Presidential debates on ABC right now-both parties

saluki

This is one debate following another--first the Republicans --then the Democrats.

Wonder of wonder --they are talking to each other not at each other!

Very different type of debate-- 

Very good so far.

ravdeb

I also only got the highlights of the debate and Hilary's was a highlight...

I haven't kept up with any of this until I read the highlights and recently got an opinion from a friend in the States.

I was a Hilary fan until yesterday. I had no idea she was "acting out". I'm surprised and disappointed as I really wanted a woman president this year. From what I see..I don't like any of them...

Obama is gorgeous and I also love his voice so if that's a criteria..I vote for him. I need to read up on him..From recent info, I think I'm not going to like his international policies which would affect me more than his domestic policies, which may be good for American residents.

Paulette531

Two things I find MOST irritating about Obama, first the Kennedy comparison, get a life, he is in no way shape or form comparable to Kennedy (who I admire greatly) and Obama's wife reminds me of Hillary Clinton.

I also get MAJOR irritated at "the first black American president", isn't that like saying "I have black friends?" which is politically incorrect? 

His political stands would also continue to break the bank so to speak, and I don't care for his immigration policy. 

abbadoodles

God, I love America.  We can have such different opinions without blasting each other to kingdom come.

Still, I'm not listing my opinions about the various candidates because I've already lived through one "duck and cover."  No fool here.

Tina

NoH8

In my opinion, having the first black president is no way similar to "having a black friend". With the history of blacks in america, many of their ancestors coming to this country in shackles, not having the right to vote and having to sit in the back of the bus not even half a century ago, having a black president would be historical. Perhaps in another half century a black, hispanic or woman president will mean nothing more than having a white middle aged male as president. I still remember when Sandra Day O'Connor was nominated to the supreme court and the whispers that one day there might be a woman president. The percentage of both women and racial minorities in leadership roles in the goverment is disproportionately smaller than those of their caucasian counterparts. This needs to change if we are to have true representation of a america, IMHO.

Naniam

I agree with all of you that Elizabeth Edwards did not look well.  In fact, I've seen his daughter with him in Iowa but not Elizabeth very much lately.

If you guys remember, Edwards name was tossed out when Gore ran for President and he was passed over.  He had only been in the Senate for a short period of time - after that he did nothing but start working on getting his name out there to run for president and was not there to even cast votes on important issues and did nothing for NC.  He finally got his wish when Kerry chose him - he has never stopped running since Gore first mentioned him and passed him by.  Remember his remark - "I've fought for the little guy all my life" - yes, and he is wealthy by his lawsuits towards insurance companies and malpractice suits.  Malpractice insurance companies pulled out of NC - the high cost of the insurance has made many quite some forms of practice or leave the state.  He has made his mark in health and insurance reform here.  

Joan, Hillary grates on me too and I have wondered about that 35 years experience and I think at one point she said something about being involved in decisions during the Clinton administration - like you, didn't realize she was a cabinet appointment.  

I see Obama and just as with Kennedy (and I fell in love with Kennedy too at age 19) and Clinton - he has charisma. He is calm and cool but he sure bites at Hillary.  I agree wtih something one of the Rep. candidates said: we need to "think" about what change means - what is it we want changed and follow the responses carefully.  I see Obama as getting by on his Charisma and that truly scares me.

I'm not a fan of any of the candidates to be honest.  I don't like Huckabee - I think he is totally unelectable.  

Do any of us truly believe that if the ticket is Hillary and ?????  or Obama and ????  that they will not beat any republician?  One of them is going to be the next president - I truly believe that.  

I did hear last night that Hillary attacks against Obama have started in NH but also saw this morning that Obama according to the poles has surged ahead of her there.  I think we are going to see some dirty stuff start.

Anyway, thanks for letting me share "my" views too.

Brenda 

NoH8

Brenda I voted for Edwards in the primaries against Kerry last go around- are you talking about those elections or the Gore ones in 2000.

In the latest poles Obama has a 10 % pt lead since the debates, beforehand they were tied.. but a lot can change before the polls close tomorrow.

At this point I think it's the democrats' race to lose-- people seem so disgusted with the bush administration that it's time for a change. I think this is evidenced, at least in Iowa and NH with independents siding with democrats vs. republicans this go around. We have a loooong way until November though and a lot can change. The dems best not count their chickens before they're hatched.

Naniam

Gore in 2000 he chose someone else - Edwards after that never stopped running.

Bush has made mistakes and there are things I don't agree with - I am also not one that feels he should have gotten all that has been leveled at him either.  Why anyone would even want this office is beyond my pea brain - look how they all age while in office.  I'm older than some and never liked Johnson but never liked Nixon either. 

Neither party has all the answers - it is up to us to listen carefully and in our own hearts and mind - feel who can do the best job.  I am trying but so far there is just a thud and no "ping"  

saluki

It is early in this political season.  Really, the gloves have not yet come off.

Whether these candidates can take close scrutiny remains to be seen.

Probably before most of your times but there was an interesting reminder in the NYT magazine section this weekend of how rough things can get----

The sad sad story of a former vice presidential candidate --Senator Thomas Eagleton-very badly handled all around. Senator George McGovern was the Presidential candidate at the time.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

December 30, 2007
Thomas F. Eagleton | b. 1929
The Running Mate Who Wasn’t
By FRANCIS WILKINSON

The federal courthouse in St. Louis is named for him. Accomplished men and women have recounted how they were awed by his intellect, influenced by his humanity, inspired and enlisted by his passion. Thomas Eagleton was a giant of Missouri politics. But he was a giant bound by ties of his own peculiar design. He spent the first part of his career in the grip of a secret. Later, he was fettered to a question he answered countless times but never resolved.

“He was a man of decency, honor, humor, integrity,” George McGovern told me recently, rattling off Eagleton’s virtues until they veered abruptly off a rhetorical cliff, “with an incredible cover-up.”

Thomas Francis Eagleton grew up in St. Louis, the second son of a successful lawyer whose own political ambitions were thwarted. As a boy, Eagleton accompanied his father on political rounds. After college at Amherst, Eagleton attended Harvard Law School, where he surrendered a coveted post on the law review in order to return home and help manage his father’s campaign for mayor of St. Louis. The senior Eagleton lost. The son never did. After law school, he initiated an unbroken string of political victories. Eagleton was elected circuit attorney of St. Louis at age 27, Missouri’s youngest attorney general at 31 and, in 1964, the state’s youngest lieutenant governor at 35. Four years later, he claimed a Senate seat.

Yet Eagleton was an unlikely running mate for McGovern, the 1972 Democratic presidential nominee. He supported a McGovern rival in the primaries, and according to the columnist Robert Novak, he spoke damagingly of McGovern off the record. But after Edward M. Kennedy and others refused McGovern’s entreaties, the call went out to Eagleton.

In a room with staff members, friends and even reporters present, Eagleton spoke on the phone with McGovern for less than a minute. McGovern’s aide Frank Mankiewicz subsequently asked Eagleton if he had any skeletons rattling around his closet. A terse denial inaugurated a latter-day industry of vice-presidential vetting.

Eagleton’s occasional hand tremors and tendency to perspire heavily were somehow overlooked in Washington. At a meeting before Eagleton’s official nomination, the McGovern campaign manager, Gary Hart was surprised, he told me recently, to see Eagleton “pouring with sweat” in the air-conditioned room.

In the 1960s, Eagleton and his family had taken great pains to hide his hospitalizations for mental illness, even diverting reporters with a tale about a stomach ailment. But after his nomination, an anonymous caller tipped off the McGovern campaign and the Knight news organization. The unraveling began.

With reporters rapidly closing in, Eagleton divulged at a news conference in South Dakota on July 25, 1972, that he had been hospitalized in 1960, 1964 and 1966 for what he first called “nervous exhaustion and fatigue” and later qualified as “depression.” He also said he had received electric-shock therapy. Many Democratic politicians and donors, sensing disaster, were irate. Nixon aides reveled in the Democrats’ misfortune.

Eagleton later explained that he had never considered his health history “sinister” — no closet, no skeleton. Years after, in his own narrative housed at the University of Missouri archives, Eagleton said that he had a “brief and random” exchange with his wife, Barbara, before he was asked to join the ticket. “If you should get [the nomination], won’t your health history come out?” she asked. Eagleton responded, “It could, I suppose.”

In two interviews, McGovern told me Eagleton related a longer version when they met just before Eagleton’s startling news conference. “We had a meeting with Tom and his wife and Eleanor and me in Sylvan Lake in the Black Hills of South Dakota,” he said. It was Eleanor McGovern who asked the question that dogged Eagleton then and ever after. “Why didn’t you tell George about this illness?”

According to McGovern, now 85, Eagleton responded that he and his wife had had a lengthy discussion “back and forth, back and forth” and concluded that McGovern would reject him if the truth were known. “ ‘We decided you wouldn’t ask me [to join the ticket] if I told you,’ ” McGovern said Eagleton explained.

The political consultant Robert Shrum, a McGovern friend who worked on the ’72 campaign, said that in the mid-1970s McGovern told him the same story and that he heard it a second time from Eleanor McGovern many years later.

But Barbara Eagleton, the only other surviving member of the meeting’s discordant quartet, flatly denied McGovern’s assertion. “It never happened,” she told me. “Can you imagine asking that question? I think there would have been total animosity on the part of McGovern if that had happened.”

When I spoke with him, McGovern also characterized his private telephone conversations with two of Eagleton’s doctors, which took place immediately before Eagleton’s withdrawal from the race. “They both said we think he can do fine in the Senate,” McGovern told me. “But when it comes to trusting the whole country to one man, that’s different.” McGovern said Eagleton had bipolar disorder — manic depression. Barbara Eagleton said: “It was not manic depression. It was depression.”

To leave the ticket, Eagleton demanded a statement from McGovern that his health was not a factor. He got it. In a measure of the public’s ambivalence, Gary Hart said calls to the campaign, which had been overwhelmingly negative about Eagleton after the revelations, suddenly switched to overwhelmingly positive after his departure.

The public trial enhanced Eagleton’s stature. He resumed telling jokes in the Senate cloakroom, led debate on a war-powers resolution and passionately argued for an end to the Vietnam War. He was particularly proud of his successful amendment to stop funds for the bombing of Cambodia.

For years, friends in Washington sensed tension between the McGoverns and Eagletons. Eleanor’s anger barely softened. Eventually, George’s did. “I know a little about political ambition,” he told me.

Eagleton retired from the Senate in 1987, undefeated. The Eagletons returned to St. Louis, where he took up law, teaching and a hefty civic load. Though he gradually lost his health and hearing, Eagleton remained passionate about public affairs, firing off letters to protégés, friends and political leaders. He was outraged by the Iraq war, pleading with Bill Clinton in a 2006 letter to forgo “the traditional silence of an ex-president in wartime.”

Late in life, Eagleton began collecting art. He was particularly fond of the German photographer Candida Höfer, whose work features public architecture of uncluttered environs and clear boundaries. Her photographs convey the scale of the public sphere. But her libraries, theaters and government halls are containers devoid of people, empty of the struggle and striving of human affairs. In a singular political life, Eagleton had experience enough to fill the void.
 

ADK

I do remember Eagleton.  Who took his place on the McGovern ticket?  I don't remember that - strange, huh?

I just want to make a quick comment - I live in MA and I have to tell you that Romney did absolutely nothing for this state.  He only served one term and spent most of that term traveling out of the state to test the waters for a presidential bid.  He will say whatever he needs to say to get a vote.  He is actually pretty reviled in this state and it doesn't surprise me in the least that NH has little interest in him.  The primary in NH actually is in the hands of the Independents.  Independents can vote in the primary and 44% of the state is Independent (30% Republican and 27% Democrat).  This might just be a true test of how the nation will go in November.  Obama's entire campaign of hope is the same campaign run by Duval Patrick, the Governor of MA elected last year.  It worked here, let's see what happens nationally.

Anonymous

I think it's unfair to claim that Obama is "black."  His mother was "white."  So, that makes him 50/50, right?  Just a thought.

Paulette531

Abadoodles...I haven't laughed today but when I read your post, I had too! I love your opinion as to not posting your opinion! Thank you, and I really mean it!

Paulette531

Shirley...I think that depends on the audience. I have listened to Obama talk on various subjects and in various settings and he seems to be black when the majority is black and he seems to be white when the majority are white and in a mixed crowd he comes across neither black nor white. I find that interesting.

I also do not in any way shape or form have any respect for the minister he claims was responsible for his conversion to Christianity, that guy is about as scarey as Huckabee.

And Amy...of course you do not see the similarity of "having a black friend" and "first black president" I wouldn't have expected anything else from you.  

JoanofArdmore

I agree, Shirley.

And I love interracial children, (and people) To me they're the true America.

BUT.There IS a saying:
"There is no such thing as being half black, half Jewish, or half pregnant"

And with  Black people especially, if they are interracial, they ARE alled Black.

Not by me, who call them Wonderful!

Anonymous

I must have grown so much over the years.  I know there's still those who do not think like I do.  I don't see the color of his darker skin as far as being the president anymore than I see Hillary as a woman.  I look at their character, what they have to offer, do I trust them, or are they full of bull!

Our country is very fragile (IMO) right now.  I feel we need someone who understands foreign policy.  It scares the $#!+ out of me to think our Commander in Chief doesn't know one darn thing about foreign policy.  Of course I hope he has dependable people feeding him dependable info.  But I truly worry about terrorists trying again to come into our country and harm more people.  Huckabee might be a "good" person just as every other person that's running.  However, he knows squat about foreign policy.

I haven't made my mind up.  I will be listening, and listening, and listening.  However, I don't think Obama has enough experience for this job.

Oh, this is going to be ANOTHER fun election year.    I probably should be like Abadoodles and keep my mouth  !

Shirley

paige-allyson

saluki

Not so strange Anne--Doubt any of us would remember Eagleton except for the notoriety of the whole unsavory business.  I can't name many vice presidential candidates.

Incidentally, it was Maria Shriver's father Sargent Shriver (married to Eunice Kennedy) that replaced Eagleton. 

nosurrender

Ok- just have to ask....

what did you all think of the teary performance today??? 

Paulette531

I didn't see the teary performance but I read about it and am amazed that it happened, I never would have thought the ice queen would break up in public.

djd

I like Hillary and I think she would be a good president; but, I think the mainstream media will have a field day with EVERYTHING related to a Clinton (Hillary or Bill) and I hope we don't have to face that circus (again!!) for the next four years.  In that vein, I don't want to see Hillary get the nomination.  But if she does, I'll support her against any opponent (except Ron Paul, who is being buried by his own party!)

JoanofArdmore

If she got the nom, which she wont,I  would vote Repug.But NOT for Mitt, or Huckabee.If it was that, I would decline to vote.

I believe miss HILLARY broke up today because she's a menopausal ,spoiled brat who is now running third.(Why doesnt she rach into her ^^^^35 years of experience?******)One minute she is acting real tough and strident, rudely interrupting, talking over Obama (the gent).The next she is glassy-eyed and breaking up?Anyone else would be called schitzy.HILLARY  is showing a perfect example of why "they" dont WANT a woman president.PMSing.At an inopportune time.(I bet given the option she'd "press the red button if it blew Obama away.)This woman is SERIOUSLY spoiled.I think she thinks allowing Bill his piccadillos made her into a saint the country owes the presidency too.HAHAHA jokes on HER!It's all blowing up in her face! I bet she's be REAL now, if she only had depth of character and COULD!

Yep, I'm angry.Because I do hope for a woman president.But NOT ms Clinton.And she is pushing the cause waaaaay back, for the next woman candidate.

Shirley, I agree with you! Someone who is familiar w/foreign policy IS needed for president.Bill Richardson is the guy.IHMO.

BUT...Obama has IT.And is bright enough, I think, to surround himself with very, very good advisors.

Naniam

I too liked Richardson but thought he did very poorly articulating in the debate the other night.

Hillary has tried to explain todays event as just being passionate.  I think it was a big blunder.  Everyone keeps talking about how tough the Clinton Machine is - I think we might be about to find out in their next move to dethrone Obama. 

Neither Clinton as a governor nor Bush as a governor - had any experience in foreign affairs when elected.  As much as I liked Kennedy and disliked Johnson - they both had federal level experience (especially Johnson) and look at the mess we found ourselves in in Viet Nam - my generations war and I lost classmates/friends there. Bush had no foreign policy experience and we're in Iraq.  Both parties have gotten us in situations; some with experience and some not.    If you want to look at experience in foreign affairs then to me that would have to be John McCain or Richardson.  Richardson stands about as much chance as we do being elected.  Lots of folks think McCain is to old.  I hope I can figure out if it matters.  The world issues are so complex and we just can't simply withdraw from the world stage but do we really have the tenacity to hang tough with a president?  

Joan, I'm with you.  I won't vote for Hillary but Obama is just so smooth, I'm leery.  He has risen to fast and there are things in his background that just makes me pause.  Do we REALLY know him?  I want to know more.  Charisma he has!.  Huckabee I won't vote for him either   As I said earlier,  I haven't a clue and so far not one of them, not one, has made me feel they would be the person to move us forward; understand the complexity of world issues.  As my brother and I were talking recently, we don't like any of them and this might just be one we sit out as well

  

 

ravdeb

When I saw that..I turned on Fox news here...I was very upset. If she is breaking down during a campaign..how will she manage during the very difficult presidency when she will have not only her supporters but a lot of non-supporters who will tear her to shreads throughout the 4 years.

Granted, she can't be strong every minute, but to break down in public is not very presidentially impressive, in my eyes.

paige-allyson

wrong thread

NoH8

Shirley, is Tiger Woods 50/50 too??? Seriously doubt when trying to hail a cab in NYC it matters much.

Paulette- your passive-aggressive comments are frightening if that's truly the way you see the world.

Hillary's tears were a huge turn off and shock for me. I undertstand where they probably came from and exhaustion didn't help. When I think of her as being presidential, I don't think that bodes well. What if the same thing happened when she was discussing difficulties with a foreign government? I don't think tears are a sign of weakness, only that there is a time and place for them. If her eyes had welled up over 9/11 (on the day of) or even the death of a soldier, I'd think that was a more appropriate public display of emotions. 

ADK

My DH is a real political junkie - he watched Hillary's breakdown and he thought it was contrived, to show that the ice princess has some feelings.  I just think about Walter Mondale - when he cried about the press going after his wife, his campaign was over.  If it was contrived, I think it was a dumb move.  If it just happened, she has set us back about 50 years.  Either way, I think NH is going to be a major blow to her campaign.   JMHO

Paulette531

Amy...the same could be said for you...and when I want a diagnoses I will ask for one until then refrain from playing doctor.

NoH8

ADK, I don't remember seeing McGovern's press conference first hand. I can actually understand his tears of frustration more -as in, pick on my all you want, don't go after my partner.

Paulette, there's a way to have a political discussion without getting personal. I know you have the ability. I wish you'd use it.

ADK

Amy,

Regardless of whether or not his reaction was justified, Mondale buried himself with his tears.  Unfortunately, perception is reality and a leader perceived as weak becomes weak.  I wish it weren't so, but that's the way it is.  Again, JMHO.

NoH8

I agree Anne- I was speaking from my own perception of what I'm looking for in a leader. I didn't hold Bush's tears on 9/11 against him (only almost everything else he'd ever done)-- again though as you say, I'm not general percption.

saluki

Was this real or contrived?  I can see the tears as real--the frustration

of thinking you had the nomination sewn up and then having to deal with

the Obama Mystique--who is obviously the media darling.  How does she even deal with that?  How do you run against it?----The train has left the station.  I think the tears were real--the whole business about making the country a better place---don't know.