This blog was just given the location and time. The CB appears to be the first media outlet with this information available. Should be a packed house tomorrow. Discussion on farm policy, perhaps?
More details (or time changes) on this blog as they become known.
145 Comments
February 13, 2008 at 3:44 pm
I’m glad you linked the location – I had no idea where the Stock Pavilion was and would have had to Google it.
February 13, 2008 at 3:51 pm
hands down
February 13, 2008 at 4:18 pm
To be perfectly honest, I saw the place daily my freshman year, and being from Wisconsin, I know what it’s use is…however, I had zero clue it was named Stock Pavilion. I wonder if Bill is gonna work out at the nat.
February 13, 2008 at 4:34 pm
Looks like I won’t be staying up all night then…
Are they SPEAKING at those times, or is that when doors open?
February 13, 2008 at 4:39 pm
Are you sure he is not speaking at the Kohl Center Pavilion? It holds roughly 1,500 people and has a stage up already… If am right, nice logistical f-up. If am wrong, nice logistical f-up.
February 13, 2008 at 5:05 pm
Join President Clinton in Madison
When
Thursday, February 14, 2008 at 2:30 PM – 5:00 PM
Where
The Stock Pavilion, University of Wisconsin Madison
1675 Linden Drive
Madison, WI 53706
General Area:
Description
Join President Clinton for a “Solutions for America” event at the University of Wisconsin at Madison.
Host
Wisconsin For Hillary
February 13, 2008 at 5:24 pm
Curious, does anyone know?
February 13, 2008 at 6:16 pm
Now the only big spot left on campus if Hillary wants to be different is the Fieldhouse, which will hold maybe 10,000 max (capacity is 7000 something for vball games)…
The main arena in the Stock Pavilion can hold 2000 people (correct me if I am mistaken). But hey, he’ll join the ranks of Harry Truman by speaking there.
February 13, 2008 at 6:17 pm
* I didn’t mention Camp Randall, though technically that is bigger than any other venue on campus.
February 13, 2008 at 6:26 pm
Not just Harry.
“While the Stock Pavilion has hosted
many animal events and educational programs,
it has also brought people to campus
for many other reasons since it was
built in 1908. Presidents Theodore
Roosevelt, Harry Truman and William
Howard Taft have all spoken there. The
Stock Pavilion has hosted many
performances, including the London,
New York, and Chicago Orchestras.”
February 13, 2008 at 6:38 pm
I thought it was like a farmhouse.
February 13, 2008 at 6:49 pm
what time are they recommending people get there? or is there an official “doors opening at…” time?
February 13, 2008 at 7:41 pm
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
February 13, 2008 at 7:42 pm
A?
February 13, 2008 at 8:38 pm
So the capacity is only 2,000? I find that odd it’s not at a larger venue.
February 13, 2008 at 9:12 pm
We are going to be there.. but why somewhere so small?
February 13, 2008 at 9:38 pm
Huckabee at the Concourse Hotel at 11am tomorrow… as long as we’re being fair…
February 13, 2008 at 9:44 pm
Yeah, yeah.
But if you go to Huckabee you’ll miss Clinton.
No question what I’m going to.
February 14, 2008 at 1:35 am
It’s not at a larger venue because they probably don’t want to rent the 7,000-8,000 field house and have it half full. Remember this is at 2 in the afternoon.
February 14, 2008 at 1:38 am
Kind of a crappy location to be honest. And the last minute location announcement doesnt help. I’m still irked that Hillary decided to spend Tuesday night in El Paso instead of Wisconsin where the next contest is. I dont get it… is the Clinton campaign competing in this state??? This “kind of/maybe” thing isnt gonna lead to a victory.
February 14, 2008 at 8:45 am
Clinton already conceeded she will most likely lose wisconsin and is focusing only on Texas and Ohio for the large votes and the demographic advantage she has, to create a “sea wall” against the big mo that Obama’s got/getting right now at 8 going on 10 straight wins.
February 14, 2008 at 10:43 am
I feel Hillary may take Wisconsin for all the wrong reasons… anyone else feel the same way?
February 14, 2008 at 1:07 pm
i hope she takes it, for all the right reasons (but i’ll also take a victory for all the “wrong” reasons as well).
you guys forget, Dane County does not = Wisconsin. marriage amendment vote, anyone?
February 14, 2008 at 2:02 pm
Maybe she’ll win because she’s already started running desperate, baseless attack ads about how Obama refuses to debate in Wisconsin (while she refuses to CAMPAIGN in Wisconsin). She’s just a cheap hack who will sell the party and the people down the river to get elected.
Perhaps she’d like to debate because for once she’d be able to speak to the thousands of people that he brings into political rallies.
February 14, 2008 at 2:15 pm
she wants to debate to talk about the issues, something Obama seems incapable of. his “yay for me” rallies are lame. and his messiah complex is shocking really. his speech at the Kohler center he was comparing voting for him and “change” to people protesting during the civil rights movement, fighting slavery, the revolutionary war. EGO, anyone? he’s all promises, and no plans.
what’s wrong with another debate. do you really think most Wisconsinites watched the other debates? probably not. but if it takes place in Wisconsin, they’ll watch. she wants to get the issues out there to the people, not have rallies hear his rhetoric. the “attack ads” are not baseless.
i’d would LOVE for someone to survey people at an Obama rally, and ask them about his plans and policies. it would be hilarious how little his supporters, err FANS, would know.
February 14, 2008 at 3:08 pm
Ha! you say that as if anybody at a Hillary rally would be able to articulate her specific policy points.
Check out his website for the ridiculously staggering amount of specific policy points he’s outlined there for his presidency.
The attack was baseless. She’s ripping at another Democratic Party member for cheap political points. That’s completely indicative of her style because she’s entirely willing to sell the party and the people down the river to get elected (coincidentally, her tunnel-vision to the White House is what is going to lose this election for her).
She doesn’t care about anybody but herself. Notice how Barack talks about how “we” are going to change things and she talks about how “she” is ready to lead and “she” is capable of changing things. She can’t change things by herself. Barack understands that the American people are a necessary part of the process.
Old Washington politics are going down.
Obama’s rhetoric is built on a solid foundation of substance and virtue and WE will prevail.
February 14, 2008 at 3:08 pm
Also, it’s the “Kohl Center” not the “Kohler center”
February 14, 2008 at 3:12 pm
Why did Obama flip flop on being for single payer health insurance?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAkIidChxic
He gets to insult McCain for flip-flopping on the Bush Tax Cuts, but somehow gets away with it himself… Hmm, sounds like politics as usual to me…OR has political hypocracy been toned down to “hopemongering” this cycle?
February 14, 2008 at 3:16 pm
Another debate would be senseless. They have pretty much the exact same platform on the issues except for their prospective health care plans and Hillary’s original support for the Iraq war (proving that she can be duped by an incompetent President *twice if you count Bill). The fact is that Hillary, as well versed in politics as she is, has about as much charisma as potato. When it comes to making it happen in November you need a charismatic person who can insight people who know nothing about politics or issues to the polls to vote for you. I mean you think it was issues that put George in the White House twice? It was who would I like to have a beer with. Bill won the white house with his ability to talk and interact and connect with people. It takes more than issues to win an election. This is not to say that Obama has no stances on issues, but his stances mean jack anyway until the party creates its platform at the convention. Democrats can keep putting “issues” people up for elections all the time, but if they actually want to win, they need a person who can attract ALL of America.
February 14, 2008 at 3:23 pm
Thank you, Milio. Beautifully put.
February 14, 2008 at 3:45 pm
ALL I KNOW IS THAT ADAM LANG NOW OWNS VOTE NAKED .. SO YOU CAN’T DO THAT WITHOUT HIS PERMISSION (I THINK HE’LL WANT IT ON TAPE)
I HOPE THIS COMMENT SET OFF HIS GOOGLE ALERT
I HOPE: ASHOK KUMAR SET OFF HIS GOOGLE ALERT TOOOOOOOOO
ASHOK KUMAR ASHOK KUMAR ASHOK KUMAR ASHOK KUMAR
February 14, 2008 at 4:15 pm
To you ASHOK KUMAR!!!!
February 14, 2008 at 4:32 pm
Valentines Day is heavily celebrated in the divorce lawyer community since it means a boom in future business.
February 14, 2008 at 4:37 pm
Have you read Obama’s 4 page plan to rebuild Iraq? It looks like a glorified version of the O’Hagan platform. While he identifies a few key issues, his “detailed plan” gives no specifics. Read it for yourself… that is, if you are not too busy hanging out with Superman tonight and screaming “hallelujah” during the course of “Yes We Can.”
From his website, his “detailed” plan for Afghanistan: Barack Obama believes that we need to begin to end the war in order to finish the fight in Afghanistan. He would redeploy at least two combat brigades (7,000 personnel) of rested, trained American troops to Afghanistan to reinforce our counter-terrorism operations and support NATO’s efforts to fight the Taliban.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/
Bullet points…
February 14, 2008 at 4:44 pm
No mention of the Drug and Human trafficking, historical oppression, complete lack of an economy, 90% poverty rates, government turmoil and lack of civil leaders, corruption (both American and domestic) and virtually no education infrastructure… our 7,000 troops will do wonders there.
February 14, 2008 at 5:05 pm
First, about the debates–FACT: There has been only one one-on-one debate between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
“Barack talks about how “we” are going to change things”
Yes, he knows how to get people to vote for him.
‘Barack understands that the American people are a necessary part of the process.”
Ha, since when? Has Bush done *anything* with the American people?
“Old Washington politics are going down.”
Barack is just as much a part of old Washington politics as the next guy, see below.
Milio, I swear what you just wrote might be the dumbest thing I’ve heard yet about this primary. Everything you just said in defense of Obama is why I take issue with his campaign. Bush was elected because “people wanted to have a beer with him,” and look where that got us. Granted Obama is no Bush, but he’s basically gaining followers the same way.
“When it comes to making it happen in November you need a charismatic person who can insight people who know nothing about politics or issues to the polls to vote for you.”
That is another problem, you talk about it likes it’s a good thing. Why would we want people who know nothing about politics and the issues to vote? Again, that’s how Bush got elected basically.
I also like how people insinuate only Obama can beat McCain. That’s idiotic. Both have a great shot of beating him when Democrats flood the polls. “but Obama is a uniter…bla bla bla” Look, the Dems are going to flood the polls. Has anyone notices the huge difference in voter numbers for Dems vs. Reps in the primaries?
4:37 – Exactly, he gives no details! “Hope and change” alone aren’t going to solve sh*t.
Now, as for Obama’s virtue:
Even Obama admits that 15 million people will be left uninsured. He downplayed the importance of the estimate that his plan would leave out 15 million people — mostly young and healthy. “Fifteen million sounds like a lot,” he said. “But what they’re really saying is I’ll have 3 percent of the population — I’ll have 97 percent covered.” [Ben Smith, Politico, 12/23/07]
That’s us, people!!! I hope you’re entry level job insures you, otherwise your screwed if Obama wins.
“Sen. Obama did waterdown legislation requiring the nuclear industry to disclose leaks after receiving pressure from Exelon, one of his top campaign contributors. The New York Times reported:
A close look at the path his legislation took tells a very different story. While he initially fought to advance his bill, even holding up a presidential nomination to try to force a hearing on it, Mr. Obama eventually rewrote it to reflect changes sought by Senate Republicans, Exelon and nuclear regulators. The new bill removed language mandating prompt reporting and simply offered guidance to regulators, whom it charged with addressing the issue of unreported leaks.
…“Senator Obama’s staff was sending us copies of the bill to review, and we could see it weakening with each successive draft,” said Joe Cosgrove, a park district director in Will County, Ill., where low-level radioactive runoff had turned up in groundwater. “The teeth were just taken out of it.”
… The campaign acknowledged that Exelon executives had met with Mr. Obama’s staff about the bill…”
Politics as usual….
And the list goes on, but this is long enough.
February 14, 2008 at 5:10 pm
Zig!
February 14, 2008 at 5:15 pm
5:05 again
yes, i know there are some “there” instead of “they’re” and vice versa…and etc. and so on
February 14, 2008 at 5:16 pm
It’s E-Day, November, 2008.
McCain wins! 362 electoral vote!
Explain this one to me. After 16 years of being in the public light, Clinton and Obama both poll within the margin of error against McCain. It *ain’t* gonna get worse for Clinton. BUT, most of the country knows less about Obama. They’ll learn about inexperience. They’ll find out about the “present” votes.
Where is that huge electability advantage? Clinton, 46-40 in PA over McCain? Obama, doing worse!
We are in a college town. An intellectual, very liberal, out of touch college town. Yes, Obama stuff is everywhere. Yeah, Obama will win Madison and this state.
Being out of touch is nothing to be proud of.
February 14, 2008 at 5:22 pm
5:16-another good point
yes, i read about Clinton’s advantage over McCain in PA, and it’s more than Obama’s
yes, it’s just one state, but it is an example of the myth of Obama’s advantage over Clinton when it comes to competing with McCain
it’s just not there
February 14, 2008 at 5:31 pm
edit — Okay, obviously I’m kidding. Jeez. Maybe you’re all a cult.
February 14, 2008 at 5:32 pm
Hey, you know what the major base of voting in the Democratic Party in major states like Ohio? Urban minorities. How much do you think they know about human trafficking? Yeah, nothing. I acknowledge that it is sad that dumb people get to choose the president, but that’s the game and democrats need to learn how to play it like the Republicans have. Have you ever seen Jaywalking on the Tonight Show with Leno? They show pictures of presidents and key major political figures to everyday Joes on the streets, and most of them have absolutely no clue. What you fail to realize Anonymous is that Democrats and Republican bases ALWAYS come to the polls in droves, they aren’t the people who win or lose the election for a candidate.
When you say that either person can win, you obviously have not been looking at poll numbers. Polling shows numbers as high as 45% of people who will absolutely not vote for Hillary no matter who her opponent would be in November. She has burned many bridges. I am not saying that she isn’t a good candidate, but if everyone was all about the issues and experience, we’d have candidates like Kucinich and Richardson not Clinton and Obama.
It’s a sad truth, but America is retarded. If you don’t think so, watch reality television…
We need to start playing to these people and stop being so elitist. That’s all, have a nice day!
February 14, 2008 at 5:42 pm
but America is retarded… but America is retarded… but America is retarded… but America is retarded…
Seriously, is this your entire logic behind endorsing Obama? I wonder why your cult is so appreciative about the Superdelegate vote.
February 14, 2008 at 5:45 pm
Ok, that was not fair on my part.
But you need to realize the “that person in Ohio” who doesn’t care about human trafficking is not going to the website to read the Obama platform. Instead, I am. Many at this university are doing the same. Those “elitists” care about the party are going there too. Why do we support Hillary? Why do I? She answers those questions.
February 14, 2008 at 5:46 pm
*elitists who
February 14, 2008 at 5:47 pm
exactly!
also “but that’s the game and democrats need to learn how to play it like the Republicans have”
against each other…in the primaries…really?
come on, Milio.
February 14, 2008 at 5:47 pm
Or maybe when they have opportunities to speak to ~20,000 potential voters candidates should incorporate at least a moderate amount of discussion of the issues into their speeches in order to help educate voters, instead of playing the “politics as usual” games of vague descriptions of how they would make things so much better. Maybe if the candidates were able to use discussions of change as a starting point to begin at least some discussion of actually policy then voters would become more educated. That way when the media covered the candidates they could report on their stances on the issues and play clips of their speeches about the policies they would implement and voters wouldn’t have to work so hard as to figure out what exactly each candidate stood for.
February 14, 2008 at 5:50 pm
“That way when the media covered the candidates they could report on their stances on the issues and play clips of their speeches about the policies they would implement and voters wouldn’t have to work so hard as to figure out what exactly each candidate stood for.”
We’re Americans. We’re lazy.
February 14, 2008 at 9:55 pm
He did talk about issues. Especially ones that are important to students. Did you not remember the $4,000 voucher for college? He tailored his speech to his audience, which was primarily students. He wants to cut funding in Iraq and put more money into the infrastructure of the United States. He also wants to give extra help to elderly home owners and give protection to pensions and social security. He also wants to raise pay for teachers and make it so that they don’t have to teach to the test. He also thinks that parents should take a more aggressive role in their children. This was all in his speech if you bothered to listen…
Did you see any of his speech in the plant in Janesville, it was about jobs and the economy. IMAGINE THAT! What I have been saying since the beginning is that Hillary and Obama have the same stances on most subjects. The only glaring difference is the health care plan (which won’t happen for either candidate because no republican will ever vote for it), and Hillary’s stance on bombing Iran and voting for Iraq (and something else that rhymes with bobbyist:). If you didn’t watch the first 20 debates that came along and told you the issues, then that is your problem. The candidates have exhausted their campaigns because they have been campaigning since last January. If you actually care THAT much about this race and don’t know their stances on issues by now, then you really don’t care. And about issues, ask Hillary how she voted on the FISA amendments on Tuesday (the ones Feingold brought to the floor), OH WAIT SHE DIDN’T!
This country is in a shitty place right now (war, economy, civil rights, health care). Barack is a man that gives me a gospel hope to rise above the problems and make the world better.
All in all, the reason I am voting for Barack Hussein Obama is because he is a man inspiring man who talks straight, shares my moral and religious beliefs, and stands for helping his brothers and sisters at home and creating a new home strength that can reach out and live WITH the world, and not ABOVE the world.
February 14, 2008 at 9:55 pm
Oh and if you went to the Kohl center, you got a voting guide that showed where candidates stood on the issues…
February 14, 2008 at 9:57 pm
“against each other…in the primaries…really?”
Hillary is the one who is airing attack ads in Wisconsin. She is playing the game just like everybody else.
February 14, 2008 at 10:30 pm
I got there early…
Sat there for three hours…
Talked with a volunteer…
No guide dealing with the issues.
February 14, 2008 at 10:40 pm
They were there, but I don’t know if they were actually from Obama’s people or not…
February 14, 2008 at 10:46 pm
WHAT’S MY IP ADDRESS NOW?!
HUH? HUH? HUH? HUH HUH HUH HUH HUH?
THAT’S WHAT I THOUGHT YOU’RE BLIND.
February 15, 2008 at 1:25 am
Ok honestly, lets just keep this blog focused on local and campus politics. This is really the most irritating back and forth ive ever read on this blog.
WI will vote on Tuesday and decide. Will Obama carry the campus? Absolutely. Will he carry Dane County? More than likely. Will he win the state? We’ll see.
That much we know for sure.
February 15, 2008 at 2:46 am
This isn’t your blog.
If the CB wants to write about Clinton, or Obama, or Huckabee, or campus crime, or the freaking Ying Yang Twins, or Ashok Kumar’s coke habit, he’s gonna do it.
You don’t have to read it, you pretentious ass.
So shut the hell up.
KTHXBYE.
P.S.
I hope your mommy gotcha something uber/kewl for valentine’s day… or at least that she’s not pressing you too hard for this month’s rent for living in the basement.
February 15, 2008 at 4:10 am
stop denying reality:
1) independents are the key to winning in november
2) hillary gets her ass kicked with indies in every poll
3) obama wins indies over mccain in almost every poll
i’m so sick of reading the hateful screeds by clinton insider hacks because they’re pissed off that virtually all of campus disagrees with their analysis of the primary. deal with the fact you picked to stand on the wrong side of history and stop whining about it on the CB by bashing the guy who’s got more money, more votes, and more delegates. there’s a reason only ten people showed up to the hillary meeting the other night, all of them insiders/leadership. obama’s meeting that night? 20,000.
seriously, don’t you have IDs to do or something? that’s your only chance of breaking, oh, maybe 1,000 votes on tuesday.
kthanxbye.
February 15, 2008 at 9:04 am
Milio, but HOW is he going to do all that stuff you listed. Those are promises, not PLANS.
“I acknowledge that it is sad that dumb people get to choose the president, but that’s the game and democrats need to learn how to play it like the Republicans have.”
This is what I was referring to, your argument that the Democratic candidates should woo the “dumb voters” in the primaries. Idiotic.
I’m done with this. For today at least.
February 15, 2008 at 2:40 pm
“Ha! you say that as if anybody at a Hillary rally would be able to articulate her specific policy points.”
I’ll give you that not everyone would be able to, perhaps not even a majority, but I would bet my life savings that more people at a Clinton rally would know about policy than an Obama rally. Way more. I’d also bet that more people that know about policy in general support Clinton.
Why is it that Barack Obama is referred to as Obama, but Hillary Clinton is referred to as Hillary?
February 15, 2008 at 3:09 pm
her signs say “hillary for president” and his say “obama ‘08.”
nah, it clearly must be the man trying to keep her down.
February 15, 2008 at 3:10 pm
^^^What? Maybe what’s because of the signs?
February 15, 2008 at 3:11 pm
oh, you were referring to the first name thing. i thought you refuting the policy argument.
February 15, 2008 at 4:12 pm
I am still undecided on either candidate (check out my column next monday for my endorsement), but I have to hand it to Hillary on the Iraq issue. As far as websites go, and Obama supporters insist that us undecideds check out his web site for his stance on the issues, Hillary’s entry on the war in Iraq is far more substantive than Obama’s. I suppose it would have to be, as she’s part of the reason we are there.
February 15, 2008 at 5:26 pm
She’s part of the reason we are there… but the only one with solutions to get us out.
Do you really think Obama would have voted any differently? I think we are all too quick to associate the courage and integrate that we find in Senator Feingold and place it upon Obama.
February 15, 2008 at 5:42 pm
when obama was campaigning against the war in chicago, hillary clinton was in washington enabling bush, giving him bipartisan cover for a falsehood he would later use to attack democrats. i don’t know about you, but i took it pretty personally when republicans called me unpatriotic because i stood against the war. we have hillary clinton (among others) for giving bush the ability to do that.
in 2002, democrats needed a leader to stand up. our party starved for leadership and a voice of opposition. hillary clinton didn’t lead. she followed, and she’s never said sorry for it. i don’t know why anyone thinks she deserves a chance now when she can’t even admit that she was wrong. further, she hasn’t even learned from her mistake, because she voted to give bush another blank check just a few months ago when it comes to iran. it’s wrong, it’s not leadership, it ceratinly doesn’t reflect strong judgement or any experienced grasp of policy, and we can do better. we can do better, and are doing better, and that’s why obama is winning.
“if you’re ready for change, she’s ready to lead” ha.
i think that “if you’re ready for change, he’s already leading” is much more accurate.
February 15, 2008 at 5:43 pm
*hillary clinton to thank (among others)
February 15, 2008 at 6:12 pm
Obama may have given a speech in 2002 against the war, but we don’t know how he would have voted if in the Senate at the time. Let’s take a look at how easily he is swayed, and how he does one thing and says another:
His record after fact shows he supports the war, he voted twice in 2006 against bringing America’s troops back home. He votes for war appropriations giving our money to Halliburton and Blackwater!!!! His latest bit of posturing S 433 allows the Bush Administration to suspend any troop withdrawal.Which if not suspended, still keeps the troops in Iraq for a long time to come.
Obama when faced with tough choices always gave in to pressure from the Bush administration or corporate lobbyists. Such as Obama voted for Bush’s energy bill, sending more than $13 billion in subsidies and tax breaks to oil, coal, and nuclear companies. Obama voted with Republicans to allow credit card companies to raise interest rates over 30 percent, INCREASING STUDENT LOANS RATES AND FEES increasing hardship for families. Obama voted for one of Bush’s top priorities – expanding Nafta to South America – (he also likes to lie about Clinton’s record with NAFTA) even as President Bush obstructed all the top Democratic priorities. Obama voted with Bush to make it harder for ordinary people to hold big corporations accountable when they do things like sell toxic toys, poisonous pet food, or just plain rip you off. Obama was the Senate’s biggest Democratic advocate of subsidies for liquid coal, even though liquid coal produces twice the global warming pollution of the crude oil it’s meant to replace (Obama ‘backed off’ this position after being pummeled by environmentalists for several months, but still voted for increased subsidies, albeit with conditions)
Obama, a Hamiltonian believer in free trade and supporters of globalization has lent his support to the ‘Hamilton Project formed by corporate-neoliberal Citigroup chair Robert Rubin and other ‘Wall Street Democrats’ to counter populist rebellion against corporate tendencies within the Democratic Party. Obama provided assistance to pro-war candidates (such as Joe Lieberman). Obama voted for ‘business-friendly ‘tort reform’ bill that rolls back working peoples’ ability to obtain reasonable redress and compensation…from corporations. Obama considers single payer universal health care too socialist and has stated that he prefers voluntary solutions.
Now people are seduced by his promises, sans plans. But why should we believe he’ll follow through? Well, I DON’T!
Clinton ‘08!
Oh, and I agree, Gerald. Nice point.
February 15, 2008 at 6:40 pm
No one ever follows through on their campaign promises (for more, See George Bush and the privatization of social security) I don’t know if any of you listen to the Mic (92.1) but people they interview on the show and callers say that they didn’t like Gore and Kerry because they talked to much on issues and bored everyone.
Also, I don’t put much stock in how people vote on military funding. John Kerry was ripped to shreds for not voting on war funding because he obviously hates troops. With a candidate like McCain, that will be raised exponentially.
Another thing I noticed about the Mic is people who call in. Stephanie Miller endorsed Obama (although she stands that people should vote with his/her conscience and not just follow her blindly). Ever since she came out with her opinion, Hillary people have been calling in with hate for her and her show (they have even been calling to get her off the air). That kind of action is down right Republican.
Gravel ‘08!
February 15, 2008 at 7:01 pm
“Also, I don’t put much stock in how people vote on military funding. John Kerry was ripped to shreds for not voting on war funding because he obviously hates troops.”
I understand this point. What I’m really getting at though is Obama likes to talk a lot about “being right on day one.” It’s not a black and white as he likes to pretend.
February 15, 2008 at 10:22 pm
Hitler 32′! He is so inspiring! He will be right on day one and give Germany hope!
February 15, 2008 at 10:26 pm
Stalin 36′! Change is always good! Death to the Kulaks! Yes we can!
February 16, 2008 at 4:07 am
Robespierre ‘93!Prompt, severe, inflexible justice to protect the Republic! Salvation of the people!
February 16, 2008 at 4:12 am
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/barone/2008/02/15/is-hillary-due-for-a-comeback.html
February 16, 2008 at 4:24 am
Lies.
February 16, 2008 at 3:23 pm
http://www.jsonline.com/watch/?watch=1&date=2/16/2008&id=35716
she’s leaving the state a day earlier than scheduled, before wisconsin even starts voting…
her campaign must know something we don’t. i wonder if the internals have plummeted in response to her going negative?
it’d make sense; the big knock on her is that she’s mean (and that’s a diplomatic characterization – note that i’m not saying i agree with this, but it’s not like it isn’t out there). the negative ads would hurt her more because they’d confirm what people already fear, thus perhaps costing her a ton of support. plus, obama’s responses were positive ads, which makes her look even worse, and perhaps means his numbers might go up.
any comment from the campus clinton crew on this, cb?
February 16, 2008 at 3:38 pm
I think you’d have to ask them. I’m sure they have an email address.
February 17, 2008 at 3:47 pm
“Bill Clinton is doing exactly what a surrogate should NOT do: become a distraction, getting the campaign off message.”
- Fox News
February 18, 2008 at 1:17 pm
I actually did some research on this vaunted energy bill. We talk about the tax cuts, but fail to mention the rise in taxes. It actually came up in the debates. Check out factcheck.org. There were indeed tax cuts, but in total, the aforementioned energy bill increased taxes by about 50 million.
February 18, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Factcheck.org really rips into Obama’s health care plan.
February 18, 2008 at 1:47 pm
Voters really rip into Hillary’s inevitability plan.
February 18, 2008 at 2:39 pm
^true that. Fact Check tears it up. But I’m still a fan of subsidized health care that is not forced upon me.
February 18, 2008 at 3:18 pm
Amen.
February 18, 2008 at 4:10 pm
Gerald, with Hillary’s health care plan you can keep your current policy if you choose. It’s not forced on you.
Obama keeps misleadingly calling his plan “universal health care,” it is not. If he doesn’t want to propose, don’t call it that.
Also, WTF to your column?
“We are not nominating a knowledgable adviser.”
Uhh, yes we are, or at least we should be.
February 18, 2008 at 4:40 pm
Hillary’s healthcare plan will never get passed. Gerald is at the same place that most Americans are; they hate to be mandated to do anything.
Look, healthcare needs to be more accessible and more affordable. Period. Both candidates agree to that, so let’s get away from this universal buzzword that’s meaningless and actually examine 1) who’s plan will actually get more people covered and 2) who’s plan can actually get enacted.
Obama’s plan will leave 15 million unmandated to get healthcare. That isn’t the same as “not covering.” His plan will make healthcare affordable, and he’s correctly betting that most people will get covered as long as it’s affordable. No one wants to be without healthcare, and it’s insulting that the Clinton campaign suggests that people who don’t have it won’t get it because they want to leech. Does anyone really believe that people would choose to not have healthcare if it didn’t cost an arm and a leg? In the words of your own candidate, “Get Real.” The Clinton plan rests on the premise that the American people are lazy and can’t make the right decision. Obama doesn’t make such insulting assumptions.
Additionally, Hillary’s plan is exceedingly costly, and also doesn’t have a chance in hell to get put into law. Obama’s plan pays for itself. There are also significant issues with mandated insurance. Can the government really compel people to have healthcare? That’s an issue that could go to the Supreme Court, and I’m not so sure they’re going to take our side.
This is ultimatley why Obama’s plan is better. Period. Increases affordability, and thereby increases accessibility. And it can get passed.
This issue is perfect in highlighting the bottom-line to Clinton and Obama, and the choice we face tomorrow:
Independents and Republicans hate Hillary Clinton, and that’s why if the General Election were today, she’d lose to John McCain in Wisconsin. She’s polarizing, her negatives are unbelievably high and only going higher, and regardless to her good intentions and policy ideas, she can’t get them enacted because she’s never going to build the coalitions needed. It’s not enough to just send a Democrat to Washington, and anyone who believes that is unfortunately deluded.
On the flip side, Barack Obama does incredibly well with GOP and Independent voters as well as Democrats. That’s why he’d beat McCain in Wisconsin, by a substantial margin. He’s already proven he can bring people from all walks of life, all places in society and all political views together for a common purpose. He’s also proven time and time again that those who underestimate do so at their own peril.
We aren’t just selecting a President who needs to have exhibited the correct judgment on issues that matter, we’re also electing a candidate who needs to WIN that election.
Hillary Clinton supporters are willing to risk a McCain presidency, for a candidate who, on the biggest decision she faces, has a record of getting it wrong.
Barack Obama supporers are willing to risk giving the Presidency for a candidate who has exhibited superior judgement on these issues, but who’s resume isn’t as long and doesn’t owe as many people in Washington favors.
That’s the choice we face tomorrow. It’s a surpassingly easy one. Young voters can smell bullshit from a mile away, and we’ll see that reflected in how overwhelming the margin is on campus tomorrow.
February 18, 2008 at 4:55 pm
I am so sick of this “polarizing” bullsh*t. That’s so lame, lame, lame. There is no way in hell that John McCain would beat Hillary Clinton in Wisconsin. Absurd.
As for the independents, etc. that will vote for Obama but not Hillary, that’s stupid too. Who are they going to vote for? Huckabee? McCain? Hell no! They’ll vote for the democratic candidate, period. They may wish it was Obama, but even so, they are not going to vote republican, or sit home. That’s too risky.
Also, Obama making health care “affordable.” Yes, but what’s “affordable”? What does he consider affordable? Saying he will make it affordable and reaching the magic number are two different things. And he should stop calling it “universal” health care.
Hillary’s plan may not pass as is, but Obama’s is so weak already the Reps. will pick it apart no problem. You’ve got to start strong.
Universal health care should become a reality. Reps, etc. were quaking in their boots over social security, now over universal health care.
“Young voters can smell bullshit from a mile away”
Unfortunately they cannot, which is why Obama-fever has swept campus. Talk about buzzwords.
February 18, 2008 at 5:09 pm
Okay, well you can conjecture, but independents aren’t Democrats, so they aren’t going to vote for Clinton just because she’s a Dem. Polls have consistently shown that independents prefer Obama over McCain, but McCain over Clinton. Just because you wish it weren’t so doesn’t mean it isn’t so.
Getting angry about it doesn’t change it, either.
Also, you can say there’s no way it happens, but SurveyUSA’s poll released today says McCain beats Clinton by 7 in Wisconsin, but loses to Obama by 10.
February 18, 2008 at 5:12 pm
polls also said Clinton was going to lose New Hampshire.
polls are crap. hanging decisions on polls is ludicrous. “well, polls say Obama will beat McCain, so I’ll vote for him. also, I’m a dumbass.”
(not you, people who rationalize this way)
February 18, 2008 at 5:14 pm
also, people are sick of Republican rule. let’s be real, most independents will very likely to inclined to vote democrat. that’s what i meant.
February 18, 2008 at 5:22 pm
Polls are accurate ways to gauge public opinion. They can be wrong, but the NH case was specific to the fact that there was a huge last minute shift in opinion toward Hillary. Also, the Dem race looked locked up for Obama, which led many independents to back McCain in the GOP Primary instead. Polls can’t predict these things, but they can offer an accurate snapshot of where a race stands on a given day. And anecdotal evidence with most independent voters confirms the fact they like Obama and McCain, in that order.
Voters shouldn’t vote based on a poll of who’s going to win for the sole purpose of backing the winner; that was not my point. My point is that DEMOCRATS concerned with winning the Whitehouse may want to consider who has a better ability to beat John McCain. That’s Obama, and polls have consistently revealed that fact, both in Wisconsin and nationally. Obama beats McCain in Iowa, Nevada, and Colorado, and winning those three alone delivers the Whitehouse to Obama. Clinton loses all three to McCain, and doesn’t win Ohio, Florida or Pennsylvania at this point.
Do we want another 2000 and 2004 where it’s neck and neck, or do we want a chance to beat the bastards in a blowout? That’s the choice.
February 18, 2008 at 5:24 pm
people are sick of Bush. democrats are sick of Bush. but independents still like McCain more than Hillary. you can think it’s absurd, and it is, but it’s also fact at this point in the campaign. wishing it weren’t so doesn’t make it so.
February 18, 2008 at 5:25 pm
and further, why pick someone who might get independent votes if they’re inclined to vote Dem instead of picking the one who they’ll vote for without question?
needless risk.
February 18, 2008 at 5:32 pm
actually clinton is beating mccain by a higher margin in PA.
also, the polls are crap while it’s all hypotheticals. when faced with the actual decision of Clinton or McCain, i have no doubt it would sway Clinton’s way. especially after she schools him in the debates.
anyway, how can independents like Obama more, then jump to McCain, when Clinton matches up far more closely with Obama than McCain.
February 18, 2008 at 5:38 pm
People backing Hillary will not listen to the fact that, totally irrationally, a lot of independents absolutely despise her.
It’s a fact. Lotta people distrust her, hated the Clinton impeachment BS, are sexist, whatever.
I can’t explain it, and I think it’s extremely unfortunate, but it’s a reality.
Just like another commenter said, just because you don’t like the reality doesn’t mean you can ignore it, or claim it’s bullshit.
Talk to several true independents. Ask them their thoughts on Obama against Clinton. You’ll see.
February 18, 2008 at 5:42 pm
Obama fuels the fire with his character assassinations. And they say Hillary’s the one who will do anything to win, divide the party, etc. Ironic, isn’t it?
I love how everyone here is an authority on the “independent” psyche.
Seriously people, polls are crap. They shouldn’t even exist, because they irrationally sway opinion. If there wasn’t the Obama is more likely to beat McCain idiocy, would people still like him as much.
flowery rhetoric only goes so far.
February 18, 2008 at 5:46 pm
you have no doubt, but you can’t see the future, and your view of this is probably clouded by the fact that you love hillary. you can come back and say, oh well you must like obama and therefore the same applies, but that’s why i’m pointing to objective evidence that supports the claims i make, not just personal feelings or hunches.
it’s an easy jump from obama to mccain, and here’s why. alot of independents don’t like and don’t trust hillary. i don’t mean that as an attack, but please recognize that your candidate is viewed as polarizing and viewed negatively by over 45% of the electorate. that’s not really a debatable point, because it’s been an unmoving fact about american politics for the last eight years. alot of people just don’t like her, rational or not. and no, it’s just not republicans.
people like obama’s freshness, his optimism, and his honesty. it draws in alot of independents, who are very disillussioned with politics today.
a move to mccain is natural because while he isn’t fresh (similar to Hillary, they’re both known products that have been around a while), he seems more honest than she does. now, you can debate whether or not that’s true, but politics isn’t about truth, it’s about perception.
and again, your inclination or conclusion on this doesn’t match with what the polls overwhelmingly show. not just one poll, this isn’t cherry-picked to win a debate with someone anonymously on CB’s blog. every poll i can remember seeing, and i read alot of them, shows clinton so much weaker with independents, and that’s why she loses general election matchups to McCain.
i respect people who stick with her, especially on this campus, but i at least would like clinton supporters to acknowledge the risk they’re asking our party to take in nominating her, because if we fuck up this one, things are going to get really bad.
i still have yet to see any clinton supporter make a case for why we should risk the presidency for her.
obama isn’t nearly as risky, and he’s more progressive to boot. for as much as some hyped-up clinton supporters are on campus blogs and bh comments, the fact is that most people aren’t voting for obama because of emotion. it’s a careful decision based on his issues, his record, and what he offers, in addition to his chances at actually winning. as much as others may want to dismiss this as hope-mongering or cultism, it’s not. he’s more true to liberal values, has shown a record of making the right call when it matters, and yeah, he’s inspiring too, which is a nice bonus. it’s bogus that clinton supporters dismiss him because he wants to make people feel good about america again. i want to love this country like i did when i was a kid, and obama gives us a chance to do that. not by talking, but by winning and then actually accomplishing what he’s set out to do by bringing people together and changing minds. it’s a much lower risk proposition in the end.
February 18, 2008 at 5:47 pm
I hate this blog
Has less taste than a cottonball. In my time back in the day we had informative people who wrote decent articles. This is all rubbish. Do you even have a point to your life?
–Norbert Truman III
February 18, 2008 at 5:47 pm
Being the commentator from 5:38, I’d like to clarify.
I’m not going off polls. Polls are total crap, I agree.
I am basing my thought process off of my personal experiences.
I have several friends: a few students, couple middle class working stiff, two elderly business owners, etc, that I have spoken with about it.
The majority have come out and said, for whatever reason, they cannot stand Clinton.
Please, tell me that their ideas are worthless and not indicative of the greater whole.
However, realize that this was done in three states of the upper midwest… all known to be supposedly very liberal.
The trend is real.
February 18, 2008 at 5:52 pm
“people like obama’s freshness, his optimism, and his honesty. it draws in alot of independents, who are very disillussioned with politics today.”
he’s not as honest as the likes to pretend. he denounces lobbyist money, when he’s already taken hundreds of thousands of dollars of it. and still does, with clever tactics. he takes the money of “former” lobbyists, their spouses, partners, etc.
Exelon?
i’m just so sick of him being portrayed as the fresh-faced squeaky clean alternative. he is not. that’s my main beef with Obama supporters.
also, republicans are going to have a field day with the “fresh faced kid” is he is the democratic nominee. it’ll being a feeding frenzy. they say they could beat Clinton easier. of course they say that. it’s reverse psychology.
February 18, 2008 at 5:57 pm
again, perceptions matter more than reality.
it may be your beef, and you may be sick of it, but that’s the way it is.
when he’s beating the hell out of McCain, signing all sorts of progressive legislation, and giving a state of the union address with words that are bigger than two syllables, i promise you won’t get sick of it.
February 18, 2008 at 5:59 pm
5:57, my point is it is going to catch up with him if he’s the dem nominee. republicans will have a field day knocking him off his pedestal.
as for your second part, if it happens, then perhaps.
February 18, 2008 at 6:02 pm
if clinton couldn’t knock him off the pedestal, what makes you think the republicans can?
let’s be real – the clinton political machine is just as well-oiled – and just as dirty in some regards – as the GOP machine.
no one says this will be a cakewalk, but having a candidate who shares our values, makes the right decision, is inspiring and is liked by most voters is better than having one who shares our values, sometimes makes the wrong decision (and doesn’t apologize for it), isn’t considered inspiring for many (though not all), and is disliked by a majority of voters.
February 18, 2008 at 6:03 pm
I’ve been lobbied and pressured by many different people to vote certain ways. After posting this, I’ll get another salvo.
Yet no matter what anybody else pushes onto me – which has been getting annoying – ironically enough, the Badger Herald today may have made up my mind on the primary.
The Obama article by Gerald was decent. Made some good points, others I didn’t agree with. In any case, written by a student, and SFO didn’t send anything else in to the paper. Fine.
The Clinton campaign’s contribution to the paper, on the other hand, I see as nothing short of a total disaster.
I found the article condescending, appealing to the audience like they were stupid kids, not adults in any fashion.
Unfortunately, that turned into the whole crux of the article: Hillary treated our generation oh-so-great when we were children, don’t you want that again?!?!
No. I don’t.
I do not care about Hillary Clinton’s treatment of her daughter’s friends. I’m betting that George Bush treated Jenna and Barbara’s friends pretty well too. Maybe even bought them a drink or two. Doesn’t mean jack, besides that he’s a fun, enjoyable person, which few could deny (if nothing else, it was fun (at first) to laugh at him).
So, why the hell adults, not even in school anymore and lacking ANY ties to UW-Madison, would think it a great idea to send their personal comments to a COLLEGE PAPER is beyond me.
And this, essentially, is what has infuriated me.
If a city figure has a comment, okay. Even Will Sandstrom, he counts.
An alumnus, okay.
A seriously political figure, one of the candidates, great, or at worst, one of the managers, though that’d be pushing it.
I personally do not give a damn, in any fashion, to hear from these four fine ladies.
Their opinions do not mean anything to me. They waste my time.
They urge us to focus on traits from a kid’s childhood as reasons to vote.
That’s just pathetic.
Someone will surely argue that they did this of their own volition, but that’s crap. They were put up to it by the campaign.
And so, unless something drastic changes in the next few hours, I am no longer considering a vote for Hillary Clinton.
I find this kind of campaign appeal ill-calculating and patronizing.
And I’ve come to be quite tired of being clearly manipulated over the last nearly eight years, thank you.
I do not find Barack Obama an incredibly appealing, heal-all candidate.
But I find Clinton abhorrent.
February 18, 2008 at 6:06 pm
the gop machine, set in motion, is ruthless. the clinton’s are a poor comparison to it.
let’s be real, the reps are far better at attacking opponents.
if there were a dem pres as inept at Bush, do you really thing the reps would have let it fly like the dems did? we would have heard the words impeachment incessantly.
anyway, i respect what you have to say. now i’ve got to go to Monona Terrace.
February 18, 2008 at 6:07 pm
“Maybe even bought them a drink or two.”
props, i lol’d reading this one.
February 18, 2008 at 6:09 pm
ruthless sure, but it’s far harder to attack obama than hillary.
ask hillary about it when you’re at the terrace. i’m sure she’d tell you how hard he is to beat
February 18, 2008 at 6:10 pm
matt, you took Hillary out of the running because some girls wrote an editorial?
i know something drastic. go see hillary at the terrace. you just may sing a different tune.
February 18, 2008 at 6:12 pm
ok, one more post.
“ruthless sure, but it’s far harder to attack obama than hillary.”
yes, but there are no surprises with Hillary. she’s vetted. who knows what they’ll come up with for Obama.
“ask hillary about it when you’re at the terrace. i’m sure she’d tell you how hard he is to beat”
touche
February 18, 2008 at 6:14 pm
the she’s vetted thing isn’t a selling point.
yes, i know exactly what they’re going to bring at her. and it scares me.
the difference? people dislike her, so they’re more inclined to believe it.
February 18, 2008 at 6:15 pm
Glad to represent the irrational American public, who at one offense, will turn away from a candidate.
Least I’m not voting on abortion.
Also, probably unable to go to the rally, as I just got home, have homework to do tonight, and haven’t gone over there yet. Too late.
February 18, 2008 at 6:18 pm
This blog’s comments nowadays only heat up when Clinton or Obama are brought up.
Then its like vultures to the kill.
No concern for anything else.
Campus crime? District 5 race? Screw it.
February 18, 2008 at 6:33 pm
While I completely disagree with Matt’s specific reasoning for voting against HRC, the overall idea that her campaign represents nothing more than the continuation of divisive politics is entirely accurate. If this wasn’t apparent before the campaign came to Wisconsin, it certainly is now. In a desperate attempt to smear Obama, she went negative and attacked him for not agreeing to debate her for the 3523th time. Are you kidding me? To try and claim that Obama doesn’t want to discuss the issues at this point is almost absurd. They’ve held debates in which Iraq, health care, education, foreign policy, domestic policy, trade policy, and almost every topic under the sun have been discussed. Instead of grasping for straws, how about HRC comes up with some fresh ideas to lead the country forward? (Note: by fresh ideas I don’t mean piggybacking on ideas that Barack has already suggested during the campaign)
February 18, 2008 at 6:54 pm
I am a John Edwards supporter who has decided not to vote tomorrow. While you and I may disagree over policy items and tactics with Senator Clinton’s campaign, to call her “abhorent” is offensive to Democrats everywhere. Voting for her or not, she has an impressive resume and is a respected woman politican around the planet. I question whether someone who came to your conclusion would ever vote for her in the first place.
February 18, 2008 at 6:55 pm
Priding oneself on being irrational screams of attention whore.
February 18, 2008 at 7:00 pm
“Also”, you clearly have never met me, are not my friend, whatever. If you did, you’d understand.
“To Matt W”, I find this particular campaign tactic extremely distasteful. I appreciate a good majority of what she’s done, but this was a stupid, stupid, needless contribution.
And to that end, your line of thinking somewhat frightens me. I apologize, I was unaware that I must support all democratic senators!
What is this, the French Revolutionary Terror? Stalinism?
If I dislike her, I’m free to say what I like.
I really don’t care if you don’t like it, and damn you for trying to shut out someone else’s opinion in the same of party unity.
February 18, 2008 at 7:02 pm
name*, not same.
February 18, 2008 at 7:03 pm
(And also, feel free to check out my blog, which is listed on the CB sidebar (drifting) if you want to see my thinking in action. Maybe you’ll understand me some more.)
February 18, 2008 at 7:28 pm
Just curious – does anybody know what Barack’s campaign strategy is for beating Hillary if she wins Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania? I think he’s going to win here but it seems like Hillary has a better-than-average shot at winning it all on March 4.
thanks
February 18, 2008 at 8:13 pm
You didn’t take a leak on Obama or Clinton so nobody’s gonna give a crap about your question.
February 18, 2008 at 8:29 pm
My guess is that Obama picks up one of the three. He’s got a ton of money, and a few recent Texas polls have shown him within range; two recent ones show him up 6 (ARG, which has a terrible track record in the primary so far) and 2 (CNN, of which hasn’t commissioned too many polls this cycle, so there’s no way to judge how good of a polling shop it is).
Hillary’s problem isn’t that she needs to win all three, it’s that she needs to win all three with 60% of the vote to make up the pledged delegate disparity. Also of note, Texas decides 1/3 of its delegates by caucus, 2/3rds by primary. I’m not exactly sure how it works beyond that fact, but it seems pretty complicated.
February 18, 2008 at 10:35 pm
“(Note: by fresh ideas I don’t mean piggybacking on ideas that Barack has already suggested during the campaign)”
Actually, Hillary had her policies laid out before Obama.
Anyway, I just came back from the terrace and Hillary KILLED it. I really believe (I know, just because you believe it doesn’t make it true, bla bla) that undecideds would have been won over.
First, she knows her sh*t. She doesn’t condescend, and gives specifics and why. She’s funny. Yup, she was funny. The crowd was rauscious, and it was great. People under-estimate her ability to inspire. She’s smart as a whip too.
I shouldn’t sound so gloating because I’ll just be written off as a Hillary lover. Trust, I’m a skeptic just like the next guy. But Hillary’s substance over style (wink, wink) has won me over.
It is such a shame that people like to throw ire her way and don’t even know why.
February 18, 2008 at 10:35 pm
111 on the Chelsea’s homies’ letter.
Holla.
February 19, 2008 at 12:12 am
Too bad.
February 19, 2008 at 12:15 am
You should post this link so people see it:
http://vpa.wi.gov/VoterSearchScreen.aspx?Language=en-us
Pretty cool, searches for your registration, so you don’t need to reregister or check it at the polls.
And searches for polling place as well.
February 19, 2008 at 1:29 am
both are now voting for obama.
why? they want a democrat in the whitehouse, and worry hillary can’t win.
also, reports of the hillary event attendance = smaller that obama’s october crowd at the terrace. not a good sign for the clinton campaign.
February 19, 2008 at 1:34 am
prime obama voters. 20. diverse. educated.
my apartment? 4-0 Clinton. Obama will win on campus, but Obamaites have to be kidding themselves if they think we don’t exist.
February 19, 2008 at 1:38 am
of course Hillary can win. if she was the dem nominee, and all the in-fighting between dems was over, and people really listened to what she had to say instead of being distracted by Obama’s empty rhetoric, they wouldn’t doubt her electability.
McCain would be toast.
February 19, 2008 at 1:49 am
21-22. diverse. educated. from rural wisconsin. prime clinton voters.
the score? 3-0 obama. add me in, and our male roommate, and it’s 5-0 obama.
glad to be canceling out their votes and then some!
February 19, 2008 at 1:51 am
Obama is underqualified, an overly verbose empty rhetoric slinger, he plays dirty politics then blinks innocently, he’s a hypocrite who has taken hundreds of thousands from lobbyists, shady dealings with Exelon, he’s a coward to not debate (there has only been a solitary one-on-one debate between he and Clinton), he hypnotizes the uninformed masses with pretty prose rather than educate them to make informed voting decisions. I am sick of it.
Clinton trumps him in every way, except naivety.
February 19, 2008 at 1:53 am
there’s one thing hillary certainly trumps obama with, and it’s the reason she’ll lose tomorrow.
February 19, 2008 at 1:54 am
Notice how we elected Bush twice.
February 19, 2008 at 1:55 am
“also, reports of the hillary event attendance = smaller that obama’s october crowd at the terrace. not a good sign for the clinton campaign”
God you’re a hack. I bet you are sitting in a chair at this moment, burning as you look at this. Obama will win Madison. He polls better in college towns. This isn’t unexpected. Even then, you are wrong.
“U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y. spoke to a crowd of nearly 4,000 supporters at the Monona Terrace Monday on the eve of the Wisconsin primary.”
http://dailycardinal.com/article/2020
February 19, 2008 at 1:56 am
http://dailycardinal.com/article/2020
UW-Madison sophomore Sara Jerving said that she previously supported Obama, but after attending Monday night’s rally, she plans to vote for Clinton in the primary election on Tuesday.
February 19, 2008 at 1:58 am
i was thinking something else, but you’re probably too dumb to figure it out.
about 4,000, but obama was over 4,000. thanks for playing!
and, by the way, the kohl center crowd? 4 times bigger. god it sucks when you’re on the losing team!
February 19, 2008 at 1:59 am
clinton picks up one vote. upset alert!
February 19, 2008 at 2:01 am
But only one, based solely on preaching “words” of emotional and intangible concepts, can attract 20,000 people to the Kohl Center. Only one can inspire traditionally apathetic demographics to come out in droves to vote. Only one can beat the word “change” to death so violently yet still bring crowds to their feet with each reference.
Obama can do all of these things, and that is why he has our endorsement for the Democratic nomination.
February 19, 2008 at 2:01 am
Obama has won eight consecutive primaries, and though it seems trivial, he is more “likable” than Clinton.
February 19, 2008 at 2:01 am
Although he may lack experience, some of the greatest U.S. presidents—Abraham Lincoln, for example—have been inexperienced.
So, as Wisconsin Democrats head to the polls Tuesday with respect for both candidates, they should vote for the candidate who has the best chance of taking the White House in November. We believe this candidate is Barack Obama.
February 19, 2008 at 2:02 am
Obama has the edge over likely Republican nominee Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., 52-42 percent, while Clinton trails McCain 49-42 percent. Many national polls have shown similar tendencies among the general public.
February 19, 2008 at 2:12 am
what is wrong with you people? all hail the mightly polls! screw polls. screw likability. who is qualified????!!!! am i the last same person on earth?
February 19, 2008 at 2:13 am
what is wrong with you people? all hail the mightly polls! screw polls. screw likability. who is qualified????!!!! am i the last sane and rational person on earth?
February 19, 2008 at 2:15 am
what is wrong with you people? all hail the mighty polls! screw polls. screw likability. who is qualified????!!!! am i the last sane and rational person on earth?
February 19, 2008 at 2:17 am
no, it seems that you’re one of the last ones who denies social science methodology for illogical gut feelings clouded by your unmoving (but undeniably admirable) love for a candidate.
February 19, 2008 at 2:23 am
sorry for the triple post, it kept not working so I resubmitted after fixing typos.
i’m not illogical, just at my wits end. i’m not going to write an essay about why i support Clinton.
February 19, 2008 at 2:31 am
Kohl Center =/= Monona Terrace.
Obama supporters (more wealthy, college towns) =/= Hillary (”lunch pail Democrats”)
Therefore, Obama packing a larger venue in a city of his base, does not place the opposition on the “losing team.”
One thing is for sure. The Obama supporters on this blog show how little Obama’s movement will change.
February 19, 2008 at 3:01 pm
HOORAY FOR PROGRESS!
DOWN WITH REACTIONARY LEADERSHIP!
!!