Two Polls today show that Romney is up by 5 in florida where is the talk?
Polls are InsiderAdvantage and Rasmussen

Sent by Tony Bartholomew | 2:25 PM ET | 01-23-2008

Let's put Hillary in office so we can get Bill back to turn around our economy!

Sent by Marianna | 2:31 PM ET | 01-23-2008

1) How come nothing's being said about Kucinich's exclusion from the Nevada debate by MSNBC, after telling him he would participate, having fulfilled the requirements'why don't the three remaining Democratic candidates protest this exclusion, which obviously has to do with Re. Kucinich's ideas (since he had fulfilled MSNBC's requirements) -especially Obama, who wants to 'bring everyone together' (and remembering that Kucinich told his supporters in Iowa to back Obama if he didn't get to the 15% minimum-in fact, they should protest Ron Paul's similar exclusion by Fox, even though he's broken the all-time one-day fundraising record for Republicans twice in two months'the relative mass media silence on these two candidates, given the distinction of their ideas and the fervor of their followers (Kucinich has handily won several online polls) is inexcusable and revealing.
2) How come, likewise, if Sen. Clinton is presenting herself as the inevitable Party standardbearer, nothing was said about her being the only one of the three Dems not to pull out her name in Michigan, since the Party was punishing Michigan for changing the date of their primary???

Why are such contradictions not being pursued?

Sent by khidr diaz | 2:33 PM ET | 01-23-2008

I'd have to argue that Bill really didn't do anything for the economy. I don't think any president should claim what happened due to the dot com boom. You could have done nothing and the budget would have been balanced. Now Bills foreign policies were defiantly good, just you can't give Bill credit for the economy. The tech sector was going to explode no mater who was president when it happened.

Sent by Tony Bartholomew | 2:41 PM ET | 01-23-2008

Senator McCain has the worst "not-voting" record in the Senate (except for Senator Tim Johnson, who missed most of the past year for medical reasons).

(Of 224 votes in 2007, McCain didn't vote 247 times (55.9% not-voting))

As an Arizona resident, I feel like McCain has abandoned his state.

Why is that fact not an issue in the national race? Why isn't it a character issue?

Sent by Jim Williamson | 2:41 PM ET | 01-23-2008

So, The Economy is the "most important issue," eh? Well, what, if anything (other than an extreme hatred of all things Republican), guides The Liberal Press in their efforts to focus The Media Spotlight on the particular issues they want voters to have fresh in their minds as they enter the polling booth on Election Day, and how far in advance of the election do they generally start? For example, since The War has been going better for months now, something that clearly benefits Republicans, that's obviously dropped off of the radar screen. And since The Economy is always constantly fluctuating through different areas of ups and downs occurring simultaneously, it's all too easy for The Media to focus their microscopes on the "down" aspects at any given point, which they currently calculate will help Democratic candidates when a Republican is President, in the same way that they focused on the "up" aspects during The Clinton Years.

Sent by David | 2:44 PM ET | 01-23-2008

Reason why Huckabee and McCain get all the press on the republican side is that when going national they don't have the money or debating abilities to go against the Dems. The media wants the least likely to win as the republican nominee. I love looking at Google news you have a 4 to 1 ratio of Dem articles to republican.

Sent by Tony Bartholomew | 3:24 PM ET | 01-23-2008

During this season of caring about change in the United States of America,
a time when we are supposed to CONSIDER all the voices who are aspiring for the
Presidency of the U.S.A.:

I'm in absolute anguish to think that
our popular media, including NPR, seem
to think it's fine and dandy to exclude the voices of Kucinich and Gravel, and to a large extent, Ron Paul, from the so
called debates. Instead, we just have
rehashes of the "top few" ragging at each other. The ad infinitum time could
be devoted to the forgotten candidates...
they are still running, and many of us
are still supporting them. And how about the Green Party candidate...haven't heard ONE WORD
about her. Democracy IS about being
able to speak your piece, isn't it?

Sent by Leona Heitsch | 3:53 PM ET | 01-23-2008

Oops!
Re: my previous post from 2:41pm

Make that 442 votes in 2007 not 224.

Sorry about the typo.

McCain's not-voting count was correct: 247

Sent by Jim Williamson | 4:51 PM ET | 01-23-2008

I could not disagree more with the political junkie!

Hillary had the experience of two terms in the White House, and she was very much involved, because the Clintons are passionate, high achievers, and they can't help but be dedicated.

They have been there, done that.

Obama hasn't done any governing on that level.

This is so very important!

It's going to take him forever to get anything done!

He's going to have to make the same kinds of compromises the Clintons have had to make.

But he's also going to have to learn about it all, starting all over again from scratch, when the Clintons have already put in eight years of excellent governing of this country. Hillary has the experience and efficiency to do the best job at this time when we need the person who truly is the most qualified.

Sent by Lisa | 4:52 PM ET | 01-23-2008

The entire show this evening is a running negative commentary about Hillary Clinton ... right out of the Obama playbook. To wit... Hillary's experience as First Lady is inconsequential. Her husband is nothing but a political hack for vigorously defending her candidacy on the campaign trail. "Many" Democrats think the Clintons are jeopardizing the future of the party by confronting Obama. (Is that why MOST Democrats continue to think she's the best candidate for President? And finally the last straw: Quoting the blatantly anti-Clinton Maureen O'Dowd. C'mon guys, this is supposed to be public radio. How about at least the pretense of a little balance?

Sent by Greg Ptacek | 1:07 AM ET | 01-24-2008