Clinton stronger, Giuliani still strong

Mentioned in the Gallup Poll, but unmentioned in the article:

1) Clinton beats Obama by a huge 56-37% margin in a head on head matchup.
2) Republican Rudi Giuliani has a much higher "favorable" rating than any Democrat: "Clinton (50%)... Obama (50%), Edwards (49%), and Gore (49%) .... Meanwhile, Giuliani remains more popular than any of the leading Democrats with a solid 61% favorable rating."

A poll on the 2008 election in the spring of 2007? Wake me up when it's 2008. Can't wait to hear all the partisan hacks jumping up & down on this one like it actually matters.

USA is not ready in present time and for that matter in near future ready yet for woman leader
most powerful nation on Earth.
My vote is for Guliani.He showed him self as leader durring 911/2001/ crisess and I do belive
he would be strong person in WH.
Sincerely
JR

Guiliani is a cross-dresser and unfit for the presidency. He'll never make it past the GOP primaries.

This is my slogan for 2008:

Anybody but Hillary!

Giuliani will not catch the extremely important Christian right vote. He cannot campaign using the mantra of family values: three marriages, accusations of infidelity, his wife also had three marriages, one of them kept secret for who knows what reasons. I have lived in NYC all of my life and I can tell anyone that even though he was popular at one time his ratings were not as good as many think they were at the end of his mandate. What kind of leadership is the one that people refer to when they talk about 911? As far as I remember all he did was to show compassion and any mayor at the time would have done the same thing. As Al Sharpton said (and I am not a supporter of him AT ALL): "Even Bozo the Clown would have done well with people after 911" Giuliani has a lot of explaining to do in relation to why NYC emergency communications were located in the World Trade Center when we all knew it was major target for terrorists after he first bombing in the early 1990s.

people still vote? maybe it's just the oler genereations, no one i know wants anything to do with furthering the government, can't well all just not vote and have all the politicians go away when they see no one wants them.

Josef, just because YOU aren't ready for a woman leader doesn't mean the rest of us aren't ready.

We are ready.

The country doesn't need someone who was only there in a crisis. We must look at the whole picture instead of little soundbytes of what someone has done. Clinton has proven herself over and over again that she has the best interest of the people of the US as her basis for making decisions. It's time for a change. And as for the US not ready for a female leader, that is only a sexist viewpoint to disregard her chances.

Why is there no mention of Ron Paul? Why isn't he listed with the other Republican candidates?

OMG! This matters right now? We are a year and a half away from the election. Do we really need a poll today?

Write in for Ross Perot.....

I think hillary clinton has the brain and common sense to be a president of the most powerfull country in the world. I think Giullani is more interested establishing a money maker business than any other else. His conduct during 9-11 in Nyc was a part of his job and is not that spectacular . Ask the fightfireters.

I wonder if Rudy is going to dress up as a woman again when he starts making a push to get the female Wingnut vote?

Rudy is going to be exposed BIGTIME for playing that phony 9/11 hero card.

I can already see the Wingnuts jumping on the Hollywood Liberal, b-list actor Fast Freddy Thompson bandwagon in the coming weeks.

"USA is not ready in present time and for that matter in near future ready yet for woman leader
most powerful nation on Earth.
My vote is for Guliani.He showed him self as leader durring 911/2001/ crisess and I do belive
he would be strong person in WH.
Sincerely
JR"

Yeah sure, he was running on the streets since he didnt have a place to sit and lead on 9/11. Dont just be impressed by someone walking infront of a camera.

That is all he did, nothing more...

An incredible showing for Hillary Clinton, whom I have supported for many years.

Bravo Hillary!

I cant believe no one is talking about the congressman from texas Ron Paul, he is clearly the winnner in MSNBC's Poll Online. And the trib isnt even listing him in the republicans to watch section. Clearly this man Ron Paul is the best thing for this country.

Dr. Paul's consistent voting record prompted one Congressman to comment that "Ron Paul personifies the Founding Fathers' ideal of the citizen-statesman. He makes it clear that his principles will never be compromised, and they never are." Another Congresswoman added that "There are few people in public life who, through thick and thin, rain or shine, stick to their principles. Ron Paul is one of those few."

Wake up. Rudy was a disaster as Mayor of NYC. On Sept 10, 2001 he was villified (look it up). The dope put the emergency response center in the World Trade Center--oops, didnt that get blown up before?? We suffered through his infidelities and mood swings...The guy was married to his second cousin for 10 years! But thats ok, as long as he is'nt a woman.....

What my 2008 Presidential Candidate The Energizer
Bunny wasn't included in any of these polls?...
And all of her drumming up support for her own
important agend now less! Write in The Energizer
Bunny if you want a President who will just
keep on going and going until she gets things
done not like these do nothing Republicans and
Democrat Losers! Vote For The Bunny in 2008!

I think Hillary Clinton is very qualified for the job of President of the United States, the most powerful nation on Earth. Regardless of gender, race, or political party, she is the most qualified. My vote is for Hillary Rodham Clinton!!!!!

Guiliani a Hero? He did nothing more than what a janitorial supervisor would do. He sat around a d watched people clean up. Handed out teddy bears. Hugged people.

Teddy bears and hugs won't bring my friends home from Iraq. It won't make headway on global warming, and it sure as hell won't fix the damage the Bush administration will leave behind.

Right wing conservatives have had their time, and they've done enough damage with their big gas guzzling SUVs and Their even bigger Egos. Move over and let someone who *thinks* do some good.

I think that it is time for a woman to take the oval office. and I feel that we finally have someone that has shown strength and courage in the face of personal attacks and she has shown great confidence and we have had men from the begining and I think we should give a woman a chance to show that women can do anything that we put our mines to you go Hillary. I have spoken with men and women on the issue of a woman becoming president with an overwhelming amount of women say go Hillary Clinton.

I like Guiliani a bit but in reality he has not shown that much talent-except for going after the Mafia and clening up Times Square. Yes he looked good in New York after 911 with Manhattan as an amazing backgound but he was out in the City mainly because he put his command headquarters BACK into the World Trade center after it had been bombed once. Smart move.

His crack about : beware the Democrats against Terror is crazy. I recall that New York was attacked when there were Republican Governors, Senators and Mayors "protecting" New York. It makes no difference either way.

I do like the Rudy is basically pro choice. get God OUT of the Government.

I am an Independent and right now leaning towards Clinton but I Love Biden and think he was actually be the best out of all of them. He really knows the world and maybe could be Clinton's Secretary of State. We really need a talented Diplomat right now.

It is about time, this powerfull country on this planet showed some leadership. Compare the qualifications, IQ and other achievements of the person running for the president. Considering all these factors, only one candidate stands out and that is Hillary. Secondly, It is about time, we elect intelligent woman as president. Other countries did i.e. Britain, Isreal, India, Bangladesh, Ceylon (SriLanka), Phylippines etc., etc.,

and then theres ron paul who the media cover ups but won the debate according to the poll on msnbc....

and then theres ron paul who the media cover ups but won the debate according to the poll on msnbc....

I like Obama's chances, forget abt all these rotten politicains..he is the best for now..new face & perspective towards new america.

My vote is: anyone but another dishonest old white guy! Whats up with these grizzled old white guy politicians always turning out as greedy sleezeballs? Year after year we keep re-electing them like lemmings.

"Oh well, maybe THIS election will be different!" ... But it never is.

Sincerly,
Tom (gringo loco)

:)

Who ever conducted this poll obviously skewed it in favor of the "chosen". Obama is favored by the people and the people's voice will be heard.

Just a note on Giuliani, for those who just know him from one day.

The reason you saw him, out on the streets on 9-11, was that against the advice of security experts,
he chose to build the NYC Emergency Management center, IN the World Trade Center... this after it was attacked in '93.
In other words, he had no place to go, so he was out on the streets.
He was advised to put it in Brooklyn. He didn't.
Where is it now... in Brooklyn.

Giuliani told NYers, that the air-quality was fine, and not to be worried. Of course, later, it was found out he lied.

As for his *being tough on crime,* which everyone highlights, crime in the whole country dropped in the 90s. If he wasn't the Mayor of America, then the drop in crime in NYC, was just a social thing, rather than anything Giulian did. Ummm, he did have Bernie Karick as Police Commish, and we all know how he's doing now.

Giuliani would be a terrible President. If he's the best the GOP can offer, it may be time to rebuild the Party.

It is a sunning show of strength that Hillary continues to lead Obama by such a healthy margin considering the glowing publicity he has been generating since late last year. Her performance in the debate was stellar – she looked and acted presidential, unlike Obama who did not perform well.

In addition to the USA Today/Gallup poll noted in the article, a new CNN poll also shows Hillary increasing her lead to 15%. State polls in New Hampshire and California released yesterday also show Hillary with a large and increasing lead over Obama.

I’d be bit nervous if I were Obama – when will all the hype finally show up in the polls? And what’s going to happen when the infatuation wears off as it inevitably will?

I think the value of this premature polling is going to be negative result for those in such a scurry to rise to the top this early. Instead of trying to really formulate a winning strategy, in that the needs of this country are to be met, I believe the energies are more geared into the self & special interest that are the driving force. This will not pan out, in fact, eventually it will turn the tides to the deserving, and needed winner in 08. America must read between the lines, and select the right candidate.

Giuliani may be the best of an undistinguished Republican lot, but I as an independent won't vote for him or any other Republican in '08. Clinton would be my first pick, but I do like Biden also. Obama is good, but would be better as a VP this time around. Yes, Biden could be a fabulous secretary of state.

Hillary Rodman Clinton is well qualified,able and indeed the best cadidate to be president of this country at this time.

Whoo hooo! Hillary's people have been working over time posting to this article. The rest of us should take the postings with a grain of salt.

No serious political faction in this country is against a woman president. That post was probably from a Hillary supporter trying to get the sympathy vote. She doesn't need our sympathy. She's an accomplished, skilled leader. Vote for a woman who is qualified to be president, and if you think it's Hillary, go for it.

The collection of posts about Guiliani all include the same talking points. If you agree with them, great, but just because Hillary has people ready to flood the posts for her, doesn't mean that this is a representative sampling of opinion.

I don't know whether I like Giuliani for president. However, his personal life is his personal life. We don't need a repeat of the abuse that President Clinton was subjected to.

If you think that anyone can do the job that Giuliani did in a crisis, just look at the Mayor of New Orleans. Needless to say, he's not running for President.

Meanwhile, look at all of Rudy's years in office, not just a few days. He did what too many New Yorkers said couldn't be done- he made the city livable again, a safe and clean place for hard-working law-abiding families of all colors, classes and sizes. In doing so, he angered a lot of New York's entrenched powers that had caused the city's decline, but that's the consequence of Questioning Authority and getting things done.

I'm so tired of hearing about what a great president Giuliani would make because "he was such a great leader during 9/11". Exactly what did he do that any other large city mayor wouldn't have done? Does anyone remember how we all thought that Bush was a "great leader" after 9/11? How's THAT working out? Here's the good news about whoever wins in 2008 - we've GOTTA be better off than we are now (unless Gingrich wins....gulp).

Who cares what "Democratic Leaning Independants" think? They cannot vote in the primaries and including them in the polls makes these numbers irrelevant.

For some reason everytime I think of Clinton in office Ithink of the movie Black Sheep. Pure politics and not another care. Look what Guiliani has done for NY, cleaned it up, handled 911 very well, and is more there for the people not the cause!

Obama is the darling of the mass media and extreme leftwing. While one cannot read a newspaper, magazine or website without running into an article puffing up and spinning greatness about Obama, the truth is most of America is lethargic to Obama. The more America finds out about Obama, the more they realize Obama makes Senator Edward Kennedy look like a moderate rightwing Republican.

Where is your link to Ron Paul in "Republicans to watch?"

I am under the impression that the Democrats are mostly coward wimps, winers, dishonest, openly and proudly decadent demagogues...but maybe it's just me...

I cant believe you people are still voting for the popular political platforms. They are popular because they spend the most money to appear on every television (brainwashing box). Rudolph Giuliani for president, are you kidding me?!?! That guy showed just how fake he is when he tried to fear monger everyone into voting for him by saying "if the democrats take control, the country will be hit by another 9/11"... I think what that means is if democrats take control (meaning he loses), he will orchestrate a new terrorist attack because hes a scumbag. Hilary Clinton is an attendee of Bilderberger group meetings, and probably a member of the Tri-Lateral commission, she will play ball for the United Nations, not for the American republic. But go ahead, idolize that shimmering, smiling face you see glowing on your television, and pretend you know that voting for a gimp is going to correct the mistakes of the Bush administration... With the popular candidates proposed, and people turning up in masse to vote for them, I would say the country is destined to fall.

Giuliani is the man we need for US President. He is a man of action, extremely intelligent, and not a conventional politician. He will get things done. Maybe not in a popular way, but he will turn out to be one of the best presidents of our time.
He dramatically improved the condition of New York City in many respects. And some believe NYC is more difficult to govern than some US states. Tourists avoided NYC before he took office. I will vote for him based on this alone.

Yeesh, can't we clone Lincoln or something. After Bush and Bush baby, election of Hillary would just spell end of democracy in America. I mean we have essentially gone back to old days of royal families and lines of succession. What's the deal with that? Does anybody care about who is leading the country, or, just being on the winning team?

I will vote for Ron Paul in 08'. No, it's not too early to talk about this. You have to get your candidate into the PRIMARIES which is at best, 5-6 months away. Then you will have just a few choices, until you are whittled down to what the MSM wants you to vote for (with evidence right now of spin and censorship against Gravel and Paul). I was a left leaning centrist until I heard of Ron Paul a few months ago. I'll never look back. There is no left and right, there is the Constitution. Read it.

Hillary for 08 President all the way!

November 2008 is a ways away.

Guliani's accomplishments go far beyond 911. He took a corrupt gov similar to Cook County, and made it efficient and accountable once again. He taught NY pols how to live w/in their financial means and turned the city around to be livable and safe. His record speaks for itself. I like both Guliani and CLinton. They both seem to get it. Barack is just another card carrying member of the Cook County Corruption Machine, and I am glad that people are starting to see him for what he is. A phony.

It is a very, very long road from now to Nov 2008. Polls show us who is where now but show very little about who will be where then. Let's hope we can interest 85% of the electorate the way France just did.

Who cares what "Democratic Leaning Independants" think? They cannot vote in the primaries and including them in the polls makes these numbers irrelevant.

Posted by: Sam | May 8, 2007 2:18:22 PM

They can in Illinois. You can take whatever ballot you want in the primary.

It has NOTHING to do with race or sex. If Hillary had ideas that could be paid for, I would vote for her. Let’s face the facts. Hillary has great ideas, but who is going to pay for them??? I have nothing more to give. Or great nation was built off of free markets and low government involvement. When did it become OK for us to be a socialist nation? That is what Hillary wants.

At least John McCain had the guts to stand up and say he would dust off the veto pen. I believe he said something to the effect of “each one must justify their existence each year” when speaking about government programs. That is the type of person we need in our government.

I will be forced to choose the lesser of two evils next November. I think we really need to establish a 3rd party so our candidates will stop lying to try and get the support of the middle. Instead of “leaning” towards the middle, why not have a party that is in the middle?

The polls may be accurate. This country has been wishing for a new president for 4 years; it has been on our collective mind. Hillary can well win the nomination AND the presidency. Rudy can surely win his party's nomination. Just look at the Rep field: 9 guys who sound exactly like Rupert Murdoch's daily talking points and one guy who may actually be able to think for himself. The religious right is irrelevant by itself; it needs "business conservatives" in coalition to have any clout at all.

_ABC

"And some believe NYC is more difficult to govern than some US states."

Giuliani was not the "governor", he was the mayor and New York City is not a state in our union (its a police state). Furthermore he helped to cover up the 9/11 investigation by quickly ordering all the WTC rubble to be removed and sent to an inaccessible dump site. The NYC firefighters wont tell you how much of a "respectable hero" Giuliani is, they will tell you how they are disillusioned from how they could have ever sought leadership in that man.

Vote Giuliani for Monarch of the Sewer Rat Republic!

Seems to me that personalities are far too prevalent in these blogs. We, as Americans, now need to focus on who can do the job and get America back on her feet. We have digressed far too much over the years. Bush has made a mess of it and we virtually have no "friends" internationally after his handling of Iraq, etc. The current administration wants to concentrate on anything to keep our minds off what the administration is PAID to do, that is look after America and Americans.... Doesn't seem to be something everyone is interested in........ No matter who is selected, politics should take a back seat to the advancement and well being of America. If the pharmaceutical companies, Oil companies, Big business, etc. are going to be able to dictate to our lawmakers what they want and have us pay for it, we need to consider how that makes us all look..... Not just the politicians, but, the people who put them there and let them stay in spite of the embarassment they cause us as Americans.

"And some believe NYC is more difficult to govern than some US states."

Giuliani was not the "governor", he was the mayor and New York City is not a state in our union (its a police state). Furthermore he helped to cover up the 9/11 investigation by quickly ordering all the WTC rubble to be removed and sent to an inaccessible dump site. The NYC firefighters wont tell you how much of a "respectable hero" Giuliani is, they will tell you how they are disillusioned from how they could have ever sought leadership in that man.

Vote Giuliani for Monarch of the Sewer Rat Republic!

"And some believe NYC is more difficult to govern than some US states."

Giuliani was not the "governor", he was the mayor and New York City is not a state in our union (its a police state). Furthermore he helped to cover up the 9/11 investigation by quickly ordering all the WTC rubble to be removed and sent to an inaccessible dump site. The NYC firefighters wont tell you how much of a "respectable hero" Giuliani is, they will tell you how they are disillusioned from how they could have ever sought leadership in that man.

Vote Giuliani for Monarch of the Sewer Rat Republic!

Bold Prediction:

As Republicans begin dropping out they will each back Mitt Romney. Mitt Romney will start airing attack ads against Guiliani and the religious fanantics that now control the Republican party will do everything in their power to keep Guiliani from being the nominee. Ultimately Romney becomes the nominee.

After the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries, Al Gore anounces he will run and immidiatly becomes the front runner. Most democrats still beck Hillary as they drop out but Gore takes the nomination.

Rudy Guiliani will endorse Al Gore, just like he endorsed Mario Cuomo in 1994. Al Gore wins in 2008.

LABO,
ARE YOU SURE YOU ARE NOT ANN COULTER IN DISGUISE. DEMOCRATS ARE NOT SYNONOMOUS WITH DECADENT. LOOK AT THE LAST 8 YEARS OF THIS PRESIDENCY IF YOU WANT AN EXAMPLE OF THIS.

What about Brownback? He's got more moral character than any candidate so far. . . Shouldn't that be our #1 concern?

Come on, if this country wants REAL change they need to start looking into and supporting Ron Paul.

Hillary Clinton?, this is not a gender thing, but seriously how could any one vote for her. We need to get rid of the same ruling families that have been in power for close to the past 20 years. No more Bush's or Clintons; or any other media endorsed canidate, because NOTHING will change and we will continue down this road of tyranny.

Support Ron Paul; a True American that stands for Real American Values and wants whats best for this countries peoples.

For those of you who think democracy is a joke, vote for Hilary Clinton...

For those of you who think our republic is a joke, vote for Giuliani...

For those of you who take this country seriously, vote for Ron Paul 2008.

Spot on Jon!

Also, if he would have upgraded communications services post '93, he could have saved hundreds of lives on 9/11.

Empty suit with a megaphone.

Not to mention he's actually a Democrat. Won't fly with the RR.

"I will vote for Ron Paul in 08'. No, it's not too early to talk about this. You have to get your candidate into the PRIMARIES which is at best, 5-6 months away. Then you will have just a few choices, until you are whittled down to what the MSM wants you to vote for (with evidence right now of spin and censorship against Gravel and Paul). I was a left leaning centrist until I heard of Ron Paul a few months ago. I'll never look back. There is no left and right, there is the Constitution. Read it."
Posted by: Cherylp | May 8, 2007 2:44:59 PM

First off, I am a true Progressive, but I found Ron Paul to be the only GOP candidate bearable to listen to, and probably the only politician of either party in the Bush II/ Terrorism era who has anything to say beyond cliches and non-sequiters. The MSM should pay more attention to him; he has undoubtedly generated significant buzz from his impressive and candid debate performance.

With that said, Mike Gravel is no Ron Paul. More like your crazy Uncle Dale. He was rambling, incoherent, and possibly senile, as as well as lacking the necessary experience to be president (a Senator for president is bad enough, but one who retired nearly 30 years ago and was the Senator from Alaska, come on). His candidacy is NOT a serious one, and does nothing to help move the conversation in the interesting directions that outside insurgent (sorry for the wording) candidates sometimes can (read: H Ross Perot, Pat Buchananan, the unfortunate candidacy of Ralph Nader...).

Ron Paul is the GOP equivalent of Dennis Kucinich, not Mike Gravel. Both men are far to the extremes of the country and their party. Yet both speak with a non-pandering candor that refuses to acquiesce to "conventional wisdom" when they believe it wrong. The two are most likely the most principled of all the candidates. I would love to see those two debate each other, and certainly hope that each will stick with the race for awhile.

But we need to be specific here. Mike Gravel, Tom Tancredo (and the other two flat-earthers who deny evolution... that automatically disqualifies someone from being fit to lead a great nation in the 21st century), Tommy Thompson (worst debate performance of anyone, even Mr. Gravel) and Duncan Hunter are not serious candidates. They are also not "insurgents" designed to move the conversation. They are simply old white men looking for one last mountain to climb, and are bereft of any new ideas whatsoever (again, the only GOP candidate who uttered a coherent and intellectually honest sentence was Ron Paul).

Paul and Kucinich on the other hand, though extremely unlikely to be president, DO serve the legitimate purpose of giving a voice to the many who are totally appalled at what has become of this country and its democracy. Don't insult Ron Paul by lumping him in with Mike Gravel and Tom Tancredo. He is a breath of fresh air, and the only politician, along with Kucinich and interestingly John Edwards, of whom I've never been much of a fan, who is willing to lay out sacrifices and speak to the true costs of what America's current obligations will mean to future generations. In short, they are the only candidates from whom one can expect to hear truth. Unfortunately, I believe this candor will disqualify them from winning the nomination. I do hope I'm wrong.

I find it bizarre how the media tries to nudge us in certain directions towards certain candidates but not in others. Isn't it the job of the media to lay out all of the options in detail and let us decide?

Instead we are given these glam pieces about Obama and Giuliani and Clinton. And Ron Paul is completely left off the Republican option list...? That's just unprofessional and rude, regardless of what you think of him.

This is exactly why the mainstream media is losing it's following, and everyone will be turning to bloggers to find out what the real story is. That's the only place real journalism exists anymore. ABC News is now actually deleting people's comments that ask why Ron Paul has been excluded. When people then ask about the deletions, those inquiries are also deleted! Unbelievable and pathetic.

My hope is that we will see some basic fairness in the future. But I'm not altogether optimistic about that...

Why then do so few New Yorkers support Guiliani? And far fewer black New Yorkers? What do the people who've seen him govern know that the rest of the US doesn't?

What about Brownback? He's got more moral character than any candidate so far. . . Shouldn't that be our #1 concern?

Posted by: Charlie | May 8, 2007 3:33:32 PM

No, competence should be our #1 concern.

I don't bash the other Candidates, and say Dr. Ron Paul is the best choice, I simply state, he is closest to what the US is SUPPOSED to be. For that reason alone, he is my choice. I don't need to agree with every single thing he has an opinion on... Because I don't think he is lying about his convictions just to get your votes. I can agree to disagree on the little stuff, but lets take care of the truly important stuff NOW. Research him. See if you like him. His record is clear.

I'm happy that someone has finally come along to take a stand, like Howard Dean looked a while back, before he was character assasinated by the Media. I just hope somehow that doesn't happen to Paul as well, or worse.

This truly is trans-partisan. You don't have to agree with him on every single issue, that's what your Reps in Congress are supposed to do, so no one person/branch has so much power. Bring balance back to our country, Ron Paul is someone who any logical American can find some kernel of truth in, and that can make you happy, and your children happy. And yes, I know it's spelled happiness.

For those that say it's too early... Wake up, feel confident about our future, no need for negative stuff.

I really hope more people look at Kucinich and Ron Paul. Ron's about the only real Republican left. I don't want Hillary at all, we need to stop getting people in office with the same last name over and over, look what's happened before with the clinton's and bush's. Guiliani, what a joke. Saw him on youtube dressed like a woman, talking to trump, which, after eating, is probably the worst thing you can watch haha!

I know, personal attacks, but go look at their policies. The democrats are republicans, and vice versa!

Get these bought and paid for politicians outta here, and get back to taking care of our own damn country. Do you know what $450+ billion could have done for the US, instead of flinging it into the desert?

-JJ

Bryan, I didn't lump Gravel with Paul in terms of choices to vote for, I just stated them as examples of candidates with virtually no media exposure. I stated quite clearly who I would vote for. I like Dennis Kucinich too, but that's just me. Ron Paul would have a chance, if everyone stopped saying "he has no chance, but I agree with his policies/stands". Don't parrot what the media tells you to think. Write him in if you have to (does that even work anymore with these new fangled electronic cheating machines?). If the media won't spread his name, people who believe in him should. Tell your friends. Your family. I rarely post anything online, but the internet is the only sane source of information left.

Who's winning and who will win?
It's all based on whimsy.
So, read about a whimsical look at this season's campaigning. A view you probably have yet to hear.
http://www.50centsaday.net

hint: the winner is not Clinton, Obama, or Giuliani.
-walt

I was excited about Giuliani and then he started playing the fear card first thing out of the gate.
That is the kind of stuff we have been hearing from Bush and Cheney for four years and is one of the reasons that no one wants to support them now.

Americans deserve better than this kind of sleazy politics.

What about Ron Paul? Go see some videos of him on youtube and google video. Every american politician should have his mindset, but its unfortunate they try to censor news about him. In my opinion he won the republican debate hands down.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xo6KIusCBoU - Ron Paul interview.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EF37-9OGblw&mode=related&search= - Another

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlEqtaWpKEU - Great Speech by JFK

Why is the Chicago Tribune disregarding the US Congressman who scored a clear victory over the other 9 Bush-clones in the MSNBC California debate? US mass media is not better than the old Soviet Pravada!

Guy McLendon
Chair Harris County Libertiarn Party

cherylp,

Your point is taken, and I agree with your position. My main point is that mentioning Ron Paul in the same sentence as Mike Gravel does a disservice to Ron Paul. Others have done so in recent posts, and if more coverage is what Paul supporters want for their candidate, I wouldn't suggest comparing him to the cartoonish former Senator from Alaska.

Congressmans Kucinich and Paul are the two polls of what is, at least in this country, liberal and conservative. Both are sages, who lack the politicians' tendency to whisper pleasant lies instead of engaging in candor and respect for the intelligence of the public. Heck, they even look alike.

I really think it undercuts the argument for broader coverage to invoke Mike Gravel, as I would argue he hardly deserves the platform he's been given. My ulterior motive, I suppose, is that he was a total embarrasment at the debate and I don't want to see another such performance by the former Senator of Alaska who is a far less able representative of the left than Representative Kucinich.

I'd like to see the GOP lineup widdled down as well, and I do hope that Ron Paul can at least become part of the conversation. He is the only anti-Iraq War candidate the Republicans have which would seem to work insurmountably against him with the GOP base. He is also the only Republican candidate who breaks significantly from Bushism, which is unbelievably refreshing.

what are these great qualifications of Clinton?
please don't BS and tell me her personal life makes her more qualified from the more experienced politicians.

her voting record is spotty at best and no better than any of the others running, IF you consider a president being a man a hindrance and a women an asset, well she is ahead of the male canidates in that area.

cherylp,

Your point is taken, and I agree with your position. My main point is that mentioning Ron Paul in the same sentence as Mike Gravel does a disservice to Ron Paul. Others have done so in recent posts, and if more coverage is what Paul supporters want for their candidate, I wouldn't suggest comparing him to the cartoonish former Senator from Alaska.

Congressmans Kucinich and Paul are the two polls of what is, at least in this country, liberal and conservative. Both are sages, who lack the politicians' tendency to whisper pleasant lies instead of engaging in candor and respect for the intelligence of the public. Heck, they even look alike.

I really think it undercuts the argument for broader coverage to invoke Mike Gravel, as I would argue he hardly deserves the platform he's been given. My ulterior motive, I suppose, is that he was a total embarrasment at the debate and I don't want to see another such performance by the former Senator of Alaska who is a far less able representative of the left than Representative Kucinich.

I'd like to see the GOP lineup widdled down as well, and I do hope that Ron Paul can at least become part of the conversation. He is the only anti-Iraq War candidate the Republicans have which would seem to work insurmountably against him with the GOP base. He is also the only Republican candidate who breaks significantly from Bushism, which is unbelievably refreshing.

Ron Paul is leading as winning the first debate by a large margin. Why isn't he mentioned?

Seriously though, Ron Paul is the only candidate presently who emphasizes on undoing all the damage that has already been done to the nation, and its a tremendous task that could probably go for a re-election and beyond. He knows that our nations sovereignty, the actual existence of our country is at stake now, so are the rights we live by.
People like Hilary Clinton will make sure the truth about 9/11 stays hidden for another 8 years... Who knows, everyone might be completely enslaved just from one term of Hilary Clinton.

I was excited about Giuliani and then he started playing the fear card first thing out of the gate.
That is the kind of stuff we have been hearing from Bush and Cheney for four years and is one of the reasons that no one wants to support them now.

Americans deserve better than this kind of sleazy politics.

Posted by: Carlos | May 8, 2007 8:06:37 PM

There have been some pretty whacky posts on this topic and a few that make sense. I'm sorry to say that this one by Carlos I agree with. Rudy really showed me something playing the fear card that I hoped I wouldn't see out of the front-runners. I would like to read more in the Tribune about Ron Paul. So far he and Rudy on the republican side are the only candidates that interest me at all.

I've read the comments to date re next US president.
Now I know why Bush is currently holding that office - he reflects the passion, the incisiveness and the intelligence of the voting public.

National polls mean very little when it comes to a party choosing its nominee. And not just because it's so early in the game.
How the Democrats are doing against each other in Iowa, New Hampshire and maybe two, three or four other states is all that will count.
Same with the Republicans.
National polls might sway some Iowa and New Hampshire votes, but I think these folks are pretty independent and make up their own minds about who they like best in their respective parties.
And if they jolt the media and the pollsters, so much the better.