<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Trouble in Paradise</title>
	<atom:link href="http://achicagoblog.blogivists.com/2007/02/08/trouble-in-paradise/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://achicagoblog.blogivists.com/2007/02/08/trouble-in-paradise/</link>
	<description>Living and breathing in the Second City</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 10:59:11 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Daniel Messick</title>
		<link>http://achicagoblog.blogivists.com/2007/02/08/trouble-in-paradise/#comment-43</link>
		<dc:creator>Daniel Messick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Feb 2007 19:01:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://achicagoblog.blogivists.com/2007/02/08/trouble-in-paradise/#comment-43</guid>
		<description>I agree Mike, it truly is baffling to me every time I hear poll results for the Democrats.
While Clinton may "sew up" the nomination, I still have to believe she is too divisive and polarizing a candidate to win election.  Obama seemingly is the "safer" candidate in that he is not nearly as divisive a candidate.  In addition, he does not have much of a record that can be attacked, while Clinton's record is ripe for attack, as is her seeming inability to choose a position without incorporating some "wiggle room" for extricating herself should the winds of change blow on an issue and cause her to change position to satisfy the majority.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img style='float: right; margin-left: 10px;' src='http://www.gravatar.com/avatar.php?gravatar_id=ecc8d8c4a09c5fa99e7a92d9db656655&amp;size=60&amp;default=http%3A%2F%2Fuse.perl.org%2Fimages%2Fpix.gif' alt='' />I agree Mike, it truly is baffling to me every time I hear poll results for the Democrats.<br />
While Clinton may &#8220;sew up&#8221; the nomination, I still have to believe she is too divisive and polarizing a candidate to win election.  Obama seemingly is the &#8220;safer&#8221; candidate in that he is not nearly as divisive a candidate.  In addition, he does not have much of a record that can be attacked, while Clinton&#8217;s record is ripe for attack, as is her seeming inability to choose a position without incorporating some &#8220;wiggle room&#8221; for extricating herself should the winds of change blow on an issue and cause her to change position to satisfy the majority.
<div style='clear:both'></div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
