Download | Play 
Download | Play (h/t Heather & Bill)
Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow dissect the various styles of the Democratic candidates after the Nevada debate. How refreshing to have a true discussion about the candidates rather than get distracted by media-driven memes.
Every candidate from the beginning of time has run on the grounds that they’re going to change something. That’s what they do, left right and center. I mean, Bush has even admitted that were he running for a third term, he’d be running as the change candidate. So the way you make it a compelling story is that you tell voters not just that you want to bring about change, but why you think change needs to happen and what needs to be changed in order for these problems that vex our nation to be brought around so that they are…so that we’re in a better place.
And I think that Obama and Clinton and Edwards are actually identifying what needs to be changed in three really different ways. I think Hillary Clinton is saying the Republicans and Bush need to be out and Democrats need to be in. I think John Edwards is saying the special interests and the lobbyists need to be out and the people need to be in, in the populist way. And I think that Barack Obama is saying that he needs to be in because he can transcend the differences across the political divide right now. There’s three very different visions of what you would do to the country if you had the reins.
No Trackbacks To “Countdown: The Candidates Of Change“
I’m still pissed at NBC about Kucinich. Can’t watch.
How great it would be if all three ended up working together in the White House next year. They seem to actually generally respect one another and admire one another’s strengths, I don’t see why they wouldn’t, that is, if all three actually want to change something.
It’s the economy stupids.
Change itself is not necessarily good; just look at all the bad changes that Bush is reasonable for!
Based on Rachel’s remarks (I <3 Rachel!), you’d think Edwards and Clinton are the people who would get things done, if elected. Obama comes off sounding like the guy who everybody will like, y’know, and want to have a beer with.
Hmm..
Pissed @ 1:
NBC = GE = Nuclear Reactors + Weapons
John Edwards = Bilderberg Group
Hillary Clinton = Bilderberg Group
Michelle Obama = Council On Foreign Relations
The early primaries exist to silence all populist candidates and leave us only with the ones annointed by the aristocrats.
Kucinich and Paul are this season’s Howard DEan.
Did you know that Kucinich is having the New Hamphire primary recounted . . . seems there is a problem with the voting machines . . Audio Here
Gee, some coverage on Edwards. For a while I was thinking he is only a halogram. Just shows up on the screen once in a while, then disappears. They are still working on the technology.
Sounds like Edwards is the man for me! I happen to be the populist.
Is this change ?
http://www.barackobama.com/200....._forum.php
“Last week, this event was described to me as a small gathering of friends. Looking at all of you here today; seeing so many of you who care about peace in this world; who care about a strong and lasting friendship between Israel and the United States, and who care about what’s on the next page of our shared futures, I think “a small gathering of friends” fits this crowd just right.”
Pissed @ 1:
Yes but, they have a constitutional right to subvert our constitutional right to select a president.
L.A. Confidential @ 3:
I keep sayin and sayin . . . .
AP - 1 hour, 12 minutes ago
NEW YORK - The Bank of New York Mellon Corp.’s fourth-quarter profit tumbled 68 percent due to its exposure to assets backed by mortgages and a tough comparison to last year, when the bank gained $1.4 billion after unloading its retail operations.
L.A. Confidential @ 11:
and sayin . . . .
Merrill posts worst quarter in its history Reuters - Thu Jan 17, 12:14 PM ET
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Merrill Lynch & Co Inc reported about $16 billion in mortgage-related write downs and adjustments on Thursday in the worst quarter of the company’s history.
It’s not Style, it’s The Economy Stupids!
With each new president comes some sort of change. Bush sure as hell changed a lot of things and in his case, his “change” wasn’t good for our country. I think each of the dem candidates brings a talent of his or her own. Can we just blend them all together and pour the result into the oval office?
If any of the repubs get into the oval office, the change will be more of the same only a smarter person will be doing it.
We don’t know what any of the candidates will do until they actually become President, but for obvious reasons Hillary and Obama do represent change. All the other candidates (except Kucinich) have quickly embraced “change” to seem like the anti-BUSH.
I think Edwards is saying that even Bank Tellers Who Support Hillary Refuse to ‘Make Change’
The corporations have already decided who is going to be president and the media is merely their talking horse of the day (Step right up! See the amazing, the irrefutable, the wondrous talking horse! Don’t look away. Keeps your euyes focused on the talking horse!)
As a former Edwards supporter, after this debate I can only think: Either vote Kucinich or don’t vote!
But there is that cynical side of me that says that the cenesorsip and muffling of Kucinich is a drive to get progressives to vote for Kucinich, thereby denying Edwards that prog vote…these politicans are so scummy…)
This article fails to point out that Obama was the candidate for Change and Clinton & Edwards stole it after Iowa.
Oh yeah nevermind, another pro Hillary article by Nicole Belle.
Can’t watch either. Never again. After what they have done to Kucinich, I will watch only Chris Matthews from now on.
No, I’m kidding. GE and NBC advertisers can f**k off. If Dennis Kucinich wasn’t invited, that would be another story. But he was, and they went to court, and they appealed the ruling like real brave fighters fighting for the right cause, as if they had to be so f*****g transparent with the way they treat US PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES and CONGRESSMEN. Dennis is so much bigger than this BS.
Bush is going to lay out his economic stimulus plan tomorrow. What’s he going to do? Maybe tell us if we join the army we will get lots of benefits? Last I looked the DOW was down over 200 points. It may be too late for bush’s band-aide.
Do we need a change? Yes, but if we had it today it would be seven years too late for some things.
Only JOHN EDWARDS has the GUTS to do what has to be done!
The “other two” are just “more of the same old, same old BELTWAY STUFF” until the nation comes apart, finishing what the BUSH BRAT AND HIS GANG has so well started.
VOTE FOR EDWARDS!
“I think Hillary Clinton is saying the Republicans and Bush need to be out and Democrats need to be in. I think John Edwards is saying the special interests and the lobbyists need to be out and the people need to be in, in the populist way. And I think that Barack Obama is saying that he needs to be in…”
What an ego.
pissed off patricia @ 19:
Bush will speak and calm the population with his words of wisdom.
“If ur’ hurtin’ you can always join the Military. Lot’s of jobs, a great future, signing bonuses, and the best leadership money can buy. Beats being homeless.”
This was a great interview. What I think the candidates need to focus on though is the “how”. What needs to change and why it needs to be changed are easy to promote to the voters. Its how they intend to change it that holds the consequences. This is what the voters need to hear and then let the voters decide who’s idea of change is the best.
By the way and this is OT but Keith Olbermann really looks like my old College Constitutional Law instructor. I’m almost tempted to write him and ask him why I got a B on a paper I did. :lol:
Avid Reader @ 6
“Did you know that Kucinich is having the New Hamphire primary recounted . . . seems there is a problem with the voting machines “
Yep, I’m just glad he didn’t use PayPal to finance it. : )
Andy @ 10
Yes but, they have a constitutional right to subvert our constitutional right to select a president.
Don’t get me started on corporations and their freakin’ rights as citizens.
Wow…
Rachel Maddow does actual punditry that is informative and helps make the race more understandable.
How refreshing.
Steve @ 17:
Well, yeah, after Iowa, they all climbed on that bandwagon, didn’t they. Even Mitt said he was the candidate for change. ;)
But I think Edwards, although “change” wasn’t his buzzword, he really is for a change of direction.
It’s not the economy stupid, that’s what the industrial plutocrats would like you to believe as you buy their products and fight for their oil profits.
It is global warming. Climate change will change everything, it already is…and the economy will become a direct result of shifting climate patterns.
Let’s be honest as we can, any one of those candidates would be a hell of a lot better than what we have dealt with these past seven years. Neither of them are failures in everything they have ever done. Neither of them are involved in Haliburton or big oil. Neither of them would be influenced by the likes of cheney, rove, rumsfeld or the neocons. Each of them are smart people with smart backgrounds. Each of them has a decent background in their personal lives. Yeah, Hillary had to deal with Bill’s problems but in spite of that she raised her daughter to be a respectable young woman.
I mean, I know everyone has their favorite, but any one of them would be such a relief from what we have now.
Joe @ 23
While you’re at it, could you also ask him to do a piece on NBC’s treatment of Kucinich? That’d be great.
Has he ever put NBC on the worse, worser, worst list?
Gasoline is going to go higher, utilities are going to go higher, food is going to go higher, everything is going to go higher higher higher higher higher higher.
What “they” going to do about that? Anyone want to talk about that?
I mean after 7 years whats it going to take?
oldgringo @ 20:
From the London Guardian last presidential cycle:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/netn.....30,00.html
Among the 100 or so invitees to the annual Bilderberg conference under way Sunday in a northern Italy resort is potential U.S. vice president John Edwards.
Reporters generally are not invited and those who are observe the conference group’s general pledge of secrecy, reinforcing the view of conspiracy theorists that the elite gathering is up to no good, London’s The Guardian newspaper reported.
Sen. Edwards is regarded in Democratic circles as a good performer in his battle with Sen. John Kerry for the nomination to be presidential candidate and so is expected to be a finalist when Kerry chooses a running mate.
Other invitees are Mrs. Bill Gates and likely are regulars Bill Clinton, Henry Kissinger and U.S. Defense Secretary Don Rumsfeld.
The Bilderberg tradition began in 1954 as a transatlantic post-war sounding board.
L.A. @30
A depression?
With Wall St. going to hell in a handbasket I hope their multi storid buildings have secured windows. The stockbrokers are going to have to go up to the roof to jump.
Are we waiting to be the last to change from fossil fuel?
Demand NEW solutions not obsolete ideas that get us more of the same!
Look to the FUTURE. Stop looking at solutions of the past expecting different results.Time to start an Energy Revoloution as well as Economic/Job Boom.
http://www.ecotality.com/blog/…..e-reality/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algaculture
http://www.theaircar.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmqpGZv0YT4
Obama ‘08
pissed off patricia @ 28:
Word. We keep forgetting that.
pissed off patricia @ 28:
Its not who’s running that matters, its who they report to. Do you think the Clinton/Bush ping pong match is accidental? Re-watch “The Matrix” and read between the lines . . . the writers were speaking to us . . .
Pissed @ 29:
I’d ask about that for sure. Leaving Kucinich or any other candidate out is, in my view unfair to the voter and unAmerican overall. The way I see it, Kucinich or any other candidate for that matter may not currently hold high poll numbers but another debate may change that. That candidate could say something to really change things and I think American’s deserve to hear it.
I’m sure that Obama would ask NBC, Wait a minute but where is Dennis?, during the debate, but we all know what the response/follow up question would be:
“Have you seen UFOs together? Hillary and Edwards don’t mind being without Dennis here, so aren’t you too rebellious and radical to stand up for whatever Dennis Kucinich thinks is right? Since you mentioned Dennis Kucinich, you must really admire his ideals, let me rephrase this, being supported by Dennis Kucinich, do you think that his close encounters with extraterrestrials and his British wife indicate some interracial issues and don’t you think that we’ve heard enough about race already, Hillary is nodding her head so she will certainly agree. So please Barack, tell us again, why are you running anyway?
Hence he stayed silent.
Avid Reader @ 6:
I think you are putting the cart before the horse. As of yet there is no proven problems with the vote in New Hampshire. We should wait untill the facts are in before we start yelling voter fraud.
StevePam @ 34:
If we get another Repug as pres. and a repug congress, they will replace fossil fuels with “WE THE POOR PEOPLE.”
“And I think that Barack Obama is saying that he needs to be in because he can transcend the differences across the political divide right now. ”
How does Obama want to transcend the differences across the political divide?”
READ BELOW. NOTE: May not be safe for REAL Democrats and Liberals to read, side effects include nausea, sudden bursts of anger and unabashed outrage:
From Huffington Post:
Obama Compares Himself To Reagan, JFK…But Not Bill Clinton
January 16, 2008 03:08 PM - Sam Stein
In an interview Monday with the Reno Journal Gazette editorial board, Sen. Barack Obama riffed on a range of political topics ranging from Katrina, the home mortgage crisis and, of course, fodder from the campaign trail.
But perhaps the most interesting offering was when he tried to place his candidacy into a historical context. Which elections does Obama see as analogous to 2008? And with which presidents does he share personal similarities? That would be John Kennedy in 1960 (hardly surprising) and Ronald Reagan in 1980 (more daring). But not, it should be noted, Bill Clinton in 1992.
In fact, Obama offered praise for the Gipper, lauding him for tapping into the country’s concern with the growth and “excesses” of the federal government, and its desire to “return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship” — hardly a welcomed interpretation within progressive circles. Said the Illinois Democrat:
“I don’t want to present myself as some sort of singular figure. I think part of what is different is the times. I do think that, for example, the 1980 election was different. I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it. They felt like with all the excesses of the 60s and the 70s and government had grown and grown but there wasn’t much sense of accountability in terms of how it was operating. I think he tapped into what people were already feeling. Which is we want clarity, we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing.”
LINK TO ARTICLE. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....81835.html
MEMO TO THE OBAMA FANS: Obama is a very smart man, this was no mistake and this was not a “well you are taking this out of context” as you guys always seem to be saying. This is code language for Republicans saying “Vote for me, Ronnie was my hero too!”
OBAMA IS A FRAUD to everyone that has put their faith & hope in him, unless you are a “Reagan Democrat.”
They are all frauds, the point of this very limited democracy is to pick the least fraudulent if the MSM will let you. Who makes BOTH parties “whisper” behind them? Sure isn’t Obama or Edwards, now is it? Who needs a spouse to roam the countryside campaigning like it’s 1992? Sure isn’t Obama or Edwards.
I’m for Edwards but, Kucinich should be allowed to be heard. Here is why they fear him.
http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/260.html