And why shouldn’t Clinton be concerned when UNIVISION doesn’t provide the ground-rules for the debate (although it WILL provide translators how does one know that they will not mistranslate a statement…which the candidate cannot “correct” on the air). Nuance is important in translation and tone can be changed severely by a translator who selects synonyms that vary from context).

The Democratic candidates pulled out of the FAUX debates primarily because of their biased reportage. UNIVISION isn’t much better in some ways…and it wouldn’t surprise me that the debate questions would be impacted by the “publishers” politics.

Of course, given the selection of questions by the other networks maybe it wouldn’t make much of a difference.

What more does Dodd have to do to win some serious support from Liberals? … I’ll support the Dem nominee, but c’mon, this is why we have primaries.

…

We’ve got to remain vigilant and not get complacent with any old “Democrat” in the WH, like many did during the 90s.

I think he has our respect and is still in the running. I favor Gore and Edwards for the moment, but Dodd, Obama and Richardson are close behind.

Hang in there and fight. It’s a contest. We don’t see Dodd on t.v. enough. I hope he’s getting heard in Iowa and New Hampshire.

How’s the campaign’s financing going? Got enough money?

Y’know, I’m hearing this word “triangulation” just often enough to p*ss me off. Everyone who uses that word has just bought into a Republican meme about Clinton. Congratulations on your support of the next Republican president.

What does triangulation really mean? One reading of it is that the triangulator actually pays attention to what other people think.

I’ve used the word, so let me take a shot at describing what I think it means.

It means taking up issues the other party usually rallies around and applying your own policy to those issues. When Bill Clinton put police on the streets it seemed pretty unusual because only Repubs had ‘been tough on crime’.

Another way you can triangulate is to coordinate with Repubs to outflank or overpower the less Conservative Democrats.

She’s clearly a Conservative Dem or Liberal Repub, no doubt about that. But, when she goes along with Dubya on the war in Iraq and when she endorses non-union practice and just flat out accepts the Republican party position on issues, then she is clearly triangulating in the absolute worst way — not even putting a Dem spin on the issue.

Perhaps scariest, but not exactly proven, is if she were to coordinate message, funding or other activities with Republicans. I suspect her of that, but have no proof. It would definately make her appear a lot more like Arlen Specter or John McCain and we don’t want them for president, do we?

So, we keep listening and watching to see where our candidates stand and try to find the best one.

Sorry if the rhetoric upsets. That’s not the purpose. At least as far as I am concerned it’s just an attempt to understand the candidates better. I hold no personal malice toward Hillary or Bill.

However I’ve read other places that Kerry lost Hispanic/Latino votes, costing him key Western states, because his campaign waited until the last month to target them or even make a Spanish website. To grab or hold those purple mountain/western states, the Democrats need to get those votes this time.
(Also Native American votes are enough to tip some of those states, but Democrats were always cautious about alienating Whites by courting their votes.)

BWWWWWHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAA!

newtnuser-
people are getting around it and using two-spaced ‘nicknames’, but if they get caught-whammo………if you do join under your real name, make sure to put your fdl name as a middle name……

yep. thanks.

kdh22 @ 96

Concentrated denial?!?

When you boil it all down, yes.

hehehe :)