How to rid the world of Bush - Guaranteed or money back.

[KurtNilsen]

99 percent of democrats vote vote for ABB.

What does that tell you? The election is won in the middle.

Look at Edwards showing among independents. (I discount some of the republican votes because I think they were distorted to some degree by naughty freepers.)



Edwards can give you the Whitehouse. Do you want it?

As a European, for our sake, I hope you do.

[still_one]

1. I don't agree with you

I believe either Kerry or Edwards can beat Bush.

Also, even though Edwards speaks quite well, many of the people from North Carolina, where he is Senator, are not particularly enamoured by him.

[KurtNilsen]

5. Agree - they both can and should win...

I just think Kerry is more of a gamble.

[Kazak]

2. Earth to Kurt...

Look who they are running against. ALL of them CAN win.

[mouse7]

14. Agreed. All 9 could have won. n/t

[NV1962]

3. As another European, I'm reminding you of the cross-over votes

In 2000, Gore attracted a record number of Democratic votes; cross-over vote however was abysmal.

This year, it's a large turn-out combined with cross-over appeal of "our" guy, and defection to non-GOP candidates or not voting by Republicans that'll do the trick.

Check the electoral facts yourself:
http://www.uselectionatlas.org/USPRESIDENT/frametextj.html

[KurtNilsen]

6. Sure...

But, I am not sure what you mean... Do you think the cross-over appeal is equal between the two?

Heck, here's the dough.

[NV1962]

8. LOL!

No, meant that in 2000 there was very little cross-over voting among both parties. This year I expect little cross-over votes from Dems voting GOP, and a much larger chunk of Republicans voting for either the Democrat, or another (3rd party) which has the net same effect of voting Dem. Also, there's going to be an awful lot of Republicans who won't vote at all, punishing Bush (but not being "hateful" enough to vote against him.)

Sorry for not being clear enough...

[KurtNilsen]

11. Right... Then I think I got it... But,

I cannot see how that doesn't strengthen my line of thinking, not refute it...

And about the Kerry Vietnam vet status which he has paraded aggresively. Even among democratic veterans it did not seem to make any difference between him and Edwards... And I do know many repub veterans view Kerry in a very bad light. What's your take on that?

[NV1962]

13. That's rather a message to the GOP

Like thus: "Hey, don't even dream about claiming a 'strong on defense' monopoly because I'll kick your ass!"

The veteran votes are not unimportant, but the "hawkish" image is a far more substantial prize, in electoral mathematics.

As to your line of thinking, I was merely pointing out that it is a combination of Democratic cross-over appeal and disenfranchisement among Republicans that, as far as I can tell, will cause November to be the month when a President will be really elected for the first time in this millenium - and a big win isn't too far fetched. It's still a long way, and a strong Democratic GOTV (get out the vote) campaign is necessary, but barring disaster... It's doable.

I think.

[elsiesummers]

24. While I generally agree, remember OR and WA.

I'm an Edwards fan and generally agree that a candidate who doesn't energize the Repub base and does pull over some swing voters is the best.

But...

some caution should be excercised, (Howard Dean's people must be embraced by any nominee - given a real role) because the left leaners can sit out the vote or vote 3rd party if they are disillusioned. And remember John Anderson - I sure do. He changed the whole ball game with Reagan and Carter.

Dems could lose Washington and Oregon, and might also affect NH, if the far left abandons the Dems.

[NV1962]

25. Yes, it's a balance act - absolutely

However, if such a schism were to occur (not likely, given the really unusually strong ABB feelings this year) I think that such a hypothetical image shift (to the right) could and probably would be offset by turning traditionally solid blue states into the red, more likely in the South-West but also in the South.

Let's keep our fingers crossed, for one because I fully believe in putting and keeping the inclusive concept really at work, and secondly because we have better and more important things to do than fighting a two-front war (i.e., "Ralph II")

Plus, what better than handing Bush's ass back to Crawford in a landslide election!

[NV1962]

4. Oops, forgot: can I have my money back now, please?

;)

[madrchsod]

7. edwards picked up clark voters

i`m not sure if the wisconsin primary requires for a voter to declare party or an open primary. it`s going to be very interesting election.oh are you excited about the royals new baby? i read norway`s english news sites cause i can`t find any from sweden

[NV1962]

9. Open (corrected on edit)

Who can vote today: Any registered Wisconsin voter, the primary is open

Source:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/02/17/elec04.prez.main/index.html

[KurtNilsen]

10. No... In that sense I AM a republican :-)

I don't mind to much though...

[PurityOfEssence]

12. You're absolutely right

It's tough here; I've been an outspoken partisan since I first joined the board in 2001, and it's been very slow going here for him.

He could truly change the world; he's got pizazz and oomph and a warmth that just radiates from him.

The next President needs to stand up in his inaugural address and basically apologize to the whole biosphere for the reckless selfishness we've loosed upon it, and Edwards is just the person to heal rifts. People can talk to him. He can get support from conservatives that they'd never give to a demonized Massachusetts liberal, and foreigners will flock to him.

He is so undeniably more appealing that it's shocking to hear arguments against him. Ironically, he's probably considerably smarter than Kerry (who's no slouch, mind you) but he won't be tarred as an intellectual as Kerry will.

All you need to know about American politics can be summed up like this: Reagan won twice, and "Forrest Gump" won best picture.

Please, oh please, fellow Democrats, come to your senses.

[KurtNilsen]

16. Great job. Continue to speak out.

It seems to me that by careful intellectual analysis Edwards comes out the strongest candidate.

But, so much more than that.... I would LOVE for him to become president.

But, one thing that struck me...

His appeal seemed to be directly inversly correlated with income... How come?

[NV1962]

17. Why "inversely correlated" ?

Rather proportional / directly, I'd say: an "intellectual" appeal attracts elite more than others... Hence Edwards' strong show among white, affluent and well-educated males in WI.

See for yourself:
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/primaries/pages/epolls/WI/index.html

[KurtNilsen]

19. I am sorry. It's early in the morning here...

I meant inversly from what I would have expected. Since fighting poverty is one of his main messages I would have thought the poor would respond to that.

Do you think Edwards has an "intellectual" appeal. Well, at least i feel flattered :-)

However, most media pundits seem to call him a populist.

[NV1962]

21. I call pundits wasted toiletpaper...

Which reflects poorly on my high opinion of toiletpaper. :D

"Populist" here is too often used as a contaminated concept, which instead of (correctly) referring to a combination of "popular" "rhetorically succesful" and "slightly out of mainstream" only reflects one or two of those qualities.

Trust me, terminological precision and sharpness is not the average American journalist's strongest asset. Which explains why the word "pundit" disrespectfully lumps together what "we" in Europe rather call separately a "political analyst" "political correspondent" or "political commentator."

As long as it's "catchy" and appears useful as a word, it's a hit...

[KurtNilsen]

22. Thank you for your thoughtful replies...

I appreciate your opinions. So, what is your view of Edwards as a candidate?

Where are you from btw?

[NV1962]

23. Any of the Fab Four depicted in my sig is fine with me

BTW, I put them in alphabetical order, not that of my personal preference.

John Edwards is a strong orator; he knows what "works" delivering a speech, and is an able inspirator. Politically, he's more or less on a line similar to that of John Kerry - they're not that much different, when you compare the "position on issues" (what in Europe would be called an electoral program.) He's smart, thinks on his feet, and has good looks (few would say he is really 51 years old.) As far as Senatorial experience is concerned, he's clearly the junior to Kerry; Edwards is currently serving his first term in the US Senate (Kerry got there in 1984) and before that, he was a sharp and succesful lawyer.

Edwards has a well-resonating message, and a good delivery; on the minus, he doesn't have as strong (lengthy) a political career / political record as the other three have.

Then again, I suspect that a certain over-representation of white, affluent and well-educated males among his supporters may correlate with his "mediagenic" appeal.

So, I think he's a pretty good candidate.

Having said all that, I'm afraid that electoral brain gymnastics aside and when applied to the whole electorate, things boil down to pure perception: name recognition (theinfamous top-of-mind rankings) and perceived "winner" looks; "issues" have little to do with it. In that regard, Edwards has at least a very steep climb ahead to overcome Kerry's current, massive lead.

This year, more than before, Democrats want to get rid of Bush (the "ABB" mantra) and that's why many people embrace the guy that they believe and hear is "the front-runner" to beat Bush: Kerry.

Marketing rulez baby!

Oh - and I'm originally from España. (Much to my chagrin I think the PP again will win the general elections there, next month... But who cares! It's only Southern Europe!)

[corporatewhore]

15. Surefire way to get rid of bush is to be antifreetrade cons and libs both

hate their jobs goin to india

[DemDogs]

18. I want the White House, and I agree Edwards can give it to us

We can fool ourselves all day that any of the nine could have gotten the independent votes we need to win, but face it, only one candidate both HAS gotten those votes in this primary, and has gotten them in a general election . . . and in a red state.
Go Edwards!

[DjTj]

20. John Edwards says:

"You must give me a shot at George Bush. You give me a shot at George Bush and I will give you the White House!"

I believe him.