Will Edwards lack of experience and backing*Bush with votes, hurt him?

[jpgpenn]

I say it sure will once we have the information put out instead it being held back by the media as is the case now.

I really don't think most folks understand the debth of Edwards inexperience in both domestic and world affairs.

[girl gone mad]

1. But,

he's cute and he connects with people. Apparently, that counts more.

[Democrats unite]

2. Let's see lack of experience, lack of character, lack of ...

Voting with Bush 76% of the time, voted for the patriot act, voted for leave no child behind. Need anymore be said?

on edit: How could I possibly forget he also voted for IWR!

[jpgpenn]

3. scarey stuff for sure!

:scared:

[PurityOfEssence]

15. "voting with Bush"

What lovely duplicitous horseshit. If one votes "aye" on a mundane funding bill, you're some kind of fascist. MOST of the legislative votes are nonpartisan and pretty much de rigeur. That's blatant skewing of statistics.

Hey, but Edwards didn't vote for the tax cuts, now did he? Not even, right? Even though your guy LIES about it repeatedly when he knows better and refuses to make any retraction. That's okay.

Let's remember: Clark has NO RECORD WHATSOEVER. He doesn't mention any abortion votes either, now does he? He's trying to suck up to Tenneseans by making them think he's against it. Of course, when he's among the party faithful, he's holding up pro-choice artwork.

When's your boy going to admit he's LYING? How can we believe a word this guy says? Is he against abortion? Did he counsel someone to vote for IWR? Does he think the administration's great, like he did at that fundraiser?

[spooky3]

60. Congressional Quarterly agrees with you

http://www.johnedwards2004.com/page.asp?id=512

[arewethereyet]

75. lack of character ? lack of experience ?

Clark has no experience.

Clark lied about calls from the White House askling him to talk up a link from Hussein to Al Queda. Lied on national TV to make himself look important. Mentioning character is really rich.

[rucky]

4. Never understood how Clark takes heat for lack of experience

& Edwards doesn't

[jpgpenn]

70. you aren't the only one asking this!

[mlawson]

5. Will posts like this draw anyone to your candidate????

The more stuff like this I see, the less fond of General Clark I become. And yes, I know better: it's not Clark himself. But still... human nature and all.

You don't get it, do you?

[jpgpenn]

9. This isn't about my candidate, it's about...

getting the facts out about your candidate. Heck, if the media refuses to do it, then why not his supporters?!

[mlawson]

13. Of course it's about your candidate.

When you post a gratuitous attack on someone else, using your candidate's avatar, you bet it relects on your candidate, rightly or wrongly. And voters are not required to explain their votes, inside the voting booth: it can be for any trivial criteria.

[jpgpenn]

19. don't be so sensative

If you can't find and post information showing Edwards experience in both domestic and world affairs don't attack me or others for basing and judging the man on what we already know. He voted along with *Bush almost %75 of the time and he sees no problem at all in scewing the facts by saying he tied with Clark in Ok. eve though he lost by over 1200 votes. this is scarey stuiff!! Except your candidate for who and what he is!

[mlawson]

27. We are not obliged to 'defend' our candidate

from hits like yours. "Experience" is a nebulous thing that cannot be quantified, which you know; anyone can make a case showing that ANY pol is experienced when they are not, or UNDER experienced when that is not so. For example what does Clark know about navigating legislation through Congress??? I am sure he can or has learned about it thorugh research, but I COULD say, "Oh he isn't experienced in that area, so he can't possibly govern if elected." How unfair would that be?

[BootinUp]

40. Clark makes his case based on executive experience

Not legislative experience.

[maxr4clark]

42. Eisenhower didn't seem to have any trouble

as President, and his last position before the Presidency was the same as Clark's: NATO SAC Europe.

In contrast, there hasn't to my knowledge been a single President who took Edwards' path to the Presidency, running during his first term as a Senator.

Clark has plenty of relevant experience with budgets, executive decisions, foreign relations, life-and-death decisions.

Oh, I forgot to ask. Has Edwards authored any bills that have made it through to become a law? If not, I don't see how you can claim he has experience at that, either. If he does, fair enough; let's hear about it.

[BootinUp]

50. yes he did ....P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act

unfortunately

[mlawson]

73. Not true!

Couldn't wait to try that one, could you?

[mlawson]

74. I was saying how unfair it would be, for me to try that tack.

But I don't get reciprocal courtesy, I see.

You know, I am liking Clark less and less, the more of this I read. Keep it up, you are doing him no favors.

[Democrats unite]

16. See post #6 and there are plenty more just like it.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bonobo]

21. As for you, you are at least consistent. No surprises.

[maxr4clark]

47. Maybe Edwards has more in common with Bush than you think.

This story about Edwards' vaunted legal career reminds me of the situation we have with our current President, where the facts aren't coming out on his side of the story.

[PurityOfEssence]

7. Will Clark's lying and stealth conservatism screw us all?

He's lying about his opponents, trying to be on all sides of issues to curry favor, and has made so many conflicting statements that his complete lack of experience in government hardly seems to be such an issue any more.

This is outrageous.

[Bonobo]

10. Please see my post/apology below. That WAS a nasty, lame post!

You should not join him in the gutter.

[jpgpenn]

14. Well if his supporters can't find information on....

Edwards experience in both domestic and world affairs then perhaps you can for us all.

[PurityOfEssence]

24. Intelligence commitee, judiciary commitee

He was one of the harshest questioners of Ashcroft, and voted against his confirmation. He did a lot of the campaign finance legislation.

Look up his record. This is a very good, decent and PROGRESSIVE person.

[jpgpenn]

30. and this ties into...

uplifting a destroyed ecomony, deterring terror, working with and neutralizing rogue nations?

And once again, I have and many others here have looked for and found NO information pertaining to Edwards debth of leadership in both domestic and world affairs. his supporters were asked repeatedly to help provide it. No One has been able to do so.

You say in your last line...This is a very good, decent and PROGRESSIVE person. .... Well then provide us that information. I mean who better to ask then those that support and know him best!

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jpgpenn]

11. "stealth conservatism", you mean like

The way Edwards voted with *Bush about %75 of the time. Try to defend your candidate by showing the expereince he has in both domestic and world affairs.

[Edwards4President]

28. John Edwards voted AGAINST W more than any other Senator

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[surfermaw]

46. Edwards voted against Bush, While Clark praised the Bush Adm.

Something to think about when you get to the poll's

[jpgpenn]

55. Edwards voted with *Bush %75 of the time!

[PurityOfEssence]

69. You forgot the dittoes; this is cynical trickery

Read the other posts about this; MANY votes are bi-partisan things that have virtually no rivalry to them. Voting for one of them is hardly as chummy to the fiends as you'd conjure with a phrase like "voted with Bush"; that brings forth images of standing in the Rose Garden and smiling.

Why do so many Clark supporters sound just like Republicans? Why do so many just repeat their masters' talking points like good little automatons?

At least accept that this "voting record" statistic is deliberately misleading. His record is fabulous in fighting the administration. For you to have an issue with his record, then you'd have to be saying that EVERY SENATOR is substandard and traitorous in your eye. Is this what your'e saying?

This is absolutely revolting.

[knight_of_the_star]

57. Quick question

How much of the public knew the dirty secrets hiding in the closet about BushCo?

How many members of CONGRESS knew?

How about a man who was a military officer who was not involved in politics and has not been until he was drafted to run for president?

[Edwards4President]

62. According to Congressional Quarterly, Edwards voted against Bush

more than any other Senator.

Sorry you don't like it, but accusing me of lying is not an appropriate response.

[jpgpenn]

64. even with No link ....

i'll take ytour word for it. this tells us why we now more then ever need someone outside Washington to take ver and Lead our country!

[Edwards4President]

65. Unfortunately, my link to CQ won't work because an account and password

is required. Sorry.

[jpgpenn]

71. well then,

copy and paste the part you are referring to!

[Bonobo]

8. Fellow Clark supporter: Cease and desist with posts like that!

It is embarrassing to the rest of us supporters to see someone on our side post drek like that.

I apologize to Edwards supporters for this lame post and I hope the poster realizes his mistake.

[jpgpenn]

12. "post like this"?

What is wrong with this post? I have been asking for info on Edwards experince for almost 1 week now. I have yet to get any information to reassure me that this guy will be able to lead us if put in the postion. If you find embarrassment in trying to get this info I suggest you not read my post.

[Bonobo]

18. My problem with your post:

Is a pragmatic one. You gain no support with it. You piss people off.

Also, you were making a speech with that thread title, not asking a question. The thread title itself contains two implicit assumptions:

1. Edwards has a lack of experience: If you have an opinion on the lack of experience, you should make a post about it and give some logiucal argument.

2. Edwards made a lot of votes that supported Bush: If that is true, you would be better served by bringing up those votes, point by point.

Instead, you tried to "sneak" them by in the title of the thread. That's what I think is lame and embarrassing. Think about it, okay?

[jpgpenn]

23. unlike what I read in your opinion

I don't go thru life with blinders on and tip toeing thru the tulips. This is a man that has on his website information saying he TIED with Clark in OK.

You might be able to sit back and let candidates like this dupe the unsuspecting into thinking he is much more then he is but I will post information that is factual and shows the man for what he is and what he voted for!

[Bonobo]

29. What blinders?

Also where was your factual information? I saw a thread with a rhetorical question that was obviously intended as a transparent smear...

Let's talk about Clark, not tear down others. There is NOTHING to be gained.
Dignified coduct and a little more sensitivity and principles will get you much further in life (and further in this campaign).

[BootinUp]

25. Well

It wasn't a work of art. But the truth is that very little information about Edwards record of voting has been discussed/debated, and I applaud the effort to raise this as a nomination process issue, which is what the original post did do.

[jpgpenn]

35. it wasn't meant as a ...

"work of art". It's called getting info out and trying in turn to receive some.

[BootinUp]

38. Of course, and I have no problem with your post

I meant no offense.

[Democrats unite]

17. There is nothing wrong with this post.

[PurityOfEssence]

20. Thank you.

Will you also repudiate Clark's deliberate lies about the tax cut votes?

I'm sorry, but I have my hopes and dreams too. Clark started his campaign by--among other things--targeting Edwards, and some of the tactics of his supporters are quite reminiscent of right wing tactics: smears, hammering of the opposition and an overriding belief in privilege.

There have been many very nice Clark supporters, but the first foray they made onto the board had even the Dean supporters gasping with shock at the harshness of it all. Lots of nyah-nyahing about whining and the like do not sit well.

[Bonobo]

26. In general (no pun intended) I think Clark supporters have been respectful

There are bad apples on all sides and I wish you would ask Mr or Mrs. Jenk to try to raise the level of his/her discourse as well.

As for the tax thing, I am not up on the issue yet, so I cannot yet speak to it. If you would like to, please tell me what the issue is and I will do my homework a bit more.

[PurityOfEssence]

48. Recently, yes, but not in the beginning

The first concerted onslaught of Clark supporters caught us all by surprise. It was one night before he announced, and it was a whole bunch of conservative flavored taunts and sneerings. Others will confirm this; it really took the Dean folks back, since they were on top of the world at that point, and weren't used to flak.

It took me quite some time to get over that as it simmered down, but it did, and the Clark camp has had a rather mellow feeling to it since then and until recently. Recently, though, much of the same scorched earth destroy-all-opposition dynamic has come back. Certainly, it's understandable: this is the clutch.

Still, I feel one can learn a lot about a candidate by the tenor of his/her supporters, and my antennae were tingling on this one, and have come back with a vengeance.

Clark has lied repeatedly recently that Kerry and Edwards voted for the Bush tax cuts (see the other threads) and it's absolutely untrue. This is wrong, and I see the best hopes of the candidate I feel best (Edwards) being unfairly ambushed by this, so I'm not too charitable on the subject.

I hope this makes sense without rankling too much.

[Bonobo]

54. Not rankled by you.

But a certain nameless other (with a far less eloquent style than you) is really pissing me off big time and I wish he/she would stop. I called out for a fellow Clarkie to cut the crap. Will you be consistent and try to do the same, please.

[spooky3]

61. I've done this previously and wish I were more successful.

I appreciate your effort but will hazard a guess you will have the same success rate I did.

At least we tried, and we're in this together! :hug:

[Nicholas_J]

22. Edwards was enormously stunned

By Dean's behavior in San Francisco last June. He was very unprepared for Dean's openly,and knowingly making statements he immediately states he knew were false immediately after making them.
The fact that Edwards could be so easily taken aback by minor attacks from people who competing with him for the democratic nomination indicates he may not be ready for the onslaught that he will face from the Bush machine between July and November,Kerry was also attacked at the same time that Edwards was and blew it off calmly and kept did not respond, except to advuse Edwards not to react to Deans statements at all.

I dont think Edwards is prepared to deal with the hostile attackes that any Democratic candidate will face from the Bush meatgrinder.

I disagree that Edwards does not understand either domestic or foreign affairs, as he has shown a depth of understanding in both areas, and his is beginning to have an understanding of the way Washington works,which is absolutely the most essential experience in getting anything done in Washington. For decades now we have been putting people who do not understand Washington into office, and it was their lack of Washinton experience that was largely responsible for their largest failures. Bill Clinton has stated that his lack of Washinton experience was larrgely resposible for all of the things he failed to accomplish while in office.

I think Edwards has just enough experience in this to not fall into the trap of being sidelines by Washington Republicans.

Over the last four ears, it has not been Washinton outsiders who have been sidelining the Bush Administrations plans, but Washinton insiders like Dick Gephardt, Nancy Pelosi and Ted Kennedy.

The Bush adminstration has faced far more opposition from Washington Democrat insiders than Reagan. Only a handful of Washington insiders fought Reagan during the 80's. That exerience has taught them valuable lesson on how to oppose a totally Republican majority in an extrememly effective way adn Edwards has been actively involved in this opposition.

Its not his knowledge that will cause problems, but his inexperience in the tricks that Rove and others will pull.

[AP]

32. Psst. '98. Helms machine. Don't people know about this?

Edwards knows a little about strategy and surprises and dealing with them.

[mlawson]

33. Perhaps so, it might be a regional thing, as well.

Once you get out of high school down here, dealing with *most* people is more genteel. It was like the first time I visited, um, some other part of the US: I was appalled at the in-your-face rudeness, and wanted nothing more than to leave. Maybe Edwards was just going through some culture shock.

But he is a tough cookie, and a fast learner. He will be fine. After all, he withstood the helms-Faircloth smear machine, in 1998. Those guys weren't playing around.

[BootinUp]

34. You raise a good point on handling attacks

And of course it is a very important skill for beating the shrub.


On the issue of insiders vs outsiders in Washington, I really feel that the Democratic party needs a strong mandate in November, and that neither Edwards, not Kerry can provide that. A mandate will do much more for us than some insider knowledge in the top job.

I feel that a Kerry candidacy will result in a loss quite frankly, or possibly a squeeker. We need a strong victory and tailcoats. This is only going to happen with a candidate with true National appeal. I do not believe that a 20 year Senator from Mass. can provide that victory.

[arewethereyet]

31. he feels as the American public feels on all that, no harm

the desperate attacks of a guy on the way out are pretty transparant.

[jpgpenn]

36. far from desperate

More like getting really information and facts out to those unsuspecting people. Like this 1, Edwrds has posted on his site that he finished TIEd for first with Clark in OK. even though he LOST by over 1200 votes.

Then again I guess you look at a glass empty and say it's full.

[arewethereyet]

41. can't answer to the campaign, I never called it a tie

but 1200 over what 170,000 or something like that is a rather small margin. Much smaller than the 7,190 difference between the General and Rev Al in SC.

[jpgpenn]

43. you can't answer..

but see no problem in them doing it huh?

[arewethereyet]

45. I understand their perspective

and their justification is a statistical one and its valid in in that context.

[BootinUp]

52. But

Statistics do not determine elections, votes do.

If this was a poll and statistics were used to interpret the results then that would be different.

[arewethereyet]

59. I don't disagree in the least

but I'm not on the payroll and, for some reason, they just don't call for advice. Go figure ?

[jpgpenn]

72. this comment comes off as...

very warped as far as i'm concerened.

[MrSlayer]

37. Yes it will kill him in the GE.

That's why they are setting it up for Kerry and Edwards. They can kill either one of them easily.

[surfermaw]

49. Record of votes

http://www.legitgov.org/fameNshame.html

[jpgpenn]

51. Thanks for the post!

:toast:

[texasmom]

53. Not with swing voters, but possibly with the base.

If he's the nominee the base has to understand the enormous improvement he will be over bush and co.

I do think he'll appeal to swing voters, and I've been thinking that bush will look downright creepy standing next to him at a debate.

One thing I learned in the last election was that the swing voters want to vote for someone they want to listen to and look at. They vote for the person they would like to sit down and have a beer with. I think that percentage of the voting public would probably respond to Edwards very well. He's very personable and easy on the eyes.

It's the base he has to worry about the most. But my contention all along has been that the base surely is acutely aware of what is at stake. I can't imagine staying home from this election.

[jpgpenn]

56. So far record turn outs

In many if not all states so far. I have no stst to back that up just repeating what McAuliffe has said.

[Goreloverjp]

58. Thank Dean, vote Edwards

Thank Dean, vote Edwards



As the country now finds itself in the thick of the Democratic primary season, the contests held so far have brought the candidates to unexpected places. With Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry having superceded former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean as the frontrunner, the eyes of the nation now turn to the upcoming primaries set to take place this weekend and next week, including the Feb. 10 contest in Virginia.

At this point, it's easy to predict a winner based on momentum or the Internet remix of the week. There's still a long way to go on the road to the White House, though, so the primaries yet to come and the dozens of delegates they will determine remain crucial in the decision as to who will take on President Bush this November. The Democrats have the unenviable task of selecting the candidate they believe has the ability to defeat an incumbent president who at many points during his term has possessed phenomenally high approval ratings.

We realize in an ideal world, where the point of electability would be moot, Howard Dean might be the candidate with the best policies and positions to serve as a foil to Bush. But we don't live in an ideal world, and Dean's poor showings in the primaries held thus far indicate that he probably doesn't have the support to handily defeat the president, let alone win the Democratic nomination.

That being said, we'd like to point out that although Dean may not be the answer for the ultimate future of the Democratic Party, he has certainly made several invaluable contributions to its cause.

EDITED BY ADMIN: COPYRIGHT

http://www.cavalierdaily.com/CVArticle.asp?ID=18520&pid=1108 :yourock:

[spooky3]

63. Thanks--you may want to edit out several paragraphs before the admins.

do--I think there is a 4 paragraph limit, to respect copyright laws.

[Moderator]

67. Goreloverjp

Per DU copyright rules
please post only four
paragraphs from the
news source.

Thank you and welcome to DU!! :toast:



DU Moderator

[LiberalBushFan]

66. Yes

but what would really kill him is if they find OBL.

Bush finds OBL + Edwards nominated = Oooooh sh*t

That's the only reason I'd support Kerry over Edwards.

[corporatewhore]

68. esp.W/the conservatives who hate bush for the PATRIOT ACT

Edwards/Kerry people tout electability.yet they voted and still support the patriot act.No self respecting small gov't promoting big centralised federal gov't loathing conservative likes the patriot act.I worked hand in hand with them last summer to get an antipatriot res here in austin They are fucking pissed.If we were smart we would win them over to our side at least for this election to send a message to bush.But what do we do?move the two Pro Patriot act cannidates to the for front because they are electable and have swing appeal.