Who's the frontrunner now?

Not to mention, that Zogby poll was conducted last week, before that "race" flap the Obama folks ginned up.

After the polls (and the pundits who cite polls) got it so wrong in New Hampshire, the same pundits go back to citing the same polls.

The media is "stuck on stupid."

And Zogby/Reuters, fresh off predicting an Obama landslide in NH, predicted that John McCain would win the GOP primary in Michigan. See http://www.pollster.com/blogs/poll_reuterscspanzogby_michiga.php

"Who's the frontrunner now"?

The Democrats.

The top three Dem candidates are better than any of the candidates the Republic Party is offering up.

It appears the race issue is the frontrunner. this nonsense does nothing for either candidate and less for the American people. Go ahead and keep sniping at each other like a bunch of children....but half the people weighing in on this are ones from the right who could care less about blacks or women.
Fools!

"CHERTOF SPEAKS"

I'M THE FRONTRUNNER, AND NO I DO NOT KNOW HOW WE LOST THOSE PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS. CALL THE FBI, OR THE CIA, MY JOB IS TO SALE FEAR, EEVS, SBILL 1639, BUILD A FENCE, AND BY THE WAY, I'M ONLY 3 MILES DEEP.

I'M THE FRONT RUNNER IN ANY RACE, BECAUSE I OVERSEE ALL RACE. WELL I WILL ONCE I GET MY REAL ID ON EVERYONE BORN AFTER 1960-FOE, I MEAN 1964.

SO DON'T GET ON A BOAT, OR ON A PLANE HILLARY OR OBAMA. STAY ON SOLID GROUNDS OR YOU WILL BE ARRESTED.

WHO'S THE FRONT RUNNER. WHAT KIND OF SILLY QUESTION IS THAT, HUH DICK!

It appears the race issue is the frontrunner. this nonsense does nothing for either candidate and less for the American people. Go ahead and keep sniping at each other like a bunch of children....but half the people weighing in on this are ones from the right who could care less about blacks or women.
Fools!

Posted by: bill r. | January 16, 2008 2:29 PM

Yep and it's mostly RNC Brucie who likes to make up the phony minority sounding post names. Keep an eye out, they're real easy to spot.

"The GOP, Stuck On Stupid Since 2000"

Yep and it's mostly RNC Brucie who likes to make up the phony minority sounding post names. Keep an eye out, they're real easy to spot.
Posted by: John E | January 16, 2008 3:26 PM

Like the posts from Shandel then Shantel. What a loser!

Well, it's officially black vs. white now.

Despite protests to the contrary, Obama has actively sought an opportunity to inject race into the 2008 campaign leading into the South Carolina primaries. He couldn't find it, so they first went with "fairy tale" being racist to describe one of Obama's positions. Hardly racist. Then his campaign picked up on Clinton’s MLK comment and misinterpreted it. He needed to trick and incite African Americans, while distancing himself enough personally so as not to be obvious to whites, Hispanics and others.

Obama needs to keep in mind, however, that if the race is held out as a reason to vote FOR someone, it must also be a valid reason to vote AGAINST someone. He can't have it both ways.

I've changed my mind and now support Obama.

Im suporting Barack Obama 100% now after Ive seen what kind of campaign the Clintons are running. We really do need to break this Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton slow motion trainwreck. Its time for change. Its time to finally get things done.

"It appears the race issue is the frontrunner. this nonsense does nothing for either candidate and less for the American people. Go ahead and keep sniping at each other like a bunch of children....but half the people weighing in on this are ones from the right who could care less about blacks or women.
Fools!"

And your blanket rip on Republicans is somehow better? If race and gender are not supposed to be factors then what difference does it make if one cares or not about one of those classifications? It doesn't matter, remember?

Poster D.R. says "Its time to finally get things done (with Obama)."

Yes, because Obama has done so much for Illinois since being elected to U.S. Senate. Let's see, he.....has....done....well, nothing but run for president and cut deals (e.g. Rezko) to enrich himself. And please don't bring up the world famous ethics bill that even Charlie Gibson laughed at during the NH debate while explaining why it's so ineffective.

That Obama certainly is a guy who gets things done for his constituents. We're still waiting for our dose of "change" he promised us.

The front runner is Bloomberg. He's waiting in the wings to see how this all shakes out. He sees how dissatisfied the majority of Democrats are with Hillary (seriously, look at Michigan, the majority chose anything but her). He also sees the moderate Republicans sick of the Christian conservatives and war-mongers that have run the party for the past 8 years. Bloomberg can win with the moderate vote if it ends up to be a Huckabee - Clinton face-off.

Since the Swamp is talking polls, here's another one showing the racial divide among Democrats: According to the Rasmussen poll of Jan. 14, Obama leads among black Democrats by 66-16 while Clinton is ahead among white Democrats by 41-27. Overall, Clinton leads Obama 37-30 in the head to head matchup.

John E, I agree. You guys have the two best candidates who are rapidly cannibalizing each other. And Edwards has nice hair, too. Maybe not Romney nice, but nice. Is it too late for Gore?

The real frontrunner is Obama in the only contest that counts: He has 25 delegates to Clinton's 24. Edwards has 18 so far. Interesting that Clinton won slightly more votes in New Hampshire than Obama, but they each came away from the contest with 9 delegates. Clinton of course is in the lead if you count the superdelegates (basically party insiders).

On the Republican side, Romney has 46 delegates to Huckabe's 19 and McCain's 15. The closeness of the races in each party make the delegates more important than polls. That's why Guiliani is spending so much time trying to win Florida, a delegate-rich state, with 57 going all to the winner if current party sanctions hold. His organization is not stupid. The media, including the Chicago Tribune, need to start covering the delegate story, not more polls.

Hillary will continue to lose ground as more and more bright people see her for what she is. It is no mistake that there is a clear delineation between who votes for Hillary and Obama, as seen in New Hampshire. Hillary attracts the uneducated and low income voters, while Obama is supported by the educated and middle to upper class voters. People are not as dumb as Hillary's handlers and PR machine think; the voters are catching on.

Obama is a once in a lifetime dream candidate. Hillary just happened to married to a former president and is a Bush-Clinton retread. We need to move forward, America.

The only race cards being played are the ones by the posters on this blog. Tell me exactly what Obama has said to incite or inject race into the election? If anything he's run from it. And is it so surprising that women are supporting HRC and blacks support Obama? Hello...they're both historic candidates. White men have been supporting white male politicians since this country's inception. Are you all so paranoid to think that an african american or a women can screw up this country any worse than Bush? Get a grip!!!

I had discussions with a lot of people who claim to really be hard core democrats, who like to talk about politics, and how they watch all of the democratic debates. They have their minds formed on the issues, such as ending the war in Iraq, awareness of global warming and environmental issues, and promoting fair trade and peace in the middle east.

When I throw out the name Kucinich, most strain their eyes and ask who, not to be funny, but because they seriously never heard of him. I can't figure out if this is something odd or something to be expected. Maybe both.

They could be plaid or polka-dot for all I care...

They are liberal nightmares willing to do or say anything just to get in office.

Gay marriage, pro-death, no-care agendas.

Will they get us out of Iraq? NO!

Will they 'fix' the economy? NO!

Will they be the same old story, except more gay-friendly? YES!

Will they be the same old story, except more gay-friendly? YES!

Posted by: Gay Flores | January 16, 2008 10:51 PM

Are you related to wide stance Larry?

America, Please wake up,Do you still want this Bush_Clinton era to continue? I do not. For a change I will vote for BO as US President for 2008. Moreover the media needs to cover all political parties contesting the election and not cover only HC. To prove my theory is right The real frontrunner is Obama. He has 25 delegates to Clinton's 24. Edwards has 18 so far. Obama is a once in a lifetime dream candidate. Hillary is just happened to married to a former president and is a Bush-Clinton retrevial. We need to move forward, America. I do not want another recession.

Tom S, I agree with your focus on delegate counts. The democratic race might well go past February if all the contests are close. And don't forget that Giuliani is big in the states with Republican winner-take-all rules. I think he has 201 in his pocket, just to start (NY, NJ, CT, DE).

Now, I must repeat what I wrote earlier but which didn't get posted.

It seems to me that Illinois is the key to the Democratic primary. You say, "But Illinois will obviously go Obama -- why should I vote?" Because Illinois will not only go Obama, it might go very much Obama, while Hillary might only split NY and NJ -- her lead in "her own state" seems to be disappearing day by day. Let's say HRC wins NY by 10 points. If Obama wins IL by 20 points, it is as if Illinois were worth twice as much, which would make it more significant than New York. Get that? If HRC wins NY by 5 points, but Obama wins IL by 25 points, Illinois acts as if it is worth 5x its size, or a state the size of two Californias.

So if you like Obama, vote for him in Illinois. In the primary, it is an important vote!

I don't even look at the polls anymore, whether they are for or against my candidate of choice. Look at the hard numbers, people. Who has the largest number of individual donors (not who has raised the most Corporate Cash, but average people who donate 20 bucks)? Who consistently draws sold out crowds? Who did that woman who made Hillary cry end up voting for in NH?

The answer is the next president, so long as our votes are not tampered with.

WHAT HAS OBAMA DONE FOR ILLIN0IS ??? ( NOTHING ) AND HAS LITTLE EXPERIENCE IN THE FIELD OF POLITICS..HELL I COULD CAMPAIGN AND SAY THE SAME STUFF HE DOES..WHERES THE PROVEN TRACK RECORD ?? HILLARY KNOWS HER STUFF ANSD IS THE STRONGEST PERSON IN THIS PARTY ...SHE SAID IT WOULD TAKE ANOTHER CLINTON TO UNDUE WHAT THE BUSH FAMILY DID TO THE COUNTRY..........WHAT A NOVEL IDEA.............OHHH, SHE SO HAS MY VOTE !!!