Who Can Stop Obama?

Newsweek Web Exclusive

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 01/04/2008 5:05:00 AM

    http://www.newsweek.com/id/82522/output/comments

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 01/04/2008 5:03:33 AM

    http://www.newsweek.com/id/74472
    http://www.newsweek.com/id/71000
    This article recieved the most comments all year How to Beat Hillary Clinton http://www.newsweek.com/id/71000
    http://www.newsweek.com/id/74472, Holy War, was also an article I recieved many comment on. My comments are meant to provide awareness to the voter.

  • Posted By: hopenapree @ 01/04/2008 4:51:32 AM

    I have been excited about this race since I found out who the candidates would be. A woman and a black man running for Office? FANTASTIC! Although I have never been a Hillary fan: I was glad she ran. I find her unemotional, uninspiring, and unbelievable. At the same time- I believe she is a much more passionate woman than she conveys. It is too bad that that she can't get her point across. Perhaps it is due to her having to keep a straight face during her husbands' "loose pants policy". As for Obama: he is exciting! I am tired of complaining about gas prices; health care, and the war overseas. I want a cleaner earth; a more inspiring place to bring up children; an end to the war overseas; a leader who will make me want to follow him. I have a brother who takes offense to the term African Amercan. He is AMERICAN! As a 'white woman' in this country: I ask----are you ready to follow a 'black man'? I sure as hell am.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 01/04/2008 4:47:15 AM

    eddiewhere @ 01/01/2008 8:32:43 PM
    Comment: PoliticalAnalyst Good Analysis, makes sense, however Obama will be the democratic nominee and the next president. All recent polls show that Obama would defeat Guilliani fifty one percent to forty three percent. After Iowa and New Hampshire people will begin to realize how strong the movement behind OBAMA really is. people want peace not war. They know that these problems abroad have to be solved. Obama is in the best position to succeed. The outcome in Iowa will be Obama thrity six per cent , Hillary thirty two percent , Edwards twenty eight percent and the other four percent will be split among the rest of the candidates. What is your prediction political analyst. We will see who is right.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 01/04/2008 4:40:44 AM

    THis was comment three days ago.
    eddiewhere @ 01/01/2008 3:37:52 AM
    Comment: NO ONE LIKES BEING CAUGHT WITH THEIR PANTS DOWN. EXPERIENCE.AND JUDGEMENT. WHAT CAN HILLARY DO THAT OBAMA CANNOT. THIS IS THE QUESTION I HAVE BEEN ASKING MYSELF. I THINK THE WORLD WILL WELCOME OBAMA AND AT LEAST GAVE HIM A FAIR CHANCE. REPUBLICANS WILL SWALLOW THEIR PRIDE AND WORK WITH OBAMA. THEY WILL NEVER DO THAT WITH HILLARY. HILLARY AND EDWARDS ARE GOOD PEOPLE, HOWEVER THEIR VOTING RECORD AND THEIR LACK OF COURAGE HAS LEAD ME TO QUESTION WHETHER THEY HAVE THE RIGHT INSTINCTS AND JUDGEMENT TO BE IN OFFICE. I REALLY THINK THEY WOULD BE MORE EFFECTIVE UNDER AN OBAMA PRESIDENCY. OBAMA WILL NOT TRY AND CONTROL EVERYTHING.
    sANDY, EDWARDS IS DESpERATE. thIS MAN FOLLOWED JOHN KERRY. HE WILL DO AND SAY ANYTHING. EVEN IF HE MEANS IT NOW IT IS TOO LATE. OBAMA AND CLINTON ARE TOO SMART, THEY KNOW THAT WHAT YOU SAY TODAY COULD FINISH YOU TOMORROW. ONLY A CANDIDATE WITH NOTHING TO LOSE WILL SAY WHAT EDWARDS IS SAYING. WHAT HAS HE DONE. BE HONEST. HILLARY IS pROUD THAT SHE WENT AGIANST HER pRINCIpLES TO GIVE BUSH A BLANK CHECK. WHY. IT WAS GOOD FOR WESTERN NEW YORK. HILLARY IS NOT STUpID IF THE WAR HAD NEGATIVE ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES IN BUFFALO, SHE WOULD HAVE VOTED AGAINST IT. TRANSpARENCY IS SOMETHING NIETHER pARTY WANTS. NO ONE LIKE GETTING CAUGHT WITH THEIR pANTS DOWN AND THEN LECTURED ABOUT JUDGEMENT CALL..
    DO YOU THINK BILL WILL VOTE FOR OBAMA OR HUCKABEE IN THE NEXT ELECTION

  • Posted By: isidore @ 01/04/2008 4:37:13 AM

    garbage. geo mcgovern all over again....how few states will he carry !!!

  • Posted By: oversplayer @ 01/04/2008 4:31:45 AM

    Huckabee's victory is worrisome. The last thing we need in the White House is another religious fanatic. Why in the world can't people understand that they should exercise their religion at home and at their places of worship and leave it out of government as our Framers so clearly intended. We consistently express our concern about religious extremists taking over the governments of foreign countries, but we don't seem to share the same concern about our own. I'd like to see a campaign in which religion is never mentioned. Obama has already violated that principle so I cannot support him.

  • Posted By: hopenapree @ 01/04/2008 4:25:31 AM

    I have been excited about this race since I found out who the candidates would be. A woman and a black man running for Office? Fantastic! Although I am not a Hillary fan; I was pleased to see her running. Even though I find her to be unemotional, unexciting, lukewarm and not inspiring as a candidate; I have always admired her intelligence, strength and fortitude. Especially after the way her husband (our former President) totally humiliated her due to his loose pants policy. She is a woman of more passion than she is able to convey to the people. It is unfortunate for her that she cannot get that passion and drive across. Maybe she has spent so many years keeping the straight face that she doesn't know how to relate. As for Obama: He is EXCITING! I have always found him interesting; but he has really 'taken off'. Today was something for the history books. A black man winning the democratic vote in a state predominantly white. Note that I did not use the term African American; as I have a brother who finds that term offensive. He will tell anyone that he is AMERICAN! I find that I think the same of Obama. He transcends bounderies, races, age gaps and genders. In his speech tonight: he used the word hope often. He is right. It is time for everyone to stop complaining about the sorry state of our country and stand up to make a change. I'm tired of paying crazy prices at the gas pumps. I am tired of environmental issues that politicians don't take seriously. I want health care for not only myself; but all Americans. I want Americans to buy our own products(Obama; please help us fix this!). I want to see people of all backgrounds take center stage in this country. That is what America is founded on. The best from all around the world; making the best country ever. At this point--I want hope. I want a change. I want stability. I want the war over, and our troops home. As a 'white woman'; I ask-----are you ready to follow a 'black man'? I am sure as hell am.

  • Posted By: i wnt to win @ 01/04/2008 12:18:35 AM

    You have to wonder why a lot of coserverative people from the other party voted for Obama. if anyone think they did it for change, they need to take the rose covered glasses off.I think the other party would much rather run against Obama than they would aagainst the Clinton's in the gereral election.
    election.

    • Posted By: madeja76 @ 01/04/2008 12:39:14 AM

      Only 3% of the voters in the democratic caucuses were republican. Obama won by a much larger margin. A Hillary candidacy is the only thing at this point that could possibly unite and invigorate the Republican Party. Clinton is running 3rd in Iowa, which means that even an overwhelming number of Democrats do not want Clinton to be POTS.

      • Posted By: doyourhomework @ 01/04/2008 4:10:10 AM

        Not exactly. Obama did win. No, I do not support Senator Obama, but I do respect all of the candidates, well maybe except fo Mr Romney and Mr Gulliani. In the real world of 'change' Mr Romney has excelled, he changes to whatever position will win the seat he is after. Mr Gulliani, sorry read too much, watched too much in my opinion he is a crook and quite lacking in morality. No, I am not going to vote republican, no not this time.
        Senator Obama is a rousing public speaker. I have not listened to all the speeches I could but have them taped for the top three candidates to listen to repeatedly. I am over fifty, I am a woman, and I am conservative. I do my homework though. I know the negatives about Senator Clinton. I also know has a calm maturity that appeals to me. I see a lot of people on here saying Senator Obama is genuine. Really? I am not saying is his not genuine but I certainly would not say that I know that he is because I do not, and neither can anyone on here. I am put off greatly by his lone vote on the victims of sexual abuse bill in Illinois, and yes, I did try and read as much on that bill as I could and I vehemently disagree with him, so did the rest of the senators. I also was greatly disappointed that he chose to not vote in the Iran vote a few months ago. I do not admire his criticism of other's voting when he was not willing to stand the test of casting whatever vote he was going to cast and take the heat and criticism like they did regardless of which way they voted. That was scheming, calculating and to me, sorry to all here, somewhat cowardly. Being on a campaign was just not a good enough reason. Just not. Not all change is good. Yes, we need change badly, but we must know there are consequences to any change, some good some bad. Saying change is easy, but making things change is not. Senator Clinton certainly does know what changes were not easy and what works and does not work. There is NO ONE that can sweep out Washington, there really isn't and if they say they can ....well they are ill informed, or know that what they are saying is to win a campaign, but isn't going to really happen. For all of you that think being a First lady is not experience in and of itself I say you are ridiculous. The essence of First Lady is a job in and of itself, and at the very, very least is a first hand observer of things none of us will ever know or see. There is a great deal to be learned from observation at the very least. You insult all First Ladys and I think that you show your lack of learning from observation by doing so. I will support Senator Clinton. I am careful and cautious but not easily fooled and there is a wealth of information available on many things senators, both state and federal vote on, there is a wealth of information on what they have supported and what causes they have worked endlessly on, it is right at your fingertips folk. Do your homework. Do your research. It matters.

  • Posted By: amylibrant @ 01/04/2008 12:39:55 AM

    I did think. I did read. I paid attention. That is why I'm giving Barack Obama my support. People amaze me in their unwillingness to accept a real person (albeit brilliant and principled) as the leader of this country. Someone who didn't spend their life in country clubs getting hand outs from daddy. Bush spent much of the eighties as a coke head and had several DUI arrests. This was AFTER he was a grown man with children. He throws prayer into a couple of speeches and people think he's moral. Barack may have experimented with drugs as MANY people do in high school and college when they are young and stupid but at least he has the balls to be honest about it. Morality is not about sneaking a cigarette now and then. It's about what you choose to do with your talents, money, mind and how you treat other people. I challenge you to come up with one example in Obama's career when he was "foolish" or "slick". Have you seen him speak? I have several times. I have been a cynic all of my life and consider my bullshit meter to be fairly sensitive. Barack struck me as very sincere in his desire to change our ridiculous government. He not only talks about wanting to help people he has actually done it. If you don't believe me...look it up for yourself! RESEARCH his record, his life, read his books. Oh. I would also like to add that I don't give a *** about Oprah (I assume that is who you were referring to by Ophra). If anything her support improved my opinion of her, not the other way around. Everyone I know who is a Barack supporter was on board way before she came into the picture. The media made a bigger spectacle of her support than what it actually was. See, the reason that Iowa is different is that these candidates have been speaking and calling and mailing and inundating us with their views, differences, similarities, strengths...blah, blah, We are the most INFORMED. I moved to Iowa five years ago. People here take their politics seriously. These are seasoned caucus goers/voters who have seen every trick in the book. Obama's win in Iowa is a testament to his sincerity and Iowans ability to see through THE SAME OLD BULLSHIT from the other candidates that Americans have been swallowing for years. WAKE UP!

    • Posted By: debatenotberate @ 01/04/2008 2:10:28 AM

      I have seen him speak and that is why I think he is slick. He is a lawyer - and a good one. He is trained to tug at the heartstrings and hopes and whatever else it takes to win the minds of the jury - in this case the voters. He has to seem sincere or he won't win the case. That does not make him a leader.

      I have read all of his books and many articles and position papers. Motherhood and apple pie, good ideas, but backed by little substance or action. I have no doubt that he is a moral man - but every flaw he has will be picked apart by the Republican machine. Senator Clinton - just a imperfect as Senator Obama - has the advantage of already having had her life examined, doors opened, and life laid bare...and she survived it. Why don't a lot of people "like" her? She is one tough lady and that is not what a "lady" should be. Senator Edwards also has hardball experience - and good ideas - and leadership ability (knowing that change comes slowly and steadily if it is to be sustained) and he is another good choice. Nothing against Iowa and Iowans but get over yourselves - there are fewer than 3 million people in Iowa and less than 200,000 showed up to caucus - this is not significant in any measure making up about 0.06% (yes 6 100ths of one percent) of the US population . There are 29 states and one TERRITORY (Puerto Rico) larger than Iowa. There are 17 metropolitan areas larger than Iowa. As for Iowans being the most informed - I call bullshit on that one - being innundated is not being informed - informed people are those who look past the in-your-face emotional and personal element and actually research and weigh facts and data - there are informed people everywhere - there are a lot of emotional people in Iowa, and that will end in about 2 weeks.

      The one thing I can truly hope for is that Mr. Huckabee actually wins the Republican nomination - there isn't a single Democratic candidate who wouldn't crush him.

      • Posted By: knitster @ 01/04/2008 4:03:02 AM

        amylibrant is right. There is a difference between being inundated and informed, and Iowans are informed. If you are not in Iowa to experience the system you have no idea what you are talking about. Iowans are far from emotional, stoic is more like it! Have to be, to survive the 4 years of pre-caucus campaigning! Not to mention the winters!

  • Posted By: JP from HB @ 01/04/2008 2:33:56 AM

    That is pure craziness- Obama simply won a tiny state with very few delegates. Big states like CA and NY do nnot care what a bunch of farmers in Iowa care about. Bill Clinton lost Iowa and NH and still won the nomination. Alter is nuts spinning this little caucus into a nomination for obama. This is not 2004 and the surprise kerry win-Hillary has 100 million dollars to spend-she didn't need an Iowa win to fundraise

    • Posted By: knitster @ 01/04/2008 3:55:39 AM

      Iowans don't care how they do it in NY or CA. We at least know that the majority of Iowans are NOT farmers. Even so, you have to be very smart and work very hard to be a successful farmer, so don't knock what you don't know. It's easy to post a comment here, but will you vote in YOUR primary? Iowans actually have to stand up and be counted at their caucus, and the fact that so many did after working all day DOES matter in that it indicates how much real change is wanted by average Americans.

  • Posted By: steve41602 @ 01/03/2008 11:17:23 PM

    Oh, come on now. Thirty eight percent of less than 200K people (76K) in a state with what? Three electoral votes? Let's get real here. Iowa is only the first, not the most important, or strategic or even meaningful.

    • Posted By: knitster @ 01/04/2008 3:42:53 AM

      Iowa had 3 million residents, and the majority live in metropolitan areas. And 5 electoral votes. Get your fact s right.

    • Posted By: independentvoter @ 01/03/2008 11:37:57 PM

      You are correct, makes me wonder why the candidates spent so much money there. Makes me also wonder what they would do with taxpayer money if elected if they spend so freely for such a small return.

  • Posted By: phd2k1 @ 01/04/2008 3:41:07 AM

    I have personally gone to see many of the candidates, including Hillary Clinton, and I must say that Iowa chose the right person in Barack Obama. He can unite and energize people in a way that John Kerry was never able to do, and in a way that Hillary or Edwards will never be able to do. Obama won Iowa because Democrats, Independents, and Republicans all rallied around him. The actual numbers show that he got only 31% of the democrats' votes compared to 30% for Hillary. The reason he won is because of the non-Democrats. OBAMA is a uniter and I am proud to support him!

  • Posted By: reaganrepub @ 01/03/2008 11:46:09 PM

    I dont have a problem with Obama but he's not experienced enough to be the President. Political correctness and fell goodness aside, don't count Billary out yet! Iowa has what, 5 electoral votes?

    • Posted By: knitster @ 01/04/2008 3:38:55 AM

      Iowa's electoral votes are not the issue. Iowans spent a lot of time paying real attention to the candidates and then actually showed up to make their choice. What happened in Iowa is not just slick ads, this is real one on one campaigning.

  • Posted By: Lone Twister @ 01/03/2008 11:48:21 PM

    Last nigth I watched this amazing documentary about Andrew Jackson.. Anyone interested in the dynamics of what os happening in politics now owes it to themselves to see, just to see what was acheived in 1828 against the status quo. Whne the energy vecors line uo, nothin can withstand the force unleashed. Are we in 1828 again? Watch and learn

    • Posted By: knitster @ 01/04/2008 3:36:37 AM

      You are totally right, that is what happened for Obama last night and will continue to happen throughout the country.

  • Posted By: cbjjbam @ 01/04/2008 12:04:09 AM

    Come on...Remember who won the last Iowa Caucus, let's hope history repeats itself and the landscape changes. Why is IOWA so big time? The people are not like the majority of the US. God help us if all it takes is Ophra to influence so many people (women). Ladies think, read, and pay attention. Just because Obama says it is time for change it isn't enough. Let us hear what the change will be. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know we need a change. Yet all we are doing is repeating the same old patterns which include this silly caucus routine.

    • Posted By: knitster @ 01/04/2008 3:33:56 AM

      If Iowans are not like the majority of the U.S. then I'm glad I live in Iowa! Iowans work hard and take responsibility seriously. The turnout was incredible after people worked all day. Obama has as many male supporters as women, old people young people, middle aged people and pepole of all races. I did not stand up for Obama tonight at my caucus, but I say what happened and it is for real.

  • Posted By: debatenotberate @ 01/04/2008 12:06:00 AM

    How incredibly stupid. Iowa is Iowa. It has little to do with national reality or national thinking. Add New Hampshire and South Carolina to the mix and well, we still have nothing. After Tsunami Tuesday, or whatever name the pundits give the really significant political pre-event of the year we can talk about trends or victory or unstoppability. I am a dedicated life long democrat - I will never vote for a Republican - ever. But if Mr. Obama is nominated I won't be voting for a Democrat for President. He is young, foolish, slick, and most of all I don't trust him. One (I admit strange) reason for this - he was a closet smoker which says to me that no matter how much information he is given he will do what he satisfies him - facts be damned. Sound like someone we have in office now? Revolution? Give me a break. The man is still a politician - he'll do what is best for Mr. Obama as soon as he has the chance. We need leadership, because this country is in a deep, deep hole. Mr. Obama is not a leader - but he is a good propagandist and illusionist.. Want another George Bush? If so elect Mr. Obama - slacker, former substance abuser, and smarmy beyond compare. Want a leader - someone tough, proven, able to form and execute a strategy? Select Senator Clinton or Senator Edwards - they have what it takes. Momentum from Iowa doesn't mean much - it's a flat place, with flat people, and an almost flat vote that will be forgotten in 2 weeks. Guess what? People are actually catching on to that and talking openly about it - even Iowans. Maybe as a whole we're smarter than the press gives us credit for being.

    • Posted By: knitster @ 01/04/2008 3:30:57 AM

      Damn right Iowa is Iowa, and thank God for that! It is a great place to live, and tonight showed how seriously this election was taken by it's citizens. Obama won because he was seen and talked with in person by people who turned in masses. This is a total repudiation of the present administration and of the Republican party. Hilary came in third because she does not represnet the change that is needed and desired by the majority.

    • Posted By: nik04 @ 01/04/2008 12:17:01 AM

      debate....don't berate?

      • Posted By: tremendousbrunette @ 01/04/2008 2:27:13 AM

        "Maybe as a whole we're smarter than the press gives us credit for being." Apparently not. "Closet smoker"? Where was this closet? It was never a secret.

        • Posted By: debatenotberate @ 01/04/2008 2:49:22 AM

          Not a secret? Is that why Michelle Obama threatened to "out" him if he didn't quit? If my facts are wrong I apologize - but my reasoning still stands - I would never trust a smoker to do the right thing from a group standpoint, I would never trust them to make good decisions. I won't hire them and I certainly don't want someone showing the "sneaky" behavior (his wife's term I believe) leading the country. If given overwhelming facts and data that something is harmful and you still do it that says something about judgement. That easy. The point that we may be smarter than the press gives us credit for being is something that is yet to be proven - only time will tell if we reject hype and spin and instead allow the country as a whole (and not the hole in the middle of the country) to form the overall decision.

          • Posted By: mindy_r @ 01/04/2008 3:29:13 AM

            You won't hire them? Wow! I hope a smoker reads this and gets to interview with your company someday. They would sue your ass off and win! I believe this is called "discrimination" in legal terms.

            Do you drink? Do you ever speed? What is your diet like? Do you drink sodas? Do you ever cross the street without a walk signal? Do you ever run a red light?

            Hmm, maybe you are doing some of the things that the overwhelming facts say are bad for you too.

            You come across as extremely judgmental and biased. Your reasoning is ridiculous.

            Issues I can "debate" but your assanine reasoning I must "berate".

            And, no, I am not a smoker.

      • Posted By: debatenotberate @ 01/04/2008 2:11:35 AM

        Yes, a debate takes two sides. I expressed mine and gave my reasons - Mr. Obama is a lousy candidate

    • Posted By: mindy_r @ 01/04/2008 3:19:13 AM

      I find it ironic that your reasons for disliking him are because he is a closet smoker? Was I asleep when that became illegal? Former substance abuser? I would be interested in knowing your age, bracket because going forward you will be hard pressed to find any candidate that does not have a "history". It is time to accept that everyone has flaws - and at least he as admitted them. The days of the "whitewashed" image of president are over because you can no longer hide things from the media. Think about yourself (or your children) - could any of you measure up to the standards you seem to want in a President? I don't know anyone who could. Let's face it - we all have a history and things we have done in the past that we aren't exceptionally proud of.

      I have been a Republican voter for 18 years and this will be the first election I will not vote Republican. You can't fake the enthusiasm and authenticity of Obama's speech tonight. Being a salesperson I have a very good bullshit meter (which, by the way, went off the charts with Hillary's emotionless speech). I truly believe he is what this country needs right now. Do I think it will be easy? No. Do I think he will achieve everything he wants to? Of course not. BUT, I do believe he believes what he is saying and will at least TRY to stick to the ideals he has set forth. That is more than I can say for any of the other candidates or recent presidents.

      Hillary felt she had won the election before it even started and while I definitely would support a woman president, I cannot support someone who seems so manufactured. She was bought and sold before she even got there.

      In closing, I am a Texan, and I too am ashamed that the President of the United States is from Texas. It's time to close this era of presidency and move on to someone different with a new vision - not the same old manufactured BS that has been the standard in both parties.

  • Posted By: JBhypno @ 01/04/2008 12:15:08 AM

    The real problem with Iowa is that Republicans can vote in the Democratic caucus. That skews the results. I would like to see the results without Republican influence. I think the primary results will give us a better indication on who we want as our next president. May it be Hillary!!!

    • Posted By: knitster @ 01/04/2008 3:26:38 AM

      Those republicans are now registered Democrats. I was there, the results are very real.

  • Posted By: i wnt to win @ 01/04/2008 12:27:48 AM

    Doesn't anyone think it's strange that a lot of conservertive Republicans in Iowa caucused for Obama. Does anyone really think they did it because they want change? I think the Repulican party would much rather face Obama in the general election.

    • Posted By: knitster @ 01/04/2008 3:25:08 AM

      Everyone who caucused wants change. If they used to be conservative Republicans they are now registered Democrats. The Obama win was not some conspiracy, it was very real.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse