I suddenly support Edwards. Here's why.

[spinbaby]

Every year we go to the same Labor Day picnic where the same two grumpy old men who watch FOX complain about "them libruls." This year they support Edwards. They like the way he supports labor. If THESE two grumpy old Republican men can support Edwards, then Edwards can win by a landslide.

[rodeodance]

1. nice, very nice.

[rwheeler31]

2. You got it.

The Economy will be a the issue.

[jefferson_dem]

3. Watch out.

If some DUers (Hillarybots in particular) find out that Edwards actually has a couple "Republicans" (oooga booga) supporting him, he'll be accused of being "the freeper" candidate.

They slip into uncontrollable conniptions at the mere suggestion of support from non-partisans...

[MessiahRp]

4. Which is ironic

Since Republicans actually ARE supporting Hillary's campaign due to their notion that she would be the easiest general election candidate.

Rp

[MannyGoldstein]

7. You Have No Proof That They Are Supporting Mrs. Clinton. None.

:sarcasm:

[jefferson_dem]

9. No proof at all...merely conjecture....

He wants her as the nominee. He knows she can be beaten. Obama is a much more daunting and complicated foe. No proof, of course, just a theory in the LAT. But some history shows it's a tactic Rove has used before:

"Whomever we attacked was going to be emboldened in Democratic primary voters' minds. So we started attacking John Kerry a lot in the end of January because we were very worried about John Edwards," Dowd said. "And we knew that if we focused on John Kerry, Democratic primary voters would sort of coalesce" around Kerry. "It wasn't like we could tag somebody. Whomever we attacked was going to be helped," he said.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/08/why-roves-attac.html

:sarcasm: again...

[msongs]

20. sorry, but rove's strategy is to attack the opponent's STRENGTH...but nice obsfuscation nt

[MessiahRp]

25. That's not how I remember it...

In 2004 Rove went after Kerry's flip flopping on stances and forced him into a corner for stuff he said during the Vietnam War hearings in which he described war crimes and threw his medals/ribbons in protest.

WE may see those as strengths.... For example, their concept of flip flopping was based on Kerry's ability to carefully think through situations with solid deliberation and change his mind if the facts present a different view.

But to the public, they looked at it as waffling and critical indecisiveness that could be dangerous in a terrorist attack situation. Forget that Moron sat in his chair and read My Pet Goat when 9/11 occurred or the idiocy of that train of thought, but Rove took weak spots for Kerry and they went from small cuts to gaping wounds.

They went after Kerry's weaknesses. Military service is a strength... but if you come back, talk poorly of fellow soldiers who may have committed war crimes and threw your medals... Whether or not it was the right thing to do Rove knew how to exploit it as anti-patriotic.

Kerry's Senate record was a weakness. How many thousands of votes has he had on every major subject? For every increasing the gas tax law that he's been able to pass there's been a million more that included lowering the taxes... all of which were likely included with an overall spending bill that either justified the tax raise or didn't justify the tax reduction.

They could cherry pick his record.

Rove took Kerry's only glaring weaknesses, which were flaws in the major strengths he had (Experience, Military Record, Intelligence/Competence) and turned the focus on those flaws with so much spin it was impossible to escape from.

Sure those flaws were connected to his strengths but they were his largest weaknesses and the only way they had to go after him.

Rp

[John Q. Citizen]

29. You mean Rove wants to run against the strongest candidate, so they can attack

strength?

That's sounds ridiculas. Are you sure that's what you mean?

I thought the concept was to turn the opponents stregnth into a weakness.

In other words, Kerry was a war hero, so they attacked him for that.


I do strongly believe the Repos would prefer to run against Hillary. That's the feeling I've been getting for a long time.

[HughMoran]

22. Wow, that is one horrific picture!

Not just because of the company Hillary is keeping either!

[disndat]

24. Perfect!

This is great. Thank you!

[durtee librul]

8. I beg to differ, the mainstream repubs

like Edwards....my entire neighborhood is red. They are all working stiffs who are what I would consider mainstream America....some are college educated, some aren't. Some are skilled trademen, some are engineering types and a whole slew of them are middle management.

Guess what - they're past the 'elect hillary bs' because she is easy to beat.

They want and will be demanding a candidate to clean up this mess we are in and restore this country to dignity and so far the overwhelmming majority of the folks ALL like Edwards and would have voted for him the last time had he been at the top of the ticket and not Kerry. They like his message and realize some 'belt tightening' is in order. Most of them cannot understand how you can take a surplus and reduce it to a huge deficit overnight - war or no war.

Only the politicos who don't have a real life are on the 'hillary is easy to beat' bandwagon....the average American is not. That's why we have the Mary Maitlans and Carvilles and Begalas and Donna's of the world - they can't hold a real job and are reduced to being talking heads who purport to 'be in the know' about what Joe six pack is really thinking.....just like they all did last November.

Bottom line, the real reason you don't hear about Edwards is because they don't know what to think about him and don't know what to do about him. Pretty soon, tho, I would expect the attack dogs to be unleashed on him in full force as I think there are some primary surprises coming and the 'i love hill folks' aren't going to like a lot of it as JRE doesn't toe the party line like a good old boy should.

All I can say is it is about time someone came along who is not bought and paid for and is not beholden to any large corporations....and I might add who has a very tidy track record of taking them to court and winning (heaven forbid) for the little guy.

You don't have to be a repub to not like the fact that when a large corporation intentionally saves a few pennies at the cost of safety and someone's life gets their come uppance. Just look at one of the other threads tonight and see the dirty laundry list of repukes and what positiions they all held in large companies....

[rodeodance]

12. I want Edwards to make a GRAND showing in Iowa!

[emilyg]

15. If you believe the Repubs - you're in trouble.

[MessiahRp]

23. I didn't ever say I agreed with them or their notion

But whenever Republicans flip and support a Democrat, Clintonites come out of the woodwork to attack that concept. Rove has said it, just about any Right Wing pundit on Cable News you can find has said they believe Clinton to be beatable and are pulling for her.

Do I think ANY of our candidates would lose to the GOP without them rigging the ballot boxes? No. That's not what I'm saying. What I am saying is don't be angry if Republicans see the light and choose to vote for a Democratic candidate if there's a lot of Republicans supporting Hillary... even if it's for the wrong reasons.

I hope a lot of Republicans flip in the general election, in the primaries though I feel they are just there to cause mischief.

And BTW, I haven't declared support to ANY candidate at this point. Last time around I was signed up to work on Kerry's site by 2/03 and volunteering for him from 6/03 on. This year is a tougher call in my mind. Last time I appreciated Howard Dean and his message but I just liked Kerry's decades of public service more.

This time there's a lot to think about. My ideal choice is Al Gore, but save his leap into this forum I haven't jumped at supporting anyone. I like Kucinich but I'm realistic about his chances. I like some of what Obama and Edwards say but disagree with them on others. Hillary will get my vote if she's out general election candidate but I don't like her enough to give her my primary vote.

So I am very split and I am not attacking one candidate over another. I was a Mod here during the 2004 primaries and I know how divided this place can get over this race. I understand it completely. I just want the supporters of Hillary to not get angry about people being happy former Republicans want to vote for Edwards or Obama because like it or not we're going to face a lot of Fox-programmed Bushbots heading to the polls to mess with the Democratic primary....

Well if their candidate ever gets figured out. That might throw a wrench into their plans. It's not too often the GOP doesn't have a lockstep candidate in place by the primaries.

Rp

[havocmom]

5. They also get sorta touchy when you suggest strong arm tactics for HRC are not helpful

Instead of offering positive statements about what their pick has done and wants to do, too many of them immediately attack people for the sincere act of not preferring her. Not how to win friends and influence people, and indicative of the problem many have with her campaign.

[Patiod]

34. I've been in the "not prefer" category for 4 years

and always feel beat-up when I mention it.

Which is why I read all of DU, but post mostly in the Lounge. I'll let the Hilary supporters beat up on others, and accuse them of being trolls, etc.

[havocmom]

35. Thought I saw you at some of the 'not prefer' meetings!

Gets tiresome, being attacked for that position, doesn't it? And when I suggest that attacking those who are not passionately on board a particular bandwagon sure seems similar to bush-bots attacking anyone who doesn't buy their agenda as being unpatriotic, hating the troops, or supporting terrorists, they really get pissed at me.

[billyoc]

6. That's right, and don't let the fact that there are only 7 of them here,

it seems like 8. :rofl:

[Jim Sagle]

11. But they KNOW what's best for the rest of us. Just ask them, they'll tell you.

;)

[The River]

13. Isn't That The Truth

personality cults scare me.

[corkhead]

37. It's actually a little higher than that. My "Ignore" list has 11 members.

[saltpoint]

10. What a good story. I think you've made a really sound choice.

A warm welcome aboard.

[autorank]

14. I like that. I was in Zel Miller country for a week. Gues what?

They just can't stand Bush, not one bit. And they talk about it, freely. There's a pretty
decent level of sophistication in the critique of the system too. I found what people had to
say very interesting. Just happened to have this exposure on a few days off and it was well
worth it.

Edwards would get these folks with a hard core populist theme, no questions asked. They're smart,
sick of the B.S., and ready to rock.

...and this is Zel Miller No. Georgia mountains. Damn, can't imagine what the rest of the country
is like...the same!

[brer cat]

19. Interesting. I live here in Zell (two ll's) county

and I don't hear much of that. If you were here recently, you probably met our "summer population" which is mostly FL folks here for the season, as well as Atlanta and other metro residents with summer cabins (originally from ???).

I would love to believe that you observed the VOTERS in this area changing, but I DON'T see in in the locals. I think that Edwards could have a lot of influence here, but we are talking about moving hard-core Dixiecrats. That's a huge effort. The locals I hear from want their guns first and foremost, are anti-gay, anti-abortion, anti-anything progressives want.

[maximusveritas]

16. They won't support him once Fox News gets around to him

If Edwards wins the nomination, they'll start attacking him 24/7 and the guys you're talking about will fall for their garbage. This isn't unique to Edwards. I think Obama will also lose his advantage among Republicans once Fox and the rest of the conservative media get through with him.

[snowbear]

28. Faux Schmaux....

Like they really had a major influence during the '06 elections!



You're giving that pathetic piece of shit network TOO MUCH credit. Even the wingnut, bat-shit crazies will vote for an Edwards or Obama over a droopy-faced actor with "old man smell" or a NYC mayor who even the firefighters can't stand.

Screw Zell. Americans are ready for change.

[illinoisprogressive]

17. I am glad you found someone to support. I really like Edwards

[spinbaby]

33. I like him, too

But I was favoring Obama. I think I'd still rather have Obama, but Edwards is a much stronger candidate. I want a candidate who can win by such an overwhelming majority that there's no WAY Rove can steal it.

[The Backlash Cometh]

18. Glad to hear it.

One word of caution for Edwards, Obama and the other Democrats who are "conceptualizing." I also bumped into a Republican voter and he wasn't impressed with anybody, obviously. But he was particularly unimpressed with Edwards, for the very reason that we are impressed with him. We like Edwards because his ideas are Democratic and we already have an idea what changes will be needed to achieve those goals. But, Republicans may not get it, yet. They don't see how we're going to get from point A to point C. So once we move out of the primaries, whoever wins needs to remember that there are Republicans that want to be believers, but they need to look under the hood, just to make sure that there's an engine inside. They need to see a plan.

[rosesaylavee]

21. Any time Republicans see the light

we should celebrate! Congratulations on finding a candidate you wish to support!

[AtomicKitten]

26. good story --

Careful of the artisanship-pay ingie-thay; sets some folks off around here.

[Exultant Democracy]

27. I still favor Obama, but Edwards populist message is starting to sway me

I guess I would like to see the both of them and Richardson all on a ticket, but we all know that can happen.

[midnight]

30. Something about this man has me taking a good look at him,

but I'm draw to his statement about poverty. I'm not making up my mind untill I hear them talk more about bringing the troops home.

[garybeck]

31. Bill OReilly said the other day that Edwards is

"by far the most disingenuous out of all the Democratic candidates"

you know that that means?

it means that's who he's scared of the most, who he doesn't want to get the nomination because he knows he can win, while the others are more vulnerable in a general election

[Apollo11]

32. I will probably support Edwards

if Al Gore doesn't jump in before November 5th.

That's because November 4th will be exactly one year before election day.

And it's pretty much the latest that Gore can wait before announcing.

THE LAST TEMPTATION OF AL GORE
By Eric Pooley
TIME Magazine -- May 17, 2007
Let's say you were dreaming up the perfect stealth candidate for 2008, a Democrat who could step into the presidential race when the party confronts its inevitable doubts about the front runners. You would want a candidate with the grass-roots appeal of Barack Obama -- someone with a message that transcends politics, someone who spoke out loud and clear and early against the war in Iraq. But you would also want a candidate with the operational toughness of Hillary Clinton -- someone with experience and credibility on the world stage.
In other words, you would want someone like Al Gore -- the improbably charismatic, Academy Award-winning, Nobel Prize-nominated environmental prophet with an army of followers and huge reserves of political and cultural capital at his command.
...
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1622597,00.html

Let's all find ways to show our support for Al Gore! :patriot:

Sign the Live Earth Pledge: www.liveearthpledge.org

Then ask all your friends and family to sign it too! :-)

Visit Al's site www.algore.com and read his blog http://blog.algore.com

Sign the petitions at www.algore.org and www.draftgore.com

:kick:

[Catchawave]

36. The grumpy old Republican I'm married to...

likes JE :hi:

[Flabbergasted]

38. Go ed