Okay -- For change's sake, I'm now rooting for Obama

I'll admit I'm very disheartened.

America is hungry for a change. In my opinion, they want much more of a change than simply to see the back end of Bush and his cronies.

I believe Edwards hit the nail on the head. People want a change from the stranglehold that Corporate Power has placed on our economy, our political system and our social structure. They also want a chance from meaningless polarization, while real issues that affect people's lives get ignored.

He was also a great candidate this time around. Passionate, rousing and hopeful that America can truly change for the better.

For whatever reason he failed to resonate. Personally I believe it is a combination of his own liabilities (2004, some inconsistencies with the Senate, mudslinging about his lifestyle), historical forces of identity politics, the shortage of resources compared to the top two, and the unforgivable marginalization of him by the MSM.

Whatever, it's time to move on.

I'll take the lead of Ted Kennedy, and put my trust in Obama for the nomination. Maybe he'll turn out to be centrist snake oil in a new package. I hope not. I do see a spirit of hope and energy in his campaign. And maybe, just maybe, he can lead the nation to better days and actually support liberal/progressive positions successfully.

Maybe he'll be another lost cause candidate, and get steamrolled by status quo politics as usual. But maybe he will pull it off, and launch a new more hopeful and just course for America and the Democratic Party.

Go, Obama!

...just like my husband, he was very sad at the Edwards' withdrawal and both of them are going with Obama.

always come down on the side of TRANSPARENCY that respects open government of the people.

I am DONE supporting any so-called Dem who supports the secrecy a nd privilege of the powerful.


http://consortiumnews.com/2006/111106.html


Time for open government. The other way has been tried for decades and it has almost killed our nation.

How nice of him to take on that responsibility.

I think Obama is exactly the right candidate for you.

;)

The Hillary Herd really follows well....

He was shut out and we all know by whom.

I agree he was shut out.

But whatever the reason he's gone, and choices have to be made.

Clinton and Obama had 24/7 free advertising for their campaigns: which means it's not a democracy anymore. When corporations get to choose the two possible "opposition" candidates, it's just a show.

Enjoy your choice of shill, but don't give me a snot on safety pin and call it fine jewelry.

Clinton, McCainand/orRomney, tuning it all out, or going third-party.

I wish it were otherwise, but that's where it's at now.

:thumbsup: I won't fall in line.

But I'll fall in line with eyes wide open

Until then I could go either way.

Kennedy's endorsement did it...he is liberal and always has been..they want to change the Dem party and that is a real good idea...I hope this means that it will weaken the Dlc influence on our party..

You've made the right choice. Don't underestimate Obama's ability to rally the people...that's what it will take for real change to occur.

I'd love to see it as well, though I'd always thought of it as an Edwards/Obama race or an Obama/Edwards race.

:crazy:

and told her that Obama was a change candidate and then he made the statement about the forces of the status quo striking back hardest against those who advocated change. I trust both John and Barack.

I found a link to a story about this:

http://abcnews.go.com/story?id=4091841

Obama and Edwards Tag-Team Clinton
Narrowed Democratic Field Faces Off in First Debate Since Iowa's Stunning Results
By MARCUS BARAM
Jan. 5, 2008 —


Sen. Barack Obama got some unexpected help during a heated exchange with Sen. Hillary Clinton in tonight's debate, from former Sen. John Edwards, who snatched second place from Clinton in Iowa's caucus.

Comparing her to the "forces for status quo," Edwards said that Obama "believes deeply in change, and I believe deeply in change. Anytime you speak out for change, this is what happens. The forces for status quo are going to attack."

Edwards also defended Obama against Clinton's charge that Obama has switched his positions on health care and the Patriot Act. "To say that Senator Obama is having a debate with himself from some Associated Press story, I think is just not -- that's not the kind of discussion we should be having."

...

Still. (sigh.)

But maybe he'll come through

a vote for someone who hasn't been around a long time seems to be the way to go. Based on what I know about my work place some of the guys with experience have lead to reinforcement of old habits, relying on conventional wisdom and laziness. Sometimes you need to look at things from a fresh perspective. That's why I support Obama.

He is one of the most authoritarian candidates in the Democrats primary. He's 3 points to the left of McCain and only 1 point lower on the fascism scale. Clinton is 2 points to the left of McCain and 2.5 points lower on the fascism scale. We're not talking about much difference at all considering that Edwards was 2 points less fascist than Obama and almost an entire point to the left. He's about a point and a half left of Hillary and only about a half point less fascist.

Not much hope in my opinion.

and the old divisiveness. Obama embodies change.

You have top take as much hope as you can get, I suppose.

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

Together, we WILL win in November.

We can all help.

CHANGE....DOES THAT WORD NOW BELONG TO THE OTHER CANDIDATE...everything else said out there seems to be taken over by that campaign, so why dont' we just give him the dictionary.

Obama spoke of change from the beginning. The others all jumped on his bandwagon. Relax...

:thumbsup:

Keep the faith.

:toast: