Pro-Bush Folk Voted for Edwards. Do They Know Something We Don't?

[WiseMen]

Why do pro-Bush voters like Edwards. That is core question at issue when trying to evaluate the meaning of the late surge for Edwards at the polls?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3762911

The MSNBC exit poll show that Edwards bested Kerry only among those
who:
1. Were Satisfied with Bush (50 to 23)
2. Support Bush Iraq policy (42 to 33)
3. View themselves as conservative (37 to 30)

Democracy Now today cited an evaluation of Edwards as one of 10 more conservative democrats in the senate. I’m not sure how significant that is but the ADA scores show that Edwards certainly votes are less consistently progressive that Kerry’s.
Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) is America's oldest independent liberal lobbying organization. ADA founders included Eleanor Roosevelt and renowned economist John Kenneth Galbraith. Current ADA President is representative Jim McDermott, arch enemy of Bush’s Iraq policy.

ADA Lifetime scores for the 3 senator candidate’s voting records:

Sen. John Kerry 92
Sen. John Edwards 85
Sen. Joseph Lieberman 78

Nothing is wrong with Edward’s relatively moderate posture in the senate, but what is extraordinary is the gap between the record and what is perceived on the campaign trail by different groups. What should be clear is that prior to the campaign, especially when he was being considered by Gore as a V.P., it was well understood that Edwards has moderate positions on most issues. But, that is not how Edwards presents himself now.

Questions:
1. Isn't it highly ironic that Dean says that he prefers Edwards to Kerry? What is it that Dean knows that the voters don’t?
2. Would these Independents and Republicans who lean Edwards in the primary, vote for Edwards over Bush in November?

[DevinDNC]

1. They know they don't want Bush facing Kerry.

yes. they know Bush wouldn't stand a chance aginst Kerry, so they are trying to help out Edwards. But of course it won't work.erry will win the nomination, and he will put Bush over his knee, and spank him right out of the White House.

[Mile Hi]

34. Boy have you got it wrong

They want to face Kerry.

They lift up Edwards to have a better showing than Dean.

It was Dean they didn't want to face.
Here is what the president for a Conservative group wrote well before the primaries.


The Appeal of Howard Dean
From the September 15, 2003 issue: Why he could be Bush's more dangerous opponent.
by Stephen Moore
09/15/2003, Volume 009, Issue 01

Republicans are said to be salivating over the prospect of a Bush-Dean match-up. They shouldn't get carried away. Howard Dean, warns John McClaughry, has been "underestimated throughout his political career. He has an uncanny knack for finding where the political capital is stored and walking off with it." The trick for Dean is to ensure that the ultra-liberal positions he has taken in the primaries, which contradict his sometimes centrist record, don't cripple his ability to reach out to Middle American voters in a general election--should he make it that far. If he does, and then finds a way to zig-zag back toward the center, Howard Dean could be George W. Bush's worst nightmare.


Stephen Moore is president of the Club for Growth and a senior fellow at the Cato Institute.

Dean could appeal to the independant and even Republican voters because of his conservative fiscal policies.
Bush will have it easy against Kerry!!!!

[x-g.o.p.er]

2. Yes

Because he is likable, and Kerry seems aloof and uninspiring. Lots of people want Bush out, and Edwards is a lot more appealing than Kerry.

[King of New Orleans]

6. Just my opinion

I think Edwards is a far better campaigner than Kerry, but I think Kerry would be a far better President.

[x-g.o.p.er]

23. I disagree because..

Edwards came from a working-class background, and understands the problems facing most people on a day to day basis. Kerry, while an experienced legislator, has always had an upper-class upbringing, which makes it harder for him to relate to "average joes" like most of us, with the exception of his years in Vietnam.

[azmesa207]

29. I disagree because

Edwards may have come from a working-class background but that alone doesn't make him understand working people he not working class people now

[DjTj]

40. Welcome to DU!

:hi:

His tax plan makes a lot more sense for working people than anyone else's. I encourage you to check it out:

http://www.johnedwards2004.com/budget-and-taxes.asp

[King of New Orleans]

3. In fairness to Edwards

It should be noted that Edwards also beat Kerry among those who said jobs were the number one issue. 46-35.

[sallyseven]

10. Yeah because Edwards said he

was against NAFTA. He never voted on it because he was not in the Senate. By the way how about picking up the seat in Kentucky. Go Dem's!!!

[flpoljunkie]

14. Edwards did vote, however, for the China Trade Deal in 2000.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=106&session=2&vote=00251

[DjTj]

43. ...with great reservations, and he voted against Fast-Track in 2002.

The Fast-Track vote:

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00203

His floor speech on PTNR:

September 19, 2000:

As U.S. goods and services flow into China and as our engagement grows, the opportunity for real change in China grows. We are all aware that China has a long way to go in improving its record on human rights, religious liberty, environmental protection and labor rights. The abuses in that nation are serious. And I am committed to continued efforts to end those abuses. As American ideas, goods, and businesses surge into China , I believe China's record will improve.

But I am mindful that globalization and this bill in particular may have a real downside. As a Senator from North Carolina, I am well-positioned to see both the enormous benefits and the large costs of this measure.

Textile and apparel workers, many of whom live in North Carolina, face real challenges as a result of this measure. While in almost every respect the agreement with China benefits our country, textiles is the major exception. As a result of joining WTO, quotas on Chinese textiles and apparel will be eliminated in 2005. As a result, Chinese apparel will flow into the United States. By and large, the Chinese imports will likely displace imports from other countries. However, there is no doubt that an additional burden will be placed on the textile industry. To be sure, the industry can try to protect itself through the anti-surge mechanism put in place by this legislation. Yet it does us no good to pretend that these remedies are perfect and that people will not be hurt. I know that textile workers will work their hearts out competing with the Chinese. I know these people; I grew up with them. When I was in college, I worked a summer job in a textile mill. My father spent his life working in mills. The impact of PNTR on them is personal to me. Dealing with the impact of this bill on them will always be a top priority for me. And I will fight throughout my career to protect them.

Mr. President, China's entry into the World Trade Organization and its attainment of permanent normal trade relations with America is not without its risks. No one can predict with certainty that China will live up to its commitments. I vote for this bill because I believe that we must turn our face toward the future. But we must be mindful of the risks. So I warn that I will monitor China's compliance with its agreements like a hawk. If they renege, I will lead the charge to force them to live up to their obligations.

But to vote against this measure--to deny PNTR--not only fails to accomplish anything productive but also denies us enormous opportunities. We cannot hide our heads in the sand. China will join the WTO. The Senate has no impact on that decision. The only question we face is whether the U.S. will grant China permanent normal trade relations or whether it will fall out of compliance with its WTO obligations. If we fall out of compliance, the U.S. will be denied the Chinese tariff reductions and rule changes, while every other country in the world takes advantage of the Chinese concessions. We must decide whether the U.S. will be able to compete with other countries--Germany, France, Japan--as they enter the Chinese market. American companies and workers deserve the right to enter those markets. On balance, I believe that China's admission into the World Trade Organization and its attainment of permanent normal trading relations is for the good.

And so I vote for this legislation, mindful of the risks, prepared to watch the results carefully and optimistic about the future.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2000_record&page=S8701&position=all

[WiseMen]

45. Edward is viewed in D.C. as to the Right of Kerry on Free Trade.

His discovery of an Anit-NAFTA position is a complete surprise.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

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

[Feanorcurufinwe]

20. The alleged 'fact' you cite doesn't exist.

The exit polls do not break down independents according to who they support.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/primaries/pages/epolls/WI/index.html

[atre]

24. Please read carefully. "Pro-nobody" is a reference to the topic header.

Your apparently spiteful retort conveniently ignores the issue: Indepedents voted for Edwards. Why? Do you honestly think it was sabotage, also (just like the Republicans who voted for him?)

[Feanorcurufinwe]

39. I've read carefully. The 'fact' you cite doesn't exist.

I'm not going to ascribe motives to you, or accuse you of careless reading.

I'm simply pointing out that the alleged 'fact' you cite does not exist.


The exit polls do not break down independents according to who they support.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/primaries/pages/epolls/WI/index.html

[atre]

51. The point was that independents in general preferred Edwards

I don't know how I could make this any clearer to you.

The fact that independents in general preferred Edwards is a tremendous hole in the electoral "sabotage" theory. If these folks were so "pro-Bush" that they wanted to sabotage the Democratic nomination process, they'd probably take the time and energy to register as Republicans, don't you think?

That fact exists, though you fight so hard to deny it. Cognitive dissonance is a dangerous thing.

[WiseMen]

47. No sabotage at issue. Question is what is it about Edwards

[atre]

52. I understand that, for YOU, the issue is not "sabotage"

There are a good many Kerry supporters who would rather believe in an evil scheme to deprive their candidate of the nomination rather than accept the fact that a Southern-draweled charmer has more cross-over appeal than a stiff New England "liberal" with an uncanny ability to avoid taking a principled stand in the last thirty years.

[mouse7]

5. No evidence of marching orders for GOP in Wisc. Primary

Nothing on talk radio or other right wing media. If Republicans did go to the polls to vote for Edwards, they did it on their own. People don't do that to "fix" the primary of the other party. More likely, they were "Lou Dobbs" Republicans that are sick of their jobs getting exported and think Edwards would do something about it.

[AP]

9. The one time I personally know about a GOP-GOTV effort for a Dem

to screw up the GE, everyone knew about it because the NRA made (very expensive) phone calls scaring RW'ers into voting the Dem ballot.

It worked, by the way.

[WiseMen]

12. Completely Agree. So why did they go for Edwards?

[AP]

17. Perhaps because Edwards stands for things that they thought made them

Republicans in the first place -- the idea that everyone willing to work should be entitled to recieve a fair percentage of the value their labor creates.

[mouse7]

18. NAFTA and job exporting

It's the issue Edwards bet everything on in Wisc.,a nd it worked, obviously.

[spooky3]

41. if there were MOs, they didn't follow them well

the Rep. vote was small, and it was split among Edwards, Dean AND Kerry.

[WiseMen]

54. No one is suggesting that. But look at thenumbers. Trade is one factor

but that applies to Dems, liberal and moderates as well. But take
these groups together and Kerry wins by 20 points.

[AP]

7. Apparently they know that Edwards is better than Bush.

These are the people democrats need to convince to vote Dem.

[John_H]

53. That spin flies like a ostrich

People who love chimp were so smitten by Edwards' personal charisma that they ran to the polls to vote for him, hoping he beats the guy they're so enthusiastic about?

There's a place in politics for cheerleading, I guess, but please odn't insult the rest of us along the way.

Kerry is the front runner and a war hero--they voted for the only guy with a shot at beating him.

[lancdem]

8. I saw those numbers and wasn't sure how to interpret them

I read somewhere that 82 percent of the primary voters in Wis. were dissatisfied with Bush, so the group satisfied with Bush had to have been pretty small percentage-wise. In Edwards' defense, that wasn't the only group he did well with. I don't know if the Repubs who voted for Edwards will vote against Bush or not. That's the million-dollar question.

[wtf]

19. I think ..

it shows his broad appeal, I also think republicans, like most people, respect Edwards for running a clean and positive campaign. You might wonder what someone who likes * would find attractive about a positive campaing, but you have to remember that for a lot of people, perception is reality. If you visit the Hannity forum, you'll find people saying things like, "Do you think Bush and the republican party should get down in the mud with the democrats in 04 to combat their attacks, or stay above the dirty politics like we normally do?" and they're not being sarcastic. So their *perception* of what * is in style, probably meshes well with their perception of Edwards.

[King of New Orleans]

26. That's exactly what I'm thinking too

I kinda feel that the Bush supporters who voted in the Dem primary participated in the primary because they were there to vote on other issues on the ballot and they decided, "What the heck, I vote on this too". They voted for the candidate that seemed closest to them. Would they vote for him again in the fall? I dunno.

[atre]

31. EXACTLY

The contention that there was a concerted effort to undermine the campaign is patently absurd. If there was such an effort, we would most certainly know about it.

[K-W]

11. It isnt a conspiricy or anything

Edwards is more moderate, therefore more conservative voters prefer him. Where is the mystery guys?

[Carni]

13. JMO They want to bury the military issue

I personally think bush's military record is a far bigger problem for stupid than his faithful are admitting to. Edwards won't be able to hammer on that issue like Kerry's people can IMO.

Just my 2 cents.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

15. Republicans don't understand Democrats

They think prolonging the nomination fight is a way to divide Democrats, but it will only make us stronger.

[atre]

21. I don't agree

Republicans have to know that every day that the race for the nomination grabs more headlines, the worse that is for Bush because it draws attention away from him.

[Mick Knox]

16. Edwards makes it rougher on kerry

The longer the fight for the primary goes on.. the more expensive it is.. the better it is for the pubs... dont get your hopes up that they will be voting for Edwards or Kerry in the election. Thats my .02

[mouse7]

22. Free media from extending campaign is far more valuable

Yes, it's more expensive, but the added value of the free media gotten from extending the race is vastly more valuable than the money spent by the campaigns.

[Mick Knox]

32. I agree!

I think its what they thought.. I didnt make that clear.. I'm glad i'm in a closed primary state.. because I do not agree with mixing the primaries.. each party should be able to select their guy and not have it influenced by the other party.

Your statement is correct... Which is exactly why there is still a notion that kerry is not the nominee. Kerry is quite obviously the nomineee

No race = no press..

After mar 2nd.. people are going to say its only 50% decided.. edwards can still win.. bring clark back... deans grass roots.. kucinich might win at convention.. blah blah blah..

Its over IMO. It was over at NH.

There is nothing new in this political race IMO.. this is old hat politics. It's certainly not any meaner or dirtier than previous campaigns.. ESPECIALLY if you look into 19th century campaigns...

I think its going exactly according to plans... but i'm kinda conspiratorial that way. Both parties know EXACTLY what they are doing.

This is of course just my opinions....

[corporatewhore]

25. Its the jobs,stupid Edwards spoke out against NAFTA cons dont like their

jobs going to india either

[WiseMen]

38. Was a factor in Edwards vote. But Was it Correlated with Pro-Bush ?? Not

likely, but only analysis from raw data could tell.

[carolinayellowdog]

27. Why do pro-Bush voters like Kerry?

According to your numbers, 23% of those satisfied with Bush, and 30% of those who call themselves conservative, voted for Kerry.

[atre]

28. They can't answer that question....

Doing so would require them to confront their cognitive dissonance.

[WiseMen]

33. Wish the analysts did a little more work to answer these questions

Specifically: Are the smaller number of conservatives that voted
for Kerry more or less likely to vote Democrat than the conservatives
that voted for Edwards.

Can't tell without direct access to the raw data to do multivariate analysis.

[charlie]

30. Edwards' lifetime score is 88

http://www.adaction.org/lifetimesennorthcarolina.html

If you're going to keep citing that thing, cite it correctly. You listed Kucinich at 86 a number of times, it's actually 90:

http://www.adaction.org/ho00037.htm

[OKNancy]

35. Here is the ADA page

with voting history

http://www.adaction.org/Campaign2004/VotingHistory/votinghistory.html

[charlie]

37. Urk

I missed that. Thanks OKNancy.

My apologies, Wisemen.

Does anyone have a list of the 20 "key votes" the ADA uses for these ratings? I've never seen that either.

[ewagner]

36. This is interesting

I did hear a report on WPR yesterday about a woman who is/was a Republican who went to see Edwards speak for the "celebrity" value of seeing a presidential candidate and came out an Edwards Supporter.

I don't underestimate the power of Edwards as a campaigner, but I am totally baffled why anyone coming out of the polls, having voted for Edwards would tell and interviewer that he/she 1: is pleased with the Bush Administration; 2, Supports the Administration policy in Iraq. Are we missing something here?

[DFLforever]

42. With those sentiments

I can see why they wouldn't vote for Dean, but it must have been hard for them to choose between Kerry and Edwards. It has to have been Edwards' personal appeal and campaigning skills.

[ewagner]

44. That was the gist of the report

Edwards personal appeal to voters and his presentation on the stump is very effective from everybody I've talked to.

[WiseMen]

46. The question is whether this person will NOT vote Bush in GE. They say

they like and support Bush.

[retyred]

48. Oh, I don't know

Maybe they were hoping for Kerry to lose? maybe they wanted to be sure dean dropped out by giving Edwards a commanding lead? maybe they wanted to boost Edwards ego so he thought he was really a contender?

Who knows, who cares, they skewed the election while being bush supporters first and foremost, Kerry got the most Democrat votes of them all, that should tell you who real Democrats wanted, and it wasn't Efwards or dean.



retyred in fla
“Good-Night Paul, Wherever You Are”
So I read this book

[Sensitivity]

49. It's amazing. Now pro-Dean folk backing Edwards. So much for principle

I see post from guys who were adamant against IWR and Patriot Act
now praising Edwards. How things change. Edwards is not so bad
but I wouldn't expect support to come from guy who were so
opposed a few days ago.

[WiseMen]

50. Well, Dean also got big support from conservatives and pro-bush voters

Weird alliances happen in politics.