Edwards the most electable, increasing advantage over Republicans in latest Rasmussen poll

[draft_mario_cuomo]

(latest Rass numbers for each match-up for comparative purposes)

Vs. Thompson

John Edwards 50%
Fred Thompson 39%

Barack Obama 46%
Fred Thompson 40%

Hillary Clinton 45%
Fred Thompson 45%

vs. Ghouliani

John Edwards 49%
Rudy Ghouliani 42%

Barack Obama 47%
Rudy Ghouliani 41%

Hillary Clinton 44%
Rudy Ghouliani 43%

vs. McCain

Edwards 52%
McCain 36%

Obama 47%
McCain 38%

Clinton 47%
McCain 38%

vs. Romney

Obama 47%
Romney 38%

Edwards 45%
Romney 38%

Clinton 46%
Romney 42%

Election 2008: Edwards Leads Giuliani by Seven, Thompson by Eleven

==A new Rasmussen Reports Election 2008 survey shows former Senator John Edwards (D) opening up a seven-point lead of 49% to 42% over former Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R). In late June, the two contenders were tied, and earlier in that month Edwards held only a four-point lead.

The national telephone survey also shows Edwards recovering a double-digit advantage over former Senator Fred Thompson (R). Edwards now leads the actor-politician 50% to 39% in the presidential race. That’s a slight improvement for the Democrat compared to his nine point advantage in late June.==

==The partisan lines are a bit less clear when Edwards is offered as the Democratic candidate rather than Clinton or Obama. More precisely, Republican voters are currently less opposed to Edwards than either Clinton or Obama. As a result, Giuliani and Thompson each attract only 68% of Republican votes when matched against Edwards.==

==Edwards is currently viewed favorably by 54% of likely voters, Giuliani by 56%, Thompson by 46%.==

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008_edwards_leads_giuliani_by_seven_thompson_by_eleven

[AJ9000]

1. Yes he is and we better take note if we want to win the 08 general election. nm

[NMDemDist2]

2. hubby swears Edwards is the guy to beat this time

his populist message is a winner

[snowbear]

3. I seriously have a feeling mario.............

That as much as I'm in a 3-way tie with Edwards, Obama and Richardson and can't make up my mind which one of them gets my big fat dividend check that the state of Alaska is getting ready to fork out to every resident...

...I have a feeling that post-Iowa, Senator Edwards is going to be catapulted into the lead for the remainder of the primary.

That is unless...

1) One of the other candidates comes in a super close 2nd in Iowa or---

2) whoever comes in second blows New Hampshire outta the water..

Right now the media is fixated on Obama & Hillary... but that may not be such a bad thing for Edwards right now?

In any event. I would love for Edwards to win. I'd love for Richardson and Obama to win too... I've never had a situation before in an election where I liked 3 of the candidates equally..

[draft_mario_cuomo]

4. I believe Edwards will win Iowa, carry that momentum to the nomination and then to the White House!

:bounce:

[snowbear]

5. I kinda have a hunch that will happen to...

Although HRC seems to be pretty brutal these days and I wonder how far she'll go to try and bring Edwards numbers down in Iowa?

I'm not so sure it will work there though....

[draft_mario_cuomo]

6. That is the great thing about the HRC-BO mutal obsession

Let them keep tearing into each other. That only helps Edwards, like the Dean-Gephardt war in Iowa last time did. They will be too busy fighting each other, too busy buying the media hype of a "Clinton vs. Obama" race that they won't know what hit them when Iowa votes. :)

[Catchawave]

32. More people will vote if they have a candidate to vote FOR

...and JE is inspiring with his message and definitely the Man with a Plan.

I live in very Republican district (Pat Robertson's voting district, how RED is that!?).....JE's positive message resonates here as many of my friends don't even know who the GOP choices are. Thank goodness we're an open state, we'll get a lot of crossover votes for the primary :toast:

[PurityOfEssence]

11. If Clinton and Obama keep up their idiotic little feud, he'll look better and better

C: You're a wimp.
O: You're a thug and that's not what I said.
C: Take that back and you did too.
O: You're twisting my words.
C: You call those "words"? They're barely syllables.
O: Are too, and good ones, too.
C: Are not, and you changed your story.
O: Did not, and you're still a thug.
C: Am not, now take that back.
O: Nuh-uh, and you're just scared of me.
C: Am not and you're a waffler.
O: Am not, warmonger.
C: Am not, creampuff.
O: Are too, Attila.
C: Sez you, mushmouth.
O: Dance on, harpy.
C: Drop dead, earboy.
O: Give Vilsack a dog biscuit for me.
C: Watch it, I hear Hugo's got herpes.
O: So who's your next war?
C: Doormat.
O: Gangster.
C: Flip-flopper.
O: Unilateral lapdog ditz. Baddie baddie lalalalala double infinity plus one...

And the beat goes on.

Sigh.

I wonder what the nazis are doin' tonight...

[byronius]

7. Ooooooooooo. Cool.

If Gore doesn't run, I'm an Edwards guy.

[LostInAnomie]

8. God I hope the Obama/Hillary battle turns nasty...

... and eats away at both of them.

I just wish Edwards could get more media attention.

[snowbear]

9. Ot would be kewl if Edwards could get Springsteen do a concert for him...

---somewhere in the midwest!

[rodeodance]

49. I was at the Kerry rally in Madison WI when Bruce did one last campaign.

[CTyankee]

54. That was some concert. The pix of the crowd were amazing.

I go to Door County Wisconsin every summer. We have a summer family house there (my husband is from Wisconsin). His sister and her arch Republican husband live in Madison and we see them in DC. I always kid them and ask them how are things in the People's Republic of Madison. He twitches. I wonder if they still support Bush and which 'pub they'll support for 08.

[snowbear]

10. duplicate post

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`

[sampsonblk]

12. Yeah! Let's pick a guy most of us don't want!

That'll work great. Let's vote based on how we think others will vote. Worked great in 2004!

[bling bling]

13. Yeah! Let's pick same guy that LOST last time!! Super smart strategy!!

[BigBearJohn]

14. Yeah, well, Gore lost last time too, but I'd vote for him in a heartbeat!

And truth be told,
I don't think Edwards did lose.
The vote was fixed.

[bling bling]

16. I'm talking about the primary, anyway.

The Dems didn't think he was all that in the 2004 primary.

Then Kerry risked his entire presidency on Edwards ability to deliver a red state or two and that gamble cost us 4 more years of the biggest fuckhead president/vice president duo ever.

No more gambles using odds and electability. And especially on people like Edwards where the odds are stacked against him. The only reason he seems the safest choice to so many is because of his color and gender. But he has nothing that the voting-population at large is interested in. He's a trial lawyer with a ridiculously hypocritical voting record for a "populist", no military or foreign policy experience. His record is full of contradictions. His actions don't match his rhetoric. I can't even believe anyone takes him seriously, to be honest. And he's a direct turn-off to many people for various reasons that I'm not even going to go over again because they've been addressed a hundred times and I'll just get attacked if I bring them up.

I seriously don't think Edwards will win if he's nominated. He's all talk and no action. The "talk" seems to be good enough for Edwards supporters around here but we'll be giving the Republicans a gift if we nominate Edwards. There are just too many angles to use to negative campaign against him. The most important angle against him will be that he reeks of insincerity and opportunism. All the GOP will have to do is compare and contrast what John Edwards *says* vs. what John Edwards *does.* There's plenty of soundbites, voting records, and paper trails to choose from.

[venable]

21. huh?

...wondering where you get the notion that 'he has nothing the voting population is interested in'.

i think the poll you are disputing says exactly the opposite. I think that his list of issues, and his positions on same, are extremely compelling to voters. I've heard complaints about Edwards, but never that his issues aren't relevant to voters.

(also, you might review the history of how Edwards was used in 04 by the kerry campaign).

[draft_mario_cuomo]

35. Edwards finished 2nd last time. So now 2nd place is bad? Your hero is currently in 2nd...

...and quickly losing ground from his 2nd place perch to Edwards of all people... :rofl:

==. He's all talk and no action.==

This coming from a supporter of a candidate whose top strategist says is running a campaign that focuses on personality, not issues. :rofl:

[bling bling]

40. Tell you what, Mario....

If Obama loses the 2007 primary then quits the Senate and spends the next 4 years campaigning and doing a 180 on the same issues he voted for, and then suddenly finds himself the champion of some cause that he never championed in the Senate, and runs for President again in 2012, I won't try to convince you or others here how sincere and honest and "electable" he is.

As of right now, Obama's words do not totally contradict his past actions.

[Joe Chi Minh]

38. Nah.... It's that haircut that gave the game away. The only polly

ever to get away with the wrong haircut was Charlie Rangel with his Pompadour quiff. It must have cost a pretty penny, and excited the Repuglican trolls no end.

[CTyankee]

55. You have to admit that the political landscape in the country has changed since 04.

We're picking up some western and midwestern states we didn't have before, rendering it moot whether we get the South or not. At least, that's the strategy I've been hearing. Besides, Kerry had other problems with his campaign that had nothing to do with Edwards.

I'm still mulling who I'll support. Right now I am looking for electability so I am paying attention to the polls of voters across all parties. It is pretty early to get much of a reading, other than name recognition and some coverage on the campaign trail.

I've read Obama's second book and he says nothing that I disagree with. I was impressed with the graciousness of the Edwardses at their press conference re Elizabeth's cancer returning. While you make some interesting points about Edwards I'm still shopping...

[venable]

20. you talking about Kerry?

I wasn't aware the Edwards had gotten the nom in 04/

[Catchawave]

31. Reagan and Nixon LOST before they

WON :eyes:

[draft_mario_cuomo]

36. Clobama are inevitable. All your votes belong to them. Resistance is futile

:sarcasm:

[bling bling]

39. Reagan lost to incumbant President and Nixon was nominated by his party.

Again, I'm talking about the primary. The Dem's didn't want Edwards last time and he hasn't done a damn thing between then and now to make him any more appealing OTHER than change his rhetoric. If he'd even stayed in the Senate it would have beefed up his credentials to some degree. He's essentially just been campaigning since 2004. The transparency of his record vs. rhetoric is going to be like giving the Republicans a can of whip-ass to use against us on a golden platter.

[saracat]

42. This kind of nastiness doesn't help your candidate.

And unsubstantiated claims about Edwards doing "nothing " are obviously unresearched garbage. You aren't doing Obama any favors with your posts. And considering your candidate is currently only in his first Senate term, your allegations about Edwards are a bit weak!

[bling bling]

43. It's not nastiness.

It's my opinion. And don't talk to me about research when it comes to Edwards.

The only people who don't seem to do any research are the ones who call out everyone else for "attacking" and "nastiness" anytime someone has a negative opinion about Edwards. And ironically, the people who tend to have negative opinions about Edwards are almost always the ONLY ones who use loads of links, citations, quotes, and sources to back up their opinion.

Don't pretend you're open to Obama and that my post will influence your opinion. I've seen you post that before. And I've seen plenty of other negative posts from you about Obama. And I can do a search and back those statements up if you request me to. Don't play innocent.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

44. You're posing as someone interesting in discussing JE but only smearing him as a liar and hypocrite

Team Obama has gotten its new marching orders and is now on a crusade to convince everyone that Edwards is a hypocrite... Two can play that game, but you cry foul when the same tactics are used against your hero.

[bling bling]

45. Well, that little comment pretty much proves to me just how little you know.

Team Obama. Marching orders. Pffft. Whatever you say.

I've done hours of my own research and showed you how I came to my conclusions. I asked you for information to support YOUR argument and you just switched the subject to Obama.

I'm not posing as anything. I didn't bring up the topic. It came up and I answered the OP by providing links. It was you that battled everything I said and made it into what it became. All you had to do was answer the OP and I would have been satisfied. Don't believe me? Then call my bluff. Try answering that OP. You obviously can't or you would have. It should be easy for you if you're truly a supporter.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

50. I've spoken of the electability argument over and over again

Ask some of my friends in the Clinton camp, for instance. :) In this thread the facts are on the table in the OP. People can evaluate them as they wish.

I did notice the visceral reaction from Team Obama regarding this thread. The Clinton camp is pretty much silent on this. Of course, their candidate is not running partly on "electability" and hence her candidacy is not threatened by evidence that shows another candidate as more electable... ;)

[saracat]

46. Really? I have never blasted Obama. And I don't post negatives about him.

I have discussed him and wondered if the South would vote for him and I have questioned the electability of Hillary.That is the worst of my "negativity" and I never claimed your posts could influence my opinion.I said you did no service to your candidate with the nastiness of your posts.That is still true.But whatever.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

34. Yeah, let's pick a guy who has never won a real election instead!

Obama--allegedly Mr. Charisma--lost 2-to-1 in his primary race for the House, was losing until scandal befell the front-runner in the Democratic primary for senate, was going to have a tough general election race until scandal struck his Republican opponent and then he beat the hapless Alan Keyes in the GE.

Edwards lost? Kerry was the nominee...

Edwards is the only candidate we have who has actually won a general election in a red state.

[venable]

19. ??? who is 'us'?

??

[sampsonblk]

25. You can obviously read polls

Edwards isn't even competitive nationally. That's who 'us' is.

[venable]

28. I read Iowa and am well pleased.

Even after an Obama and HRC blitz of Iowa, Edwards lead remains.

I read the polls about which this thread exists, and discover that, in fact, Edwards is the most liked in terms of an actual general election.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

37. He isn't competitive? So you must think HRC is inevitable? Why not stop the campaign now...

It is illogical to think Edwards is not competitive and then turn around and say a guy who is 8 points ahead of Edwards and 20 points behind HRC is competitive...

[Inspired]

23. Most of us? You certainly don't speak for me. n/t

[sampsonblk]

24. Yeah, Pretty Much

I am talking about the idea that we should vote based on how we think others will vote, instead of voting for who we want to become president.

A lot of us tried that in 2004. I, for one, will not do that again.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

33. When were the primaries? Who won? nt

[LSK]

52. I WANT John Edwards to win the Primaries

[More Than A Feeling]

53. I do hate the electability meme, but that's not why I support John Edwards.

[TeamJordan23]

15. The Hillary numbers are horrible. I still feel that Obama can attract more Indeps & Repubs than

Edwards. But Edwards' numbers are pretty good.

[Agnostic_Jihad]

17. skeptical

I don't trust those numbers. In reality Ghouliani may wipe the floor with Edwards in a general election after the press gets done painting him as a wuss. I know it's unfair, but that's how it will go and the haircut and house won't help with his image.

The only one who can win is Hillary I think and she's the best one after Biden anyways, that's why I support her.

[cobalt1999]

22. Polling this early is as silly as looking at chicken entrails.

There is no way either one will give you a clear picture of what will happen in 2008. It does however keep the pollsters busy and gives people something to talk about, but at this stage the margin of error must be about 20% +/-.

[gatorick73]

18. Oh man, I really need to

stay up later or get up earlier. A lot of the greatest discussions are happening whilst I'm snoozing. Please put me down for the Edwards and Richardson ticket.

[Colobo]

26. Edwards/Obama or Obama/Edwards is fine with me.

[Agnostic_Jihad]

27. how about

Guliani/Thomspon, because that's what you'll get

[venable]

29. Edwards/Obama would trounce Rudy/Freddy

it would set the republicans back a century.

[slick8790]

30. Riiiight.

And a liberal woman who's also a clinton will do MUCH better with the american public :eyes:

[JohnLocke]

41. K&R!

[rinsd]

47. Ras has new numbers for Hillary coming out this week (nt)

[draft_mario_cuomo]

51. Yes, I'll be sure to post them if you or SE do not beat me to it

Or if Team Obama beats me to it because if the numbers are bad for HRC we will be seeing threads about it all week. ;)

[rodeodance]

48. would love to see the Edwards as the First Family!!