Dude, it would suck to watch TV in Iowa right now.

He will get trounced in the general election.

He gives good prepared speeches, but too bad Obama isn't actually qualified for the job of President of the United States.
He will get trounced in the general election.

Hmm, let's follow the logic here:
If not qualified for presidency...
Then will get trounced in general election.

Mahtli69, you're assuming American voters are good arbiters of who's qualified to be president. After eight years of G-Dub, this strikes me as a pretty wild assumption.

BTW, there was another tall fella from Illinois -- good speaker too -- who wasn't qualified to be president either. His name was Abraham Lincoln.

I like the plan where they choose four different states each four years (one big, one small, one western, one southern) and have those four run simultaneous primaries/caucuses.

trounced by who? rudy? obama is handsome as fuck, and rudy is FUGLY. people who don't think much vote for attractive people.

I hope BO is reading this...

And, I didn't say Obama was a good speaker, I said he gives good prepared speeches. Shooting from the hip, Obama is a complete boob. He has been horrible in the debates. Yes, given American voters, maybe that doesn't matter, but do you really want to count on that?

My biggest worry about Obama, based on his performance so far, is that he will absolutely crumble under the spotlight of the general election. He loses his composure too easily. Did you see him get booed the other day at the debates? He might have crapped his pants. NOT VERY PRESIDENTIAL.

Read Krugman in the NYT today -- says Obama is taking up the Republican position that social security is in crisis.

That Obama is preaching bipartisanship when this means giving in to the conservatives and the issues that confront us are partisan.

And, I didn't say Obama was a good speaker, I said he gives good prepared speeches. Shooting from the hip, Obama is a complete boob.

Oh, really? I'll leave it to anyone here who is interested to judge for themselves how Obama does "on his feet" so to speak. Here's the transcript of his Meet the Press interview from a couple weekends ago:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21738432/

Did you see him get booed the other day at the debates? He might have crapped his pants.

Hey, Edwards got booed too. Why? Because there was a large contingent of boorish Hillary supporters, apparently, unfortunately. I take that booing as a judgment more of Hillary and her machine than of Edwards or Obama.

Anyway, Mahtli69, I can understand, watching the proceedings on TV, you could be a good judge of whether someone got booed. Now if you can also be a good judge from the same vantage point of whether someone crapped in his pants, you obviously have some extraordinary sensory perception.

I'd love to know why Kucinich and Gravel outpoll Edwards at that site.

Remove Paul and his votes from the Republican candidates pool and the GOP doesn't seem to be popular outside the United States...

It makes me wonder how US thinking differs from the rest of the world's...

Read Krugman in the NYT today -- says Obama is taking up the Republican position that social security is in crisis.

Here's the Krugman column:
Played for a Sucker

I blame Obama for making a lame political maneuver here, but keep in mind, there isn't much daylight between any of these Dems on Social Security. As Krugman himself notes: "I don’t believe Mr. Obama is a closet privatizer."

BTW, about that other tall Illinois fellow who was a good speaker... When he was running for president in 1860, Abe Lincoln did not run as an abolitionist. He actually ran as quite the cautious moderate on the slavery issue.

BTW, about that other tall Illinois fellow who was a good speaker... When he was running for president in 1860

For chrissakes, stop it already with the Lincoln comparison. They are both tall and from Illinois. So is Dick Butkus.

"I don’t believe Mr. Obama is a closet privatizer. He is, however, someone who keeps insisting that he can transcend the partisanship of our times — and in this case, that turned him into a sucker.

"Mr. Obama wanted a way to distinguish himself from Hillary Clinton — and for Mr. Obama, who has said that the reason “we can’t tackle the big problems that demand solutions” is that “politics has become so bitter and partisan,” joining in the attack on Senator Clinton’s Social Security position must have seemed like a golden opportunity to sound forceful yet bipartisan.

"But Social Security isn’t a big problem that demands a solution; it’s a small problem, way down the list of major issues facing America, that has nonetheless become an obsession of Beltway insiders. And on Social Security, as on many other issues, what Washington means by bipartisanship is mainly that everyone should come together to give conservatives what they want.

"We all wish that American politics weren’t so bitter and partisan. But if you try to find common ground where none exists — which is the case for many issues today — you end up being played for a fool. And that’s what has just happened to Mr. Obama."

We remove comments that are off topic, threatening, or commercial in nature, and we do not allow sock-puppetry (impersonating someone else)—or any kind of puppetry, for that matter. We never censor comments based on ideology.

I really really do.

Ah, to have our elections be even ten times longer would be such a sweet relief.