(2)He is a Flip Flopper – he has apologized for EVERY major vote he cast in the senate (Iraq, bankruptcy legislation, No Child Left Behind, trade with China, etc.). If they got Kerry on one flip flop – how about 4, 5 or 6 flip flops with Edwards?

(3)He's been campaigning in Iowa for 4 YEARS and in most polls he is still in 3rd place. He should OWN Iowa by a decisive lead.

(4)Outside of Iowa, he usually polls a distant 3rd behind Clinton and Obama on average, at between 12% to 15% (sometimes 18%), which is a TERRIBLE showing for our 2004 VP candidate, considering his competition is (a) a virtual unknown, and (b)the most polarizing woman in America (50% won't vote for her).

(5)He's taking public financing – so he can't compete effectively for the DEM nomination (beyond the first few states) against Hillary and Obama with their fundraising (especially on Super Tuesday). That's why Hillary sent President Clinton onto Charlie Rose to pump up Edwards, as he simultaneously bashed Obama. They see Obama as more of a long term threat because he has as much money as they do, is very popular, and he can go the distance against Hillary to fight for the nomination, but Edwards (being broke) can't. Although the Clintons want to win Iowa, they're afraid she'll lose, so if they can't win Iowa they want to at least stop Obama from winning there in order to weaken him. Then, if Edwards wins Iowa, they'll just turn the guns on him in NH and later states to take him out like they've been trying to do with Obama. For them, a 3rd place Iowa finish to Edwards is better than a 2nd place finish to Obama. Given that the Clinton camp has been trying to kneecap Obama for the last month, it should be a RED FLAG to anyone when Bill Clinton goes on Charlie Rose and talks about an Edwards win in Iowa as though it doesn't bother them.

Basically, an Iowa win for Edwards just makes it more likely that Clinton will get the nomination. If Clinton gets the nomination with 50% of the country saying they won't vote for her under any circumstances, it's likely that democrats could lose in November. She might win, but she's got a much shorter playing field if half the country has already turned its back on her candidacy, and her nomination will galvanize the republicans like nothing else. It's what they're waiting for – they have 2 decades of dirt on the Clintons to air in the general election.

Hillary is smart, her intelligence and other admirable qualities make her a viable candidate. She demonstrates an air of confidence which is a strength. She claims to be the most experienced, but to what ends?

Experience is a false narrative without success. Perhaps Hillary knows her way around the annals of government, but so did Rumsfeld and Cheney. Obviously they never learned from their experiences. That alone ought to give one pause.

And what about Hillary Clinton's judgment? Even if she has the experience it has not translated into wise decision making or sound judgment in several incidences: her foreign policy is very similar to Bush's. Take Iraq and Iran as example. Her full support of waging war and continuing the occupation of Iraq is troubling.

At this crucial time when we need change innovative, creative thinking is needed more than ever. Hillary is probably the least who has demonstrated that quality. She has not made bold and tough choices nor is she a political risk-taker.

Equally important I do not doubt Hillary has a lot going for her, but we may want to also take into consideration that when Bill was president the far right made so much noise against him it made it difficult to maneuver. I believe Bill Clinton did a lot of positive things for this country he also made a lot of decisions that were not healthy. Take NAFTA, GATT and other policies for instance. At no fault of his, the far right made every issue into a huge battle.

Going into this election, there is no doubt in my mind they will not hesitate to replay that scenario. The damage it did to the country will further deepen. While she is not entirely to blame, Hillary is fodder for that kind of negativity. That is an important factor we ought to consider, too.

Obama is no greenhorn. He represents “change” rather than more of the same. Moreover he will not be as polarizing.

If you believe justice is a strength and the rule of law matters, accountability and transparency are vital components for a healthy democracy, and that sound judgment, reasoned logic, intelligence tempered with forethought and foresight reflect the qualities of a leader, support Obama.

Obama is uniquely qualified and prepared to lead the country as President of the United States.

I trust him to lead and move the country forward in a different direction

Last but not least do we really want another Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton?

The experience Rumsfeld, Cheney, and others Bush surrounded himself with got us where we are today! Americans lost confidence in Bush and his cabinet because they lack intelligent reasoning and have been less than truthful to the electorate. Likewise Clinton's lack of candor leaves little to be desired. Americans want a president who is forthcoming and someone they can trust.

Although Obama has plenty of experience it is his judgment that makes him stand out from the rest of the contenders.  Instead of using military power Barack Obama has the intelligence, patience and reasoned logic to draw on a host of tools available that can actually solve problems rather than create more.

Judgment cannot be overemphasized.

The main difference between Obama's and Hillary's health care plans is that Hillary wants universal healthcare, meaning everybody will be forced to buy healthcare, while Obama is focusing on universal access – he will not make buying a plan mandatory because he believes the problem is that health care is unaffordable for many Americans, not that people do not want health insurance.

Where are these candidate's policies and the info. which people are cutting other candidates with, they have none.

Shame this democratic election is being debated on lack of true info. and facts..

Obama said he would leave the troops in Iraq for at least 5 more years and if I am not mistaking, said he would make the bases in Iraq permanent.

As for his policies on health care want is the difference between Obama's and Hillary's.

For one thing they all are saying that Americans would be forced to pay for health insurance, no matter if they can not pay for it.

Why do you believe Americans do not have health insurance now.

So if one has the actual facts of each candidate's policies, please post the info. so everyone can see what their policies are..

Kucinich has most of the values that democrats and independents said they wish for, so why are his numbers down?

Is it because of the blasting by the news media and the lack of including him in some of the debates like Iowa has done.

Anyway I hope democrats have enough sense to vote for the democratic candidate in the general election no matter who it might be.

A no vote in the general election is the republican's dream.

The polls taken are usually determined by less then a 1,000 persons and these  polls can be bias as h… depending on who is contacted for their numbers and  results.

This article was determined  by this person making this statement::

“” But if the caucuses were held tonight, this is how  “”"we think”"  they would turn out”"

You are making the statement that Obama would have a better chance of winning and just where do you get your “facts” which makes this statement correct..  There are going to be person against Obama as well as there are against Hillary.

They problem with democrats is that they are so easily manipulated by RNC propaganda and the right wing corporate controlled news media's BS.

If you wish to get rid of this dictatorship we had for the last 7 years, so no matter who wins the democratic primary, swallow your pride and make sure you vote for the democratic candidate, so the propaganda being spreaded by the RNC doesn't work to stop democrats from voting  and voting for the democratic candidate.  If democrats don't vote democratic and the republicans win the white house for 4 more years, the republican dictatorship  will be completed for a permanent control over our country which Cheney has set in place in the last 7 years.

I like Edwards or Kucicinh but I will vote for the winner of the democratic primary election no matter who it is, in spite of the deceit and BS spread around by persons wanting the democrats to lose the presidency in 2008.