Edwards

[surfermaw]

I seldom post here but read almost every day, picking up information to use when posting on other boards, There is something that upsets me greatly.. Here you are taking more time hitting at Hillary and other democrats. On other board that have both parties posting, the hacking at Edwards not is getting hot and heavy...Sees that they see Edwards is coming on strong, and trying to stop him.....If we don't get it together, we are going to be looking at 8 more years of Republican rule.

Thanks for your time reading my article.

[venable]

1. I think you are saying that the repubs are afraid of Edwards. I agree.

in 04 Rove told a republican pollster that I know (yes, I know one) that Edwards was the only one of the group he couldn't beat.

I think that he thought that the demonizing he could do to edwards would not stick...that was the republican pollster's interpretation.

Rove should take a gander at the demonizing that goes on here. Not just of Edwards, but he sure gets some serious vitriol.

[Colobo]

2. They beat Kerry/Edwards in 04

What makes you think they can't beat Edwards in 08?

[surfermaw]

4. I didn't say he couldn't be beat in 08

What I said is we don't need to be cutting the legs out from under any democrat candidate. On other boards Rep. are starting to hack at Edwards. I have been around for a long time, and I don't think we should be hacking at our own candidates. With the Republicans hacking at Edwards leads me to think that they are thinking Edwards is the one they are going to have to beat. I would like to tell you why I think is going to be our Ace in the hole, but I would have to in a seance bash two others in a mild way..

[BlueStater]

5. The lack of any good candidates on the GOP side for one thing

I'm definitely not underestimating the GOP. If living under this nightmare for the last six years has taught me anything, it's that the GOP could take the most pathetic loser in the universe and make him seem presidential if they lie enough.

But I have to say that, at this point, I feel more confident than not. McCain is a senile old fool who is running an embarrasing campaign. Rudy only polls high because no one in the media has challenged his phony "America's mayor" persona. Fred Thompson is overrated. Romney is probably the biggest threat of the bunch but he consistently polls far behind our candidates in every poll I've seen.

[edwardsfeingold08]

6. Because it's completely different

One third of Americans can't even name the current vice president and he's been in office since 2000. That means two thirds of Americans don't pay attention to the bottom of the ticket at all. To say they beat Edwards in 2004, really isn't the same as if he were on the top of the ticket. It's just not.

Also, the job of the vice presidential candidate in a campaign is to help sell the presidential candidate to the American people. If you want to say Edwards didn't help Kerry, fine. The poster said Rove feared Edwards in 2004. What is your dispute with that?

[venable]

7. I'm referring to Edwards at the top of the ticket in 04

that is what I was told unnerved Rove (to the extent that a monster can lose nerve).

Edwards national performance can NOT be judged by the outcome of the 04 election, given the way the campaign was run, and how Edwards was used.

[dogman]

8. Maybe because Edwards' stance in '08 was closest to bushco's.

He and Lieberman were for the Iraq War but Lieberman was a proven social liberal. Edwards speech was posted on the gov. website as their proof of bi-partisanship. I personally doubt they were really afraid, however. The hardest part of running against Edwards would have been his lack of a record as a Democratic Senator at that time.

[venable]

9. wrong wrong and incredibly wrong

I am only writing a reply to say that this doesn't even deserve a reply.

hate all you want, but do try to make some sense.

if you really believe what you posted, then I simply return to the sentence two above this one.

this is tiring.

[dogman]

11. Not at all wrong.

I do not hate him however. I have no respect for his record and his weather vane approach to politics though. You may not be able to deal with the facts but that is no reflection on me. I am tired of attempts to rewrite history and create a new reality that ignores the facts.

[venable]

14. my issue is with your statement that Rove was worried JE is too much like w

when the issue for rove was that he was recognized as the real mccoy when it comes to looking after the little guy, speaking their language...this is something he can not demonize. Even the trial lawyer past speaks to this, as they found out when they traipsed that out in his initial senate run. It didn't fly, except to make people realize that Edwards had spent his life giving voice to the little guy (regardless of the money he made...note that Edwards turned down over 95% of the cases brought to him...the opposite of an ambulance chaser)

this is a far distance from he is too much like Bushco.

That's what I say doesn't make sense.

I agree that revisionism is not helpful, either whitewashing past records, or claiming that a progressive populist (The Nation's favored candidate was Edwards, as per several editorials in 04) was the same as the right wing shits that occupy the WH.

[dogman]

15. Carville said he could talk an owl out of a tree.

There is no evidence I can see that Rove feared him. The VP debate with Cheney was not "awesome" as many of his supporters felt it would be. The problem I saw at the time is that he would be forced to argue the Kerry position on Iraq which was new to him. He did fair as a speaker but there was no strong feeling for the argument he had recently debated with Kerry in the primary. There is no doubt he is a gifted speaker. Although some like myself thought his speeches lacked real depth. He would kill as an infomercial salesman. The question for me is the depth of his feelings. Where do his policy ideas come from? It seems, the latest polls. He has been running for President since 2001 and at that time bushco held a favorable majority. Edwards stood strong for that policy too. I don't care how much money he has, where he lives, or what his personal expenses are. Those things offer slight indications of his personality. I am concerned about policy and issues. Rhetoric is cheap however, that is why I look at the record and the complete picture. I in no way think Edwards is the same as w, However their similarity in viewing the intel worry the hell out of me. It is not a question of which man has the better intent, it is the level of competence that I am concerned with. I, like the reported majority in Iowa, await a better candidate.

[venable]

20. there is a huge difference between 'pleased to have more people in the race'

and 'awaiting a better candidate'. One does not follow from the other.

I don't want to be a nitpicker, but the poll that says x number want gore or someone else in the race does NOT mean they are not happy with those in the race. It is a false assumption from that poll.

For instance, I am happy with several candidates, and still would like to see Gore get in...though I may or may not vote for him if he did... probably wouldn't, but I do like him as a candidate and think he should throw his hat in the ring, and who knows, maybe I would vote for him. that's what that poll registers.

[surfermaw]

3. Exactly

I am seeing more and more people on board for both Rep's and democrats, hitting at Eward's, trying to bring him down... I am an old lady my family was always politically active, and it is normal for me to pick up on some things, even if someone is for another candidate, it may be Edwards that is the ace in the hole for us. I am thinking he is....North Carolina i goes democrat at home and usually votes Republican on the national level, however Edwards did win a Senate Seat, but I don't know if he would have lost in another run, however that wouldn't matter to me, this state has always been I'm Against it Jesse Helms, for Edwards to win his seat was a great great accomplishment. Just be sure he isn't written off early.

[Pastiche423]

21. He would NOT have won a second term

During his only term in congress, he ignored his constituents. Hell, he couldn't even win his home state in the '04 primary.

[StudentsMustUniteNow]

10. Edwards is the toughest to beat

He channels our frustration in a way the other candidates don't.

[TeamJordan23]

12. Couldn't Disagree Anymore

I am sorry, but I do not think Republicans go to sleep worrying about John Edwards being their biggest threat.

First of all, Edwards disappears in nearly any debate I have seen him in. He looks way too soft and has not had one memorable debate performance.

Second, Edwards made nearly no impact running as a VP in 2004. I think even in his home state of North Carolina, Dems only picked up like .5% more votes than 2000. Again, he was soft and forgettable as a VP candidate. I was very disappointed by his performance back than.

Finally, while I agree with his populist message, we need to realize that we live in a country that tilts slightly conservative. Just imagine all the attack ads that Edwards will face over the costs of some of his proposed programs and the increase in Taxes that he thinks will be necessary to pay for some of them. I'm sorry, but I know this will turn off many independent voters. Even a lot of democrats are fiscally conservative.

I will support Edwards if he gets the nomination, but I just don't see him winning a general election. I am also upset that he was for the Iraq war at the beginning. I don't remember him challenging the intelligence at all back than.

I honestly believe that Obama would be the biggest threat due to the fact that he does so well with Independents (and even some Republicans like him).

[Clark2008]

13. You're correct.

I live in a very Republican area (granted, my neighborhood is a blue oasis, but my county is extremely red) and none of the staunch Republicans I encounter daily are worried about Edwards. None. In fact, some of them don't even remember who he is (I posted about that conversation a month or so ago). To be honest, while they're not too thrilled with their own choices, they're also not too worried about any of our candidates.

I don't agree, however, that Edwards is seen as a populist anywhere but on Dem boards online. In fact, most people think he's a hypocrite around here: talking about the poor while getting a $400 haircuts and living in opulence - that is, if they think of him at all.

I am very cynical about our choices this year because I do live very far outside what I call the "blue bubble." I don't see white male swing voters going for any of our so-called front-runners in the numbers needed to flip any red/purple states. That's going to hurt.

[BlueStater]

18. Blah blah blah

"I don't agree, however, that Edwards is seen as a populist anywhere but on Dem boards online. In fact, most people think he's a hypocrite around here: talking about the poor while getting a $400 haircuts and living in opulence - that is, if they think of him at all."

Speak for yourself, okay?

[Catchawave]

19. Good response :)

If Edwards gets the nom, she'll implode. Can't wait :rofl:

[illinoisprogressive]

17. I've lurked on the freepers and they feel Edwards is the most beatable

they are concerned about Obama but, mostly want to run against Hillary because they hate her and she has so much bagagge they can swift her

[karynnj]

25. If she has baggage they do not need to swift her - they use the baggage

The point is the swiftboat stuff was UNTRUE not that it was damaging.

[jazzjunkysue]

22. Nope. Edwards is 1. Male 2. White 3. Southern.

He's our man. Seriously. They are afraid of him as well they should be.

I've heard him speak in person and he's inspiring. He has charisma. He's our rock star.

Obama cannot win a general. He's black. Neither can Hillary. Half of us hate her and most of them do.

Hillary's money keeps her artificially inflated in the early polls. That's where it ends.

When middle america is in the voting booth, they can pull the switch for Edwards alone.

[Crunchy Frog]

23. We should support Edwards because he has white skin and a penis.

:shrug:

[jazzjunkysue]

24. The discussion, if you read it, was electability, not worthiness.

He's a great man, always wins his cases, and can handle anything with elegance.

Not sure you can promise that from Hilary or Obama.

[FrenchieCat]

26. And in essence you are saying that Edwards is the most electable

precisely because he is a Southern White Man.

The fact that he has shown himself incompentente in the realm of national security (Co-sponsored, promoted and voted Yeah on the IWR,and had to say sorry 3 years later to this day) makes him unelectable to me. This will be an election about Iraq and possibly Iran (and if you don't think so, that is only your wish).......not about the Dow and how it has gone up and reached record high.

Edwards wants to raise taxes....which again makes him unelectable.
His health care proposal is not much different from the others, and so even there, he doesn't stand out.

So, in essence, if another Southern White Man enters the race, Edwards becomes that much less "electable"...especially if that candidate also has national security experience.

Seems like your reason for Edwards being "electable" has a sorry and shaky foundation, IMO.

[illinoisprogressive]

16. I don't see him as threatening but, I also don't trash him because I think

he is okay. He does not threaten me at all. I like elizabeth alot and edwards is a good choice if my candidate doesn't win the nomination.

[hezekkia]

27. I'm not a huge Edwards fan

he seems a little too slick for me. In '04 he was the Southern centrist, in '08 he's the liberal populist. I would prefer a little more consistency.

That matters to me much more than a hair cut or mansion.