Waiting On The Des Moines Register Endorsement

Buzz is that the odds are that they will endorse a candidate (maybe even 2, one Dem, one GOP) for President. Maybe even tonight. And it might even matter. Though the DMR endorsee has lost the last 3 contested Iowa caucuses.

Snark off. Will it be Clinton? Obama? Edwards? Why not Biden?

In the immortal words of Samuel Goldwyn, nobody knows nuthin'

< DOJ Cracks Down on Kiddie Pictures | Des Moines Register Endorses Hillary Clinton >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    CNN (none / 0) (#1)
    by Jgarza on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 03:53:07 PM EST
    said 8 pm tonight? I think.  That post was appropriately snarky, this is ridiculous, but why can't i wait to find out who?  

    Great (none / 0) (#2)
    by Jgarza on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 03:56:44 PM EST
    No useless MTP punditry on this either, its 60 minutes of Mit.  John Edwards isn't till Feb 4th?  What are the chances he will still be in the race at that point?

    Never mind (none / 0) (#3)
    by Jgarza on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 03:58:23 PM EST
    he was last Feb 4

    the edwards link (none / 0) (#4)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 04:25:50 PM EST
    goes to the same biden story as the biden link. Where's the Edwards' story?

    The first update (none / 0) (#8)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 07:55:22 PM EST
    Hilariously the second update says Obama.

    so ONE story now speculates about 3 candidates.

    2 more updates and he would have gotten them all.

    Just absurd.


    Ms. Hunter of the editorial board (none / 0) (#5)
    by oculus on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 07:10:23 PM EST
    didn't have time to take Wesley Clark's phone call.  Also, rumor has it the earliest Sunday print editions in Iowa may beat the Internet announcement of the endorsements by the Des Moines Register.

    Here's the Sat. NYT article on the courting behavious of the candidates and their surrogates:


    What are the chances a Dem primary (none / 0) (#6)
    by oculus on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 07:26:27 PM EST
    candidate who says "Goodness me, . . ."  Will get the nomination in 2008?  

    Boston Globe endorsed (none / 0) (#7)
    by Jgarza on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 07:32:00 PM EST
    HIllary (none / 0) (#9)
    by Jgarza on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 08:08:29 PM EST
    got it.. blah

    The editorials... (none / 0) (#10)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 08:24:38 PM EST
    in the Register defending their choices are rather entertaining, as are the comments to the editorials.

    Alas, my HTML skills are weak (OK, non-existant) or I would provide the links.

    Shorter average Register reader:  They only selected Hillary because Bill wined and wooed the Editorial Board.

    want HTML?? (none / 0) (#11)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 08:33:11 PM EST
    I don't mind this. (none / 0) (#12)
    by Geekesque on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 08:33:49 PM EST
    Clinton is not doing so hot in Iowa--she's had an awful 3 weeks and her ground game isn't as good as the other two have.

    Worst case scenario would be Edwards getting it.  For me, of course.

    Haha plus (none / 0) (#14)
    by Jgarza on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 08:34:56 PM EST
    With the NY Times article, the back story will be that Bill got it for her.

    If any thing (none / 0) (#15)
    by Jgarza on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 08:41:17 PM EST
    they un-endorsed Edwards:
    That readiness to lead sets her apart from a constellation of possible stars in her party, particularly Barack Obama, who also demonstrates the potential to be a fine president. When Obama speaks before a crowd, he can be more inspirational than Clinton. Yet, with his relative inexperience, it's hard to feel as confident he could accomplish the daunting agenda that lies ahead.

    Edwards was our pick for the 2004 nomination. But this is a different race, with different candidates. We too seldom saw the "positive, optimistic" campaign we found appealing in 2004. His harsh anti-corporate rhetoric would make it difficult to work with the business community to forge change.

    So, in other words... (none / 0) (#17)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 09:09:35 PM EST
    ...Hillary is best positioned to further the corporate agenda of Gannett?

    That actually makes more sense to me that the Bill got Hill the endorsement theme.  


    But the editorial board threesome sd (none / 0) (#18)
    by oculus on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 11:44:20 PM EST
    that, although it was quite flattering Bill expended so much charm on them, it had absolutely no influence on their decision.

    It is... (none / 0) (#19)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 01:27:13 PM EST
    ...entirely likely that the two go hand-in-hand.  Whatever the case, it sure has the natives talking.  58 pages of comments on the Hill endorsement when I checked this morning. Most I've ever seen (on things like abortion or anything to do with teh gheys) is 20 or so.

    Hope your weekend is good, Oculus.  I'm a bit sad (but not surprised) that Drake beat Iowa at home yesterday.


    O.K. I've got to go read the DMR (none / 0) (#20)
    by oculus on Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 01:54:57 PM EST
    comments.  Reading the comments in the local paper here affords a scary view of the dark side.  

    Hillary (none / 0) (#13)
    by Maryb2004 on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 08:34:41 PM EST
    which I find kind of surprising, although I'm not sure why.  

    and hey, welcome back, I missed you. :)

    New post on endorsement (none / 0) (#16)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 08:59:32 PM EST
    is here.