Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

A Compendium Of Reasons To Vote For John Edwards

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-01-03 11:26 PM
Original message
A Compendium Of Reasons To Vote For John Edwards
ibid, by request. Jump in with your own threads, by all means!

P.S. This is not an endorsement of Edwards. I was asked.

P.P.S.: This is all from Edwards' website, so...

www.johnedwards2004.com

====

Edwards on the environment - a small list:

Preserving Clean Air Laws and Fighting the Administration's Roll Back of the Clean Air Act:

Senator Edwards led the fight against increased air pollution from factories with the administration's rollback of the Clean Air Act. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) moved to change the "New Source Review" provisions of the Clean Air Act to make it much easier for old factories and power plants to increase their pollution levels without having to add state-of-the-art clean-air technology. Edwards chaired a Senate hearing to expose the new rule's real effects, during which former EPA Administrator Carol Browner said the rules would "allow the air to become dirtier." Edwards also led a bipartisan group of 44 Senators in a letter urging the administration to postpone their planned changes and "conduct a rigorous analysis of the air pollution and public health impacts of the proposed rule changes."

Edwards Led Effort to Pass Amendment to Delay Administration's Rule Change Allowing More Pollution:

Edwards led the effort to delay the roll back of the Clean Air Act and offered legislation to delay the rule change until a study was completed on its effect on human health and pollution levels. While the amendment did not pass, environmental leaders underscored the importance of the vote for demonstrating that clean air was a bipartisan issue and that the Senate could aggressively counter administration efforts to weaken public health safeguards.

Reducing Polluting Smokestack Emissions That Cause Acid Rain, Toxic Contamination, Global Warming:

Edwards co-sponsored the Clean Power Act of 2002, which would drastically reduce powerplant emissions of four major pollutants which cause smog, acid rain, mercury contamination and global warming. The bill, authored by independent Senator Jim Jeffords, would tighten controls on sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and mercury. It would also for the first time regulate the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide - the prime suspect causing global warming. This tri-partisan legislation was much stronger in cracking down on harmful emissions to protect the environment and the health of Americans than the administration's "Clear Skies" proposal. Edwards has also co-sponsored the Clear Power Act of 2003 in the current session of Congress.

Limiting Logging In National Forests:

Senator Edwards voted to support limits to logging in National Forests. In 2000, Edwards voted for legislation to cut the government's timber sale program by $30 million, and instead spend the money to increase support for wildfire prevention and decrease the federal debt. Edwards also called for the Senate to defeat anti-environmental efforts to end public and judicial oversight over the Tongass National Forest.

Working For Tougher Standards On Arsenic In Drinking Water:

After the Bush Administration shelved Clinton administration rules regarding acceptable levels of arsenic in drinking water, Edwards voted to require the administration to immediately issue new standards for arsenic in drinking water.

Fighting to Protect the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge From Exploration and Drilling:

Edwards voted against leasing land in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) for oil exploration and production. ANWR is one of America's natural treasures and is an important part of the Earth's ecosystem. In addition to environmental impacts, drilling for oil in the Arctic Refuge will do little or nothing to reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil. According to the U.S. Geological Survey, recoverable oil under the Arctic Refuge would only provide a few months of oil for the U.S. and wouldn't even be accessible for years to come.

Increasing Fuel Efficiency Standards:

Edwards voted in favor of a proposal in 2002 to have the Transportation Department issue rules that would have reduced the growth in consumption of oil by passenger vehicles by one million barrels a day by 2015. Edwards also voted against a proposal to scrap fuel efficiency standards (CAFE standards) and replace them with a requirement for the Secretary of Transportation to issue new regulations to increase CAFE standards based on the maximum feasible average fuel economy levels that can be achieved for automobiles and light trucks.

Making 35,000 Dry-Cleaners More Environmentally Friendly:

Edwards introduced legislation to reduce the amount of toxic and flammable solvents used in the 35,000 dry-cleaners through the country. The bill would offer a tax credit to dry cleaners who switch to more environmentally-friendly and energy-efficient methods of cleaning. A similar bill in the US House was supported by the Sierra Club and the Physicians for Social Responsibility. <"Senator Edwards Introduces Environmental Protection Legislation," 8/1/01>

====

On working folks:

Increase the Minimum Wage:

Edwards believes America's workers deserve fair pay for their hard work. Today, the minimum wage, in real dollars, is worth less than it was in 1968. That is why Edwards has consistently voted for increasing the minimum wage and believes we need to increase it again, which is why he is currently cosponsoring a Senate bill to increase the minimum wage in the Senate.

Protect Workplace Safety Laws:

Edwards believes that we must strengthen OSHA and protect workplace safety laws. These laws safeguard millions of workers from hazardous work conditions and have prevented countless workplace accidents and fatalities. He will oppose budget cuts that threaten OSHA's ability to protect the safety and health of American workers and will oppose any efforts to weaken the OSHA laws. He also voted against the Bush administration's efforts to overturn ergonomics regulations offered by the Clinton White House to prevent workplace injuries. Edwards also helped lead the fight against anti-ergonomics Bush nominee Eugene Scalia.

Ensure that Working Families Could Participate in the Political Process:

Edwards believes union members deserve to have their voices heard in the political process, and has voted against so-called "paycheck protection" measures. Edwards has voted against measures to require unions and corporations to obtain permission from dues-paying members or shareholders before spending money on political activities.

Support the Rights of Workers to Organize:

Edwards believes in the right to organize, and he will fight efforts to weaken that right. Labor has been a powerful force for good in this country and across the globe, and he supports tougher penalties and stronger enforcement to protect workers' rights to organize and collectively bargain. Edwards also opposes permanent striker replacement because he believes we should not punish an employee with permanent job loss if he or she exercises a legally protected right to strike.

Oppose Fast-Track Trade Authority After Edwards' Worker Protections Were Dropped from the Bill:

In 2002, Edwards voted against giving President Bush fast-track trade authority, after several provisions he supported to help workers and the textile industry were dropped from the final bill. Edwards worked to include amendments that would have laid out objectives for the White House to follow when negotiating textile deals with foreign countries, sped up aid to displaced textile workers hurt by the trade deals, and increased financing for community college retraining programs. When these provisions were taken out of the final bill, Edwards voted against it.

High Ratings on Union Scorecards, Was Endorsed by AFL-CIO in Senate Race:

Edwards has consistently earned high scores from labor unions for his votes on behalf of American workers. Edwards has a lifetime rating of 94 percent from the AFL-CIO, and scored a 100 percent from the group in 2001. Edwards has earned a 100 percent in three of four available scorecards from the SEIU, including 2002. In 2001, he received a 92.86 percent voting record with the UAW. During his 1998 Senate race, Edwards was endorsed by the AFL-CIO as the candidate best able to win the primary, unseat incumbent Senator Lauch Faircloth, and stand up for labor in the Senate.

====

Many others:

Standing Up For A Woman's Right To Choose

Supporting Roe vs. Wade, Fighting For a Federal Freedom of Choice Act. Edwards is a strong supporter of Roe vs. Wade and a woman's right to choose. At a January 2003 NARAL event, Edwards said he would "help lead a fight to pass a federal freedom of choice act so that your right to choose is guaranteed and protected no matter what the court does." He has voted against Republican efforts to prohibit funding for choice for federal employees, DC residents and women overseas at international family planning centers. He also voted to eliminate a ban on abortions at overseas military facilities, which would ban abortion even if even if the woman paid for it herself.

Opposing a Global Gag Rule. Edwards opposes President Bush's reinstatement of the "Mexico City policy" or "global gag rule," which prevents an organization from receiving federal funding—or UN funding—if they provide abortions or counsel patients about abortions.

Opposing Anti-Choice Nominations. Edwards, a member of the Judiciary Committee voted against the nominations of John Ashcroft, Priscilla Owen, and Bill Pryor each strongly opposed by pro-choice groups such as NOW, NARAL, and Planned Parenthood.

Promoting Women's Health, Pay Equity

Leading the Fight for a Real Patients' Bill of Rights To Require HMOs to Cover OB/GYNs and Breast Cancer Treatments. Edwards was a key leader on legislation that would guarantee HMOs provide people the health care they pay for by coauthoring the Bipartisan Patient Protection Act with Senators Kennedy and McCain and leading the fight to pass the bill. He supported requiring health insurance plans to allow any woman to designate an OB/GYN doctor as her primary care physician and to provide coverage for inpatient hospital care after any mastectomy, lumpectomy, or lymph node dissection.

Helping Victims of Domestic and Sexual Violence. In 2002, Edwards introduced the Women in Trauma Act, which would focus new federal efforts on improving mental health and substance abuse services for women affected by domestic or sexual violence. Edwards also introduced the Counseling in Shelters Act to provide federal funding to enable shelters and other community-based providers to hire trained mental health and substance abuse counselors to help victims.

Working to Increase Funding for Women's Health Research. In 2001, Edwards authored a bill to increase awareness of the link between periodontal disease in pregnant women and birth defects. In addition, Edwards has voted to increase funding for breast cancer research programs under the National Institute of Health and Department of Defense. He has also cosponsored several bills to provide funding for breast cancer research and to promote awareness of the disease.

Supporting Equitable Coverage of Contraceptives. In March 2003, Edwards voted to require equitable coverage of contraceptives. He cosponsored two bills to require health plans to provide equitable coverage of prescription contraceptive drugs in 1999 and 2001. Many insurance companies commit the discriminatory health practice of covering prescriptions but excluding coverage for birth control - a prescription needed exclusively by women.

Supporting Pay Equity. Edwards knows that women still earn, on average, 78 cents for every dollar earned by men. He cosponsored the Paycheck Fairness Act, which would strengthen penalties against employers who deny women equal pay for equal work.

Giving Parents More Choices At Work

Assisting Parents Get Time with Their Children. Senator Edwards has proposed a $2,500 family leave tax credit, phased in over a period of years, that will effectively provide paid leave without hurting businesses. While the Family and Medical Leave Act gives 2/3 of Americans unpaid leave when a new child is born, many American cannot afford to take unpaid leave. Yet the danger with requiring paid leave is hurting small businesses and costing jobs. This credit, offered to the working parents of newborns as a refundable tax credit, would benefit about 3.5 million families a year. For families with newborns, the proposal would more than double the existing child tax credit, and like the existing credit, the proposal would phase out for families earning more than $110,000.

Expanding Family Leave. The Family and Medical Leave Act helps many families each year spend time with their children and elderly family members, but is too limited in its scope. Parents of newborns should be able to take unpaid leave on a part-time basis, provided they establish a real schedule with their businesses. Edwards would also give parents unpaid leave for parent-teacher conferences and would guarantee some form of unpaid leave to millions of workers at small businesses who get nothing now.

Doubling Support for Elder Care. Edwards would help the growing number of working parents who are responsible for their own parents' or spouses' care by doubling federal support for respite care and adult day care.

Offering Quality Afterschool Opportunities

Offering High-Quality Afterschool Programs for Children Who Need Them. Edwards believes that with more and more parents working, children need quality afterschool programs to help them learn more and stay out of trouble. He supports expanding quality afterschool programs to millions of children whose parents want them. His initiative, phased in over time, would be run through the states, with two requirements: providing opportunities at or near every school, and making the opportunities high-quality. Edwards opposed the Bush administration's efforts to cut 500,000 afterschool slots, and believes we should determine which programs work best and promote those programs.

Supporting Parents' Values and Encouraging Responsible Parents
Encouraging Community Service. Edwards will help high schools require community service as a condition of graduation. Not all education takes place in the classroom--community service is one of the best ways to encourage our young people to get new experiences and become more involved in their communities.

Encouraging Responsibility from Dads. While moms on welfare are required to work, and they get help in finding it, dads have neither help nor the requirement. In order to give fathers better means to support their children and be valued members of their family and their community, we should require fathers to work, give them help finding work, and make sure child support goes to the parent, and not the government.

Offering Help for Senior Women

Protect Social Security. Senator Edwards knows that women are particularly affected by detrimental changes in Social Security, and he strongly opposes recent efforts to privatize Social Security, which would jeopardize benefits by risking our Social Security funds in the stock market. Edwards also opposes efforts to raise the retirement age and has called on Congress and the administration to restore fiscal discipline to Washington in order to preserve the Social Security Trust Fund and our commitment to future generations.

Lower-Cost Prescriptions For All Seniors Through Medicare. Senator Edwards believes that we need an affordable prescription benefit for senior citizens and disabled Medicare beneficiaries. Edwards strongly opposes proposals to require seniors to give up their traditional Medicare and go into an HMO in order to get drug benefits. He strongly supports a prescription drug benefit but believes the benefit proposed in current legislation is too confusing and unstable, and does not do enough to control prices.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-01-03 11:33 PM
Response to Original message
1. hey, thanks.
OK, I should have done this for myself. I'm a little embarassed. But thanks.

Now who wants to talk?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cherryperry Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-01-03 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. After reading the original post,
Edwards looks absolutely perfect.

Do you have more reasons you support him?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tinoire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-01-03 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. Why don't you tell me in your own words why you prefer him?
Edited on Mon Sep-01-03 11:43 PM by Tinoire
What really grips you? Is he from your home-state?

On edit: I must add after reading Will's original post that he looks very good there. It's an impressive CV.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 12:09 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. What really grips me is that...
Edited on Tue Sep-02-03 12:15 AM by AP
...I have been convinced that everything the Republicans do is motivated by one central aim, to shift the burden of running society on to the working and middle class, and shift the benefits to the people who are already wealthy. Every Republican policy can be explained with this paradigm. Privatize the gain. Socialize the costs. It's so clear to me that the most important tool they use to achieve this is the tax system. Now, I've felt this for a while now -- long before I ever heard of John Edwards. And I've felt that it is REALLY HARD to articulate a message which most voters can grasp which offers the Democratic side of the argument on this issue (that we need to reward work, not wealth and that middle and working class opportunity are key not only to a stoking economy but to the future of American society, and whether America has any kind of prosperous future for the masses has become a question of some urgency of late).

So, I have had all these concerns, and all these ideas about what the perfect candidate is, and one night I'm watching this guy I'd never really seen before at a house party and he's talking about...I can't effing believe it...about progressive taxation in a way that is really easy to comprehend, and to which the audience is clearly relating. And then I look into his biography, and I'm like, I got to fucking pinch myself because this guy's the candidate I invented in my dreams. I seriously have yet to be disappointed by anythign that has come out of his mouth. I wish he were doing better in the polls, but I'd probably feel that way if Clinton were my man and it was September 1991.

Another thing about Edwards, it's like I'm totally on his vibe. I'm thinking something one day about what the ideal candidate would do or say, and then he does it the next day. How can you not like the candidate who is totally doing what you wish they'd do.

I just read through Edwards's Real Solutions, and there wasn't a damn thing in it that I didn't agree with. OK, maybe one or two things I'd tweak, and then there's the Death Penalty, but I'm just going to hope we have an informed public debate on that issue while Edwards is president, and then I'm sure the right thing will happen.

One more thing. I read something that really resonates with me during this primary season. In the introduction to Wealth and Democracy Kevin Phillips outlines his very compelling argument about where America is going, and how it today is similar, historically, to ealier periods of increasing fascism (my word). Phillips than chides Democrats for running in the primaries, at a time when the issue that will connect with voters is the question of middle class opportunity, two guys who are NOT from the middle class. He notes that Bill Bradley as the Princeton-educated son of a bank president. He doesn't note that most people think of the phrase "Million Dollar" when they think of Bradley. Phillips makes the point that there is no way that the MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE to voters today (whether they're overtly conscious of its roots or not) -- their anxeity about middle class opportunity in today's economy -- is going to be tapped into by a guy whose biography is nothing like the average American's. Phillips never says it, but it's likely that he thinks this is a big reason Clinton was able to break the power hegemony of the Republican Party.

So, are we going to run another losing son of a rich and powerful guy, or are we going to run a winner who can tap into what everyone knows is the REAL problem with America? So, thinking historically, you have got to love Edwards.

And for those of you who don't think biography is important, I've been reading this book, the End of the American Era, and often the author describes historical figures by describing their biography. Hamilton had anxieites about his impoverished roots and the fact that his parents were never married, so he over compensates by completely indentifying with the sources of NY power -- big business and finance. Wilson was the son of minister who saw first hand the carnage of the civil war and committed his presidency to creating the League of Nations, which, in the form he advocated, he felt would end war between member nations.

Why in the world does the author do that? To fill out the pages. No. It's because biography REALLY REALLY matters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tinoire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 12:40 AM
Response to Reply #7
18. That was really a great post. Thank you!
That was so heartfelt and supported by the issues will posted originally that I'm touched and really greatful you shared that with us!

I am resigning myself to the fact that I may end up having to over-look my anti-war principle for the expedient purpose of getting Bush out and keeping any other evil from getting in.

Thanks for making me WANT to look at John Edwards more closely

and thanks John Kleeb for the additional info that he and DK are friends. After reading Edward's stance on the so very important issues aroud workers and their rights, I'm very impressed. Environment too... I'm going to look at this guy more closely now- the workers in this country are too disrespected.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tinoire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 12:51 AM
Response to Reply #7
23. What's his stance on Israel / Palestine ?
I'm curious about some things that weren't mentioned, such as Israel/Palestine which is one of my TOP issues. Do you know anything about that? Is it the same old, same old we get from most Democrats, just tell me so- and if you don't know- that's ok- I'll look it up myself...

Thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 12:58 AM
Response to Reply #23
27. I believe, his Real Solutions says he's for a strong Isreal.
But who isn't?

More telling is that he's really committed to having Iraq be turned into a country in which Iraqis are in control of their own destiny and Iraqi wealth flows back into Iraq and not into Houston. I think this is where you'll find the difference between the Likud-fans, and the Labor-fans, or however you want to draw that dichotomy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cherryperry Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #27
56. Surely you jest:
You wrote, "I believe, his Real Solutions says he's for a strong Israel. But who isn't?"

AP, apparently you have not entered the I/P forum.

Wake-up call!!!!!!!

However, I feel just the opposite from so many @ DU and so I went to Edwards' website and read he does realize that Israel is a vital ally and the only democracy in the area...and so, I am even more impressed than I was before. Thanks for your excellent 'in-your-own-words' description of why you support Edwards as well as your sweetly naive remarks as quoted above.


:pals: :yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-03-03 12:45 AM
Response to Reply #56
61. I meant, among the candidates, who doesn't?
I definitely didn't mean among the general public!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tjdee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 08:58 AM
Response to Reply #7
50. Great post!
I'm for Edwards too, but I always wait around for you to say what I want but better.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnKleeb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 12:20 AM
Response to Reply #6
12. hey didcha know that Kucinich and Edwards are buds
Kucinich/Edwards? Kucinich/Gephardt, Kucinich/John Lewis, and heres a real mind grabber but I respect the idea Kucinich/Bernie Sanders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 12:26 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. What's not to like about Edwards?
If you search the CSPAN archives for John Edwards, the second most recent video archive that comes up is a Washington Journal on which the spent 30 minutes talking about Edwards. They open the segment with a clip of the nine candidates sitting in chairs on a stage (I'm not sure which debate it is). Edwards is doing his spiel (which is brilliant) and it's a shot from the side. Most of the candidates are sitting their looking like they're jealous, yet appreciative of his skills. However, you see Sharpton on the end, and he has a look like, "man, I like this guy" -- and I heard on Tavis Smiley that he does. But even better, there's Kucinich, the only one on the edge of his chair, and he's totally nodding in agreement, and clearly way into Edwards's message.

I think it's very telling that Sharpton and Kucinich are down with Edwards as a person. I even read where Nader says he's a good guy, that he's doing the right thing with his life. And Kerry clearly likes him too -- you can see it in the way they interact.

That's a uniter not a divider for you, eh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnKleeb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 12:42 AM
Response to Reply #14
19. Its just that I support Kucinich
We win with a Edwards presidency. Hes good. I dont mind him at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cherryperry Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 07:03 PM
Response to Reply #12
57. Yes, John:
Kucinich/Lewis
Kucinich/Sanders
Kucinich/Edwards
Kucinich/Gephardt

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-01-03 11:34 PM
Response to Original message
2. Wonderful, but
Dean rules.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-01-03 11:37 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Not yet he doesn't
:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RetroLounge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-01-03 11:37 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Come on Clete, that adds nothing to the discussion.
Edited on Mon Sep-01-03 11:39 PM by RetroLounge
Dean Rules???

Dean is a candidate (whom I back) but he is NOT Led Zeppelin.

He does NOT rule. He is running for President.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 12:10 AM
Response to Reply #4
9. Dean is from the ruling class though.
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RetroLounge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #9
55. And?
is there a point?

and what exactly is a ruling class?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robin Hood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 12:23 AM
Response to Reply #4
13. Dean should join Led Zeppelin, and then he would rule, or rock, whatever.
And he's buying the stairway to hea, a, ven.

:hippie:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kodi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 12:09 AM
Response to Original message
8. on a purely personal level, edwards is an indecive person.
and i actually like him quite a bit. but i have close friends who are also his close friends and financial supporters who have told me too many stories about him not being able to make up his mind on matters.....even as to why and how he should run for president.

perhaps someone will ask him as was asked to ted kennedy in 1980, and ask him point blank..."why are you running and what makes you unique enough and qualified to be president."

he is not ready, give him 4 more years in the senate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 12:18 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. For a guy who is indecisive, he is running quite a brilliant
campaign in terms of being consistently on a message which is perfect in a historical sense. It is very disciplined what he's doing.

When you say he's indecisive, I imagine (with the emphasis on imagine) that this is just his style of preparation. For example, I imagine that he prepared for his trials by thinking of a thousand different ways to do something, but when he gets in front of the jury he picks exactly the right thing, and it works really well. 'Cause I don't know what's going on behind the curtain, but when he's in front of the curtain, it's political and campaign perfection.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 12:19 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. and if you want to talk 'indecisive' let's talk about...
...Dean, who seems to be all over the board.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eloriel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 12:47 AM
Response to Reply #11
21. You just undid most of the good you'd done in your superb
post about Edwards. Why would you want to do that? It would be different IF IT WERE TRUE. But it's not.

Dean got asked about 3 purported flip flops by him by Judy Woodruff on CNN's Crossfire/Inside Politics special this afternoon and explained it extraordinarily well, if you care to look up the transcript.

I don't like lies or distortions being told about any candidate. Please stop, okay?

Eloriel
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 12:54 AM
Response to Reply #21
25. That was for laughs. Let me try to rescue myself here...
I'm very very sorry. I thought that it wasn't in the spirit of the rest of my posts in this thread, and I regretted it almost immediately.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kodi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 12:29 AM
Response to Reply #10
15. just ask erskine bowles about edwards
and be sure you have a wire.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 12:33 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. Erskine and Edwards seem to have come to an agreement which they both like
You know how Erskine is going to be Senator. By having Edwards run for president, and having Ersking ride in on his coattails.

The only people who think there's an issue with this are the Republicans who are having a tough time creating dirt on Edwards.

Could there be a sorrier attempt to slime a guy. I'm not even sure it makes sense to act like Edwards's goal to help as many people as possible is bad. I mean, it's like, this is what politicians are supposed to want to do... the most good possible. It isn't a fault.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kodi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 01:09 AM
Response to Reply #16
31. edwards might not even carry NC, & he has no coat tails
i am assuming for the moment that each of us is hooked up to the NC democratic party's main players. yet what i am hearing lately from the people i know in charlotte is not what you are saying.

but please, dont get me wrong. i like a helluva' lot of what edwards is saying, in fact, i think he(and graham)are the most genuine candidates for the american people the dems have and would do campaign work for edwards myself if he gets the nod in 2004. but i just dont see it in 2004...2008 is his time.

honestly, it aint over til its over, and if dean continues to shoot his mouth off and have to backtrack he will get in trouble soon. that leaves an opening for edwards to sneak up in the polls, because the deannies will probably not side with kerry or gephardt, they might well gravitate to edwards.

even so, dean has raised a lot of money and people who donated to dean already will have to swallow their pride to move to another candidate.

BTW erskine has a really nice house. you would like it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 01:19 AM
Response to Reply #31
32. Edwards said (and I agree) that he's the only candidate
most state Dems will want to campaign with next Nov. If anyone has coattails it's goign to be Edwards. He plays well in every state.

As for the risk of losing NC, although this seat changes party pretty regualarly, I don't think it's going to change parties this time. Edwards is too good of a campaigner. If he runs, he'll win it. If he runs for President, he'll win it for Bowles. If he runs for President, he'll bring in other Dems in other states, and if they lose NC (low probability) he'll definitely make it up somewhere else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OldSoldier Donating Member (982 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 06:29 AM
Response to Reply #32
44. Pretty regularly?
Try every six years regularly.

North Carolina is a Term Limitations state for senators--except for Jesse Helms, we've not reelected one in a very long time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joanski01 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 05:10 AM
Response to Reply #10
43. Edwards is talking things
over with his "close friends", and they tell others that he is indecisive? I don't like that at all. Thinking and talking is the way you work out problems. Edwards is a good candidate. I really do like all the candidates, except for Joe Lieberman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tinoire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 12:48 AM
Response to Reply #8
22. I get the feeling he's young and more exprerience would help
but he's off to such a fine start that I would forgive his youth and even indecisiveness. Often indecisiveness is the sign of someone who takes the time to examine everything, in depth...

If he doesn't make it this time, I'll be watching him for 2008.

One thing that struck me during the debates was what a gentleman he is- as in a really gentle person... I like that!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 01:00 AM
Response to Reply #22
28. I have a response to this one too that'll make you want him to win in 2004
but I'm getting tired.

Raise the issue again, and I'll give you my argument.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tinoire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 01:46 AM
Response to Reply #28
37. It's really not an issue for me.
I don't care about the youth or the indecision. Some of the most intelligent people I know are indecisive simply because they take the time to weigh everything...

Youth is only a plus for me!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 01:27 AM
Response to Reply #8
35. maybe it's sour grapes
and they aren't really his friends?
The information (his so called close friends) so easily shared and you with us seems rather out of line for what 'friends' do. Course, that might just be me and if I was Edwards I wouldn't consider these people my friends anymore if I found this out.
I also doubt that a lawyer as sharp as John Edwards did things the way your friends project. I happen to live in NC and was raised in what could be considered a similar culture/fashion as Edwards and something tells me this story about Edwards smells. :shrug:

As far, as Edwards qualifications I think he's 1000 times more qualified than the pResident we have now .....a C average, he hasn't ever had to work a hard day in his life!
*Bush was born on third base and thinks he hit a home run!

One thing about Edwards his Mommy and Daddy didn't buy him his law degree he had to work for it and he wasn't born with a silver spoon in his mouth. I don't think Edwards is the type of person that forgets where he comes from and I'd much rather see him as President than what we have now which is a freaking nightmare!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kodi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 02:36 AM
Response to Reply #35
41. yes, it is sour grapes, but they're yours.
strange it is that when information is provided that doesn't fit to true believers' preconceptions they disparage it instead of thinking about it in a clear manner.

some of these people helped edwards get elected to the senate in 1998, and still like him a lot, but have reservations about his candidacy for the presidency at this time.

these are the same people who advised bowles not to run in 2000 because he could not win, and they were right.

as far as your blah blah blah chest thumping about "i live in NC" who gives a shit if you do. so did i for decades and i worked on david price's first run for congress years ago when he was still a professor. i know many of the activists and moneybags in the democratic party in NC and what i posted is what i heard from them.

if you dont like what i posted, that is your problem, not mine.

christ, you guys eat your own on this site.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 02:47 AM
Response to Reply #41
42. Did you read the GQ interview from last January?
It had that quote from the Democratic advisor who said, when he asked why Edwards was running, he got a very compelling response about his desire to help people on a larger scale rather than one person at a time.

The article also suggeted that Edwards has a hard time blowing his own horn. He wouldn't relate the story about sitting in on the protest for a prom for the black students in any satisfying way for the reporter, so the reporter had to go ask around to get the story from people who witnessed it. So, I wonder if those stories offer clues into what your friends are observing.

I'm really curious about what people are saying, because the difference between the impression Edwards creates (being so on message, have such a clear meta-message) and the behind-the-scenes indecisiveness is striking.

Also, I think Edwards is answering the Ted Kennedy question in every speech -- he wants to help the kind of people he grew up with who are the people Bush is hurting the most...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 08:02 AM
Response to Reply #41
47. Kodi.........David Price is a treasure! I love the guy....he answers his
letters from his constituents....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 09:44 AM
Response to Reply #41
53. nope not sour grapes
or a problem on my part.

I just don't find your 'information' he said, she said that Edwards is indecisive adding anything, it's rumor/gossip. These people? I don't know them and how do I know that it isn't sour grapes on their part?
Honestly, how do you expect someone to think about this in a clear manner when they see how you presented it? Now you say they have reservations about his candidacy at this time. I have no problem with that it makes sense he hasn't been in the Senate all that long.

It's got nothing to do with me being a 'true believer'
Edwards isn't even my pick for the nomination.
I just happen to think that gossip/rumor isn't a good way to help people see things in a 'clear manner' if that's your goal.
My impression with your first post about Edwards and his so-called indecisiveness came across as 'eating our own' to me yet you try to turn it around and say I'm doing it to you? :shrug: whatever
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShaneGR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 08:04 AM
Response to Reply #8
48. He has been asked that
And his response has always been about the working men and women, like his parents, and how he wants to help them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
legin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 12:40 AM
Response to Original message
17. Where is the foreign policy stuff ??
I have to say I have a very limited interest in domestic issues, but for sure:
'Making 35,000 Dry-Cleaners More Environmentally Friendly'
doesn't really get my pulses racing.

Though here I can imagine it making a 500 post flame fest. :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 01:20 AM
Response to Reply #17
33. It's the economy, stupid.
Gulf War I was in 1991. By 1992, it was already all about the economy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uptohere Donating Member (603 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 09:36 AM
Response to Reply #17
52. look here
these are the bullets

Edwards’ foreign policy agenda is based on:
Protecting the safety and security of the American people.
Winning the war on terrorism.
Maintaining the world's best military.
Winning the peace.
Forging a global coalition against weapons of mass destruction.
Promoting America's highest values - democracy, freedom and human rights - around the world.
Rebuilding relationships with America's allies and friends.
Working to resolve conflicts.
Revitalizing institutions that make America stronger.

this is the link

http://www.johnedwards2004.com/foreign_policy.asp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robin Hood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 12:43 AM
Response to Original message
20. This is why i think that Edwards is the best bet to beat Bush.
His looks. ........ Yeah, that's right. I hate to break it like that to you, but that's who will win.

Tonight i watched this biker show on discovery channell(I know, it's weird). They were having the radest chopper contest. One of the chopper makers was an older more burly guy, and the other was a younger long haired hyper dude who made a what I thought to be a lesser bike than the older less good looking dude.

The crowd was asked why they were voting the way that they were voting, as they approached the ballot box. They kept saying that they were voting for the younger more good looking dude, because it's not all about the bike(Fuzzy math), It's also about the attitude(looks) of the bike owner. So the lesser of the chopper builders won the contest.

This was but a microcosm of the voting populace and how they make their decision when they enter the voting booth. I hate to see it so superficially but there it is. The people don't care about the details. Hell, most Americans never emotionally matured past Junior High school. so for them it has to be a simple popularity contest, and don't bother them with the details that affect their life.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yaledem Donating Member (88 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 12:54 AM
Response to Original message
24. Only candidate with no PAC money.
He is the ONLY candidate running who has taken $0 from PACs and Washington lobbyists. (He didn't take any in his Senate race either.) Some candidates give lip service to campaign finance reform and public funding, while others go above and beyond what the current law dictates.

See for yourself:
www.opensecrets.org
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 12:56 AM
Response to Reply #24
26. I heard Kerry is taking no PAC money. Without checking now
which would be the easy thing to do, is he taking PAC money now?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yaledem Donating Member (88 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 01:09 AM
Response to Reply #26
30. Candidate PAC Donations
Edwards: $0

Kerry: $8,725
Dean: $15,500
Gephardt: $300,372
Lieberman: $126,260
Graham: $54,050
Kucinich: $1,000
Braun: $3,000
Sharpton: $2,000

Source: www.opensecrets.org
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 01:21 AM
Response to Reply #30
34. Wow.
Gep and Lieberman -- that's pretty sick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShaneGR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 07:20 PM
Response to Reply #34
60. Gephardt's PAC #
Almost all union money
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cherryperry Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #24
58. Now, THAT really means something!!! eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VolcanoJen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 01:04 AM
Response to Original message
29. I chose Edwards as my candidate to follow on today's...
... official Kick-Off of the Campaign Season.

Hallelujah!!! It's here! Our dreams of uprooting WhistleAss are nearing, my friends.

Anyhow, I watched Edwards on C-SPAN's excellent "Road to the White House" and remain impressed. Sent him a few more bucks, too. I annointed him the winner of VolcanoJen's Campaign Kick-Off contest...

I also remain undecided, but I'm getting closer. Thanks for this excellent, informative and postive thread, Will.

:-)
Jennifer
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shanty Oilish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 01:39 AM
Response to Original message
36. Two and a half reasons John Edwards should fold
John Kerry, Howard Dean and Dick Gephardt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 01:52 AM
Response to Reply #36
38. With that logic, Clinton would have dropped out, and we would haveHA
had Tsongas or Jerry Brown lose to Bush in the general election.

And just the notion that you'd want Edwards's message off the platform now...that's mad. This guy is the one who is making the BEST (not the angriest, and not the craziest, and maybe not the rhyming, just the plain best) arguments about why people should be voting for a democrat in 2004.

Even if you don't think he's going to win, you should at least what him to be around for awhile...unless of course you're afraid he's going to beat your candidate once more people hear what he has to say.

There are three candidates I definitely want around until the end -- Kucinich, Edwards and Sharpton. They are the ones I think liven up the debates in a productive way -- which is, basically, they explain things to you that bush does covertly in a way that makes something click in your head. Dean, on the other hand, lists off all the bad things that are obvious. I know that stuff that's like listening to myself complain. But Edwards, Kucinich and and Sharpton put things that I know in a way that is really compelling, or they say things I didn't know that I'm glad to hear. Sharpton is actually really good at this. So I want them to be around for a while.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cherryperry Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 07:17 PM
Response to Reply #38
59. what about Moseley-Braun?
speaking as a woman about a really wonderful female candidate, what do you think about including her as the 4th you want around until the end? hmmmmmmmm?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GalleryGod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 02:05 AM
Response to Reply #36
39. John Edwards is a Terrific Candidate Who has Yet to be Defined.
by the Elite-Barbque-Slurpin'-Media Whores...

I find him acutely effective on the stump;focused and earnest without being smarmy. He's still fresh-let 'em out there with his own "oxygen & space" and he might surprize a few folks.

As for all the "Dean Rules" posts that are here,there, and every-where?:

PERSPECTIVE CHECK: January to Super Tuesday 1984: Hart's Campaign was, "as relentless as an Old Western prairie fire" that would "reduce the opposition to ashes" (Newsweek & Time):think:

I could easily WORK and VOTE for Senator Edwards election!
:bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 02:10 AM
Response to Reply #39
40. About Edwards being defined...
...this is an interesting point. One of the interesting things about campaigning is how a candidate gets defined. The candidate has one argument about who he or she is. Sometimes the media plays along (Bush 00) and sometime they don't (Gore 00).

I think the best candidates are able to control their own identities. How do they do that with a non-compliant press? By having a direct connection to the public -- by having an ability to connect directly with people.

I think Edwards definitely has that skill. I think he is in total control of his identity. He proved this in his senate race. He took the image his opposition tried to create and turned it 180 degrees in his favor, and worked into his own message about his identity. It's an amazing skill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uptohere Donating Member (603 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #36
54. Kerry is faltering of late while Edwards is on the rise
and most give Gephardt little chance, even his vaunted union support is hedging A LOT.

I actually think things will continue to swing around. Check back in a month and see if you're still pegged on your theory.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Paragon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 06:37 AM
Response to Original message
45. In all seriousness, John Edwards is not viable for the Presidency until...
...he gets that thing removed from his upper lip.

Blecch!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rooktoven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 07:50 AM
Response to Original message
46. A positive, eloquent message,
No attacks on other dems, and devastating commentary on *

What's not to like. AS far as him getting out of the way for Dean , Kerry and Gephardt-- Gephardt has no chance. Dean has a partial one, Kerry maybe a bit bigger one.

If you want MARGIN of victory, Edwards is your man. (And we do want MARGIN, right?)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uptohere Donating Member (603 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 08:54 AM
Response to Reply #46
49. yes we do
and Edwards is the only one capable of galvanizing people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tjdee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-02-03 09:09 AM
Response to Original message
51. Thanks Will. Edwards is a fantastic candidate. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 07:23 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC