• Kaiser Edmond said:

  Obviously, you and E.J. are firmly in the Clinton camp. Accusing Obama of abadoning "hope" for attacking Hillary are talking points from the Clinton campaign.  Laying out the fact that there is a contrast between He and Hillary is not negative campaigning. The Clinton campaign, aided and abeted by the media (includes you), has successfully up to now been able to make it appear that there are no differences between Hillary and Obama positions on the war, Social Security, etc. And if there are no differences you might as well vote for Hillary and you get Bill (we don't need to go back there again either) back again. Hillary is not saying the same thing about the her War (It's hers because she hasnoy admitted that her vote to authorize it was a mistake) that Obama nor Edwards for that matter. So Obama has two tasks. Make clear the differences and continue to lay out his vision for the country. Drawing truthful contrasts is not "Swift Boating".

  October 19, 2007 6:33 PM

• James English said:

  I want you to know that first of all, I respect your opinion. That problem I have in your argument is that Hillary Clinton still has 50% in high negatives. Neither is there a reason to play into her position in which you are absolutely correct to be a 25% lead in national polls. Think about this and work with me here. When Gravel, Biden, Kucinich, Todd drop out of the race they have to choose someone else. Many of these same people may not like Clinton not because of her 20 year experience in the public eye as the wife of Bill Clinton but also carries a lot of baggage in those years as well. There is no polling to show who the supporters of the second-tier candidates will support when drop out and the big elephant in the room among the Democratic party is her "Polarizing" effect as well as her "Trianglation" which now being exposed by both parties and could undermine her and add ammunition during the rest of the debates this year.

  October 19, 2007 9:35 PM

Leave a Comment