good ol' days where the economy was good and the thought of war was long gone after daddy Bush. Lets face it, Bill would be a great asset to the Hillary Clinton campaign.
The list of problems with Ms. Clinton is long, and we've seen now that she has slipped from the lead how vindictive and manipulative she can be. Personally, I don't want someone like that as my president, like so many others have been. Also, It seems that Ms. Clinton is far too liberal of a politician to suit America, which is a predominantly moderate country. Obama on the other hand is very inspiring and insightful. I've seen how he has captured the attention of political apathetics and made them care, once again, about voting. There's something very different about Obama then other politicians including Hillary -- People actually believe what he's saying.
Obama has framed the debate: before Iowa, he was the only candidate talking consistently of change (with the exception of Huckabee). Now they're all arguing about who is the best to lead "Change".
Being a "Me Too" candidate is not very inspiriing and shows a lack of leadership.
Where did one of your bloggers get the absurd notion that Bill Clinton is seen in a positive light by MOST Americans? And does he not realise that it is Bill running for a third term, and not Hillary running for a first? This old World War II Royal Navy veteran, a U.S. citizen for some 43 years, is committed to vote for another veteran, the indomitable John McCain. We need a man in the White House with his brand of guts.
Senator Clinton is - let's face it, precisely the sort of political-hack that Americans are fed up with. We remember White Water and are aware of the charade to now seek to attempt to differentiate her formerly shark-bite [take it all at once] approach to medical care services in the United States. Of course, there's her voting record in the Senate as well, such as supporting President Bush and the invasion of Iraq and then trying to distance herself from it as the US was not greeted with open arms. Senator Clinton suffers from the same syndrome as many 'old' Dem's, they want to be our mother - as they think they know what's best for us. Please...
America faces challenges on the domestic front{s} last seen in the years following 1929 and in global issues that threaten all of western democracies on a host of levels [energy, labour, pollution, extremism, etc]. The 'old' tired/tried and failed smoke and mirrors won't get America out of her malaise thsi tiem around. America's ready for someone with new perspectives and new approaches to our changing landscape. As surely as the GOP has no credibility - whatsoever, Senator Clinton [aka: the carpetbaggetress who moved to New York for a easy Senate-seat]do not offer answers or leadership. It's past time for a new direction, a new course and someone new at the helm of the ship of state.
Hillary Clinton is an able administrator, more or less centrist, and would get my vote if all we needed was a caretaker President. There is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that Hillary would have responded to Katrina a thousand times better than the current occupant of the White House.
Unfortunately, GWB has been so damaging to the U.S. that we need someone who will help the country's spirit recover from the domestic and international policy debacles of the past several years. Obama is not a naive child. He's a seasoned politician who still has, as Bush Sr. called it, "the vision thing."
Of course, Huckabee has a vision too, but God help us if he gets the opportunity to put his vision into action!
I have to disagree with Bob from comment number 2.
The Republicans have never pushed for Barack Obama. Hilary Clinton is the one Democrat that could inspire their conservative base to get up and vote AGAINST her. Frankly, most Republicans are stunned to see her falling down and Barack catching fire. And in spite of the USA's wretched past with African Americans, the seeds of change have been planted and are taking root.
In the UK you may not feel it the way we do here, but there is a sense of hope and optimism that has not been felt since Bobby Kennedy was assassinated.
Change is in the air and without doubt it will happen in November. Before long the Democratic candidates will be dwindled to three (Richardson is on his way out). As good as Obama is, and I agree, he is charismatic, articulate and intelligent, he has YET to convince this voter that he is a leader. Keep in mind, the election is not for another ten months, so Obama still has time to convince me and many others. Clinton, however, is highly intelligent, articulate and a clear leader who has a spine of steel. She sees what this country needs to achieve and I believe she is the one capable to get us there. Hillary not only has the experience, the knowledge and the ability to run this country she will also be a strong and believe it or not, compassionate President. If Hillary were elected we would also essentially be getting two Presidents for the price of one. Clinton/Obama ticket? Edwards? Who knows, but after 8 long years with a President with no leadership abilities nor vision it's time to elect someone that can direct this country and show us a brighter vision for the future. None of the Republicans offer anything close to Clinton or Obama (nor Edwards for that matter).
Hillary is extremely tough, bright and capable. Faced with Obama's talent for smooth talking, however, she will have difficulty competing.
She talks about being "ready" for the very, very hard job of president. I don't think people want to hear that. They want to hear an upbeat message.
Unfortunately, Obama has demonstrated nothing of his ability to get anything done in Washington. It's very different from his experience, which is "community outreach". He could conceivably waste 4 years trying to talk his way through everything.
"...plainly Mrs. (or is it Ms.?) Clinton senses a nostalgia for the Cold War"...great! shades of her 'role model' Mrs. (definitely not Ms.) Thatcher. America's very own "iron lady", 'assertive', 'tough' Hillary. But emphatically not warm, understanding, humane, compassionate, etc.; no place for any generous feelings in high office on eithr side of the Atlantic. Come to think of it, maybe that's why darling Hillary's campaign doesn't inspire. She has about as much 'soul' as Putin. It takes one to know one, I guess. Reminds one of the old joke they used to tell about Thatcher: "If my child's school lunch program is going to be cut, I want it to be cut by a woman!" How politically correct can you get. The Cold War would be perfect for a cold fish like her. Now you see why Bill strayed off the reservation?
I find it interesting that Senator Clinton was talking tough about Putin. Don't these Democrats all want to engage in niceties with world tyrants and not make them so mad at us? Senator Clinton, at that time President Bush was engaging in just the very thing you Dems accuse him of not doing more of now. Get your story straight.
We recently experienced a similar wave of change, hope and optimism in Australia with our recent Federal Government election in November. It swept the Labour government to victory. Labour ran a centrist policy on most issues (security, tax, immigration etc) but offered hope on many of those issues that were important to the younger generations (environment).
If this feeling of optimism, change and hope repeats in other states I wouldn't be surprised if history repeats itself.
FYI- this feeling was so strong that the sitting Prime Minister lost his own (blue ribbon) seat, something that he had held for 30 years. This was the first time that a sitting PM had lost his seat since 1921. Hope & Change are powerful forces once the electorate believes its genuine.
The theme:
According to General Semantics, cognitive sciences, it鈥檚 the frame STUPID! The frame is the network of associations that spring from the sub-conscientious with the brand.
Obama has a brand of hope and change 鈥 a people lost in the wilderness about to cross to the holy land. The collection of tribes of all the people lost in the dessert looking across to the promised land of milk and honey. The leader is a guide and prophet, a coach getting the team into the supper bowl.
Clinton is the good mother or sheep herder taking care of her children or sheep. The sheepherder will provide 鈥 health care, financial stability, jobs, welfare, prosperity, world peace, the whole laundry list of democratic promises. The focus is on HER, me, I, the government, the process, and in material benefits of voting.
The Republican image of the strict father offer security and freedom from reason. The people is to follow and believe and not question authority. Ditto Heads鈥
Democracy in America:
There are some popular myths about the nature of the American civilization. The nation was a child of enlighten not a Christian revival. The Deists and Freemasons who organized the 鈥渃ommittees of public safety鈥 and created the propaganda that let to the 鈥渞ebellion of the American Colonies鈥 and was all about CHANGE. The established order of CHURCH, KING, and State was gothic v. the modern world which was rational, logical as opposed to faith based doctrine based on tradition and authority. The idea that people could manage their own affairs depended on people being sensible, not driven by superstitions, and passions. The people must have a higher sense of the common good and see beyond just personal, regional, racial, ethic, class or religious prejudices. The 鈥減eople鈥 were property owners and educated. The masses were not to be trusted. Without the balance of power, public education, and a stable middle class Imperial tyranny would be replaced by the rule of the mob.
If Mr. Edwards wants to change 鈥渢he system鈥 he will have to convince the states to call a constitutional convention to redesign the balance of power. The system we have has been successful designed to prevent Democracy because popular rule would endanger civil liberties and state sovereignty 鈥 Democracy only requires majority rule within a parliamentary system. The American design was to prevent the state from doing much, for better or worse. The balance of power design was there because the founding fathers did not trust the people or majorities that would abolish slavery, over tax or regulate, tax trade to the disadvantage of one region or industry or another. Our limited democracy is another result of our original sin of slavery.
There's no doubt Senator Barrack O'Bama is as charismatic as they come. I went to hear him speak in person and he has the presence of a rock star. There is no doubt he is likeable. But as Americans vote in the primary, I hope they don't forget what happened in 2000 and 2004. In 2000, Americans voted for George Bush because he was more 'likeable' than Al Gore. Bush was likeable, Gore had the experience. In 2004, Americans voted for George Bush because he was more 'likeable' than John Kerry. Bush was likeable, Kerry had the experience. Look where voting for likeability got America.
I must respectfully disagree with the comments of one of your readers. Bob asserts that the Republicans want Obama because they feel that he is more beatable. Nothing could be further from the truth. Think about it for a second, don't you think that the party that brought you George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan understands the power of personality over the logic of competence and experience? I would think that the Repulicans would much rather face the devil they know (Hillary) over the devil they don't. Excluding President Bush, Hillary Clinton is the most polarizing figure in American politics. This fact alone is why the right-wing is lamenting the Clinton collapse.
Bob says WHO is the thinking man's candidate? 40% of all donations from US college professors went to Obama, 20% to Clinton (07Q1-2). 51% of Harvard professors who donated, backed Obama. 17% to Clinton. 56% of Harvard donations to Obama, 21% to Clinton. Perhaps those are all the thinking women at Harvard who gave their money to Obama, and Clinton is yet the thinking man's candidate. I don't think so.
While I would like to see a woman president someday, I can't get past the Bill and Hill factor. The package. After Bush and Shrub, I've had enough nepotism, family ties, etc.
I have been watching Obama with interest for several years. I like the way that he has always said he wants to draw people together from both sides. I believe he does and it's refreshing. I am so-o-o-o very tired of nasty partisan politics. I want change and so, I sense, do many others. I am a Republican, but I may vote for a Democrat this time, to be sure I get it. I am hearing my friends say the same thing and we are all over 50.
I can't help feeling a bit sorry for Hillary. She's worked extremely hard for over eight years to get where she is today. However, I think she's just realizing that, thanks to a younger man, the baton may be just out of her reach, and that must hurt terribly.
>> Hillary is a thinking man's candidate which excludes more than half the voters in the US -- the half that will read your article with glee and delight.
I disagree. The thinking (wo)man will just as likely realise that Hillary Clinton is a faux Republican in many of her policies. If the American electorate really does desire change, it will probably decide that electing a Democrat who will generally seek to keep the status quo intact is not the best way to go about it.
Senator Clinton has gained respect in the Senate for her hard work and grasp of the issues; however, she seems strident in speech and somewhat secretive. Senator Obama is an excellent and inspiring speaker, obviously highly intelligent, but perhaps lacks the depth of experience desirable in a chief executive. Each of the candidates has weaknesses. Nevertheless, I look forward with hope to the 2008 election. Whoever is elected (Republican or Democrat), he or she is almost certain to be more competent, more intelligent, more honest, and more committed to freedom and the rule of law than the incumbent.
Completely agree with Sunny H. I'm an independent but dedicated voter, and have been jaded by BOTH parties ever since the Republican Right decided that it would be in the nation's best interests to dwell on lewd Presidential peccadillos rather than on running a country.
Whenever Obama speaks, the sheer relief of him makes even an old grump like me want to stand up and roar, "Halleluia!"
new president...fresh blood..wooohoooooo....whether its hillary or obama it doesn't matter to me!!!!!!!
Obama is clearly the most able candidate, if America can leave behind its pre-justices for the next election then they have a great chance to restore some of the credibility and good will lost over the last 25 years. He brings back feelings of RFK. To quote the great man himself, "Few men are willing to brave the disapproval of their fellows, the censure of their colleagues, the wrath of society. Moral courage is a rarer commodity than bravery in battle or great intelligence. Yet it is the one essential, vital, quality for those who seek to change a world which yields most painfully to change." R.F Kennedy, Stay safe Obama,
Someone mentioned female voting records. Personally I think it's sad if people, and women in particular, aren't voting for Hillary in part because she is female. I would if I were in the US as she ticks the rest of the boxes and I care not a jot for charisma as long as she has enough.
Sadly I don't think it because people are 'beyond' classifying people as still believe there is anti-female feeling and much of it comes from woemen themselves. I read posts here and Hillary is sometimes desribed like a headmistress. Is this still the stereotype that powerful women are put against?
Time to move on. I agree: Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, Clinton, and maybe Clinton again? Twenty-eight years of Bushes and Clintons? A whole generation? Why not bring in Jeb for 2016 and make it thirty-six years? Enough already. Let's do Obama/Edwards v. Romney/Giuliani -- or some other permutation of the four.
Obama is the real deal, no doubt about that, and the last time I checked, the USA was a federation not a constitutional monarchy, enough with the Clintons and Bushes. Please stay safe Obama.
Is there so little talent in the USA.
They can only choose their presidents from two families.