Edwards says he'll compete and win in GOP-leaning states

[JohnLocke]

Edwards says he'll compete and win in GOP-leaning states
The Associated Press
Friday, October 19, 2007
----
LOS ANGELES--John Edwards has invested much of his time in one state, Iowa. But he promised Friday that if he wins the Democratic nomination he'll campaign in every state—even Republican strongholds—to capture the White House and bolster the party's majorities in Congress.

In a speech to union supporters at a downtown hotel, the former senator faulted members of his own party for being too quick to cede states like Montana, South Dakota and Kansas to the GOP in presidential contests. He cited his own Senate victory in North Carolina as evidence that Democrats can appeal across political and geographic lines, even in states with Republican pedigrees.

"Some Democrats say, 'Well, we can't win in the red states.' ... I know Democrats can win in those states because I've done it," Edwards said.

"We need a candidate who will spend time talking to hardworking men and women in places like Kentucky, Georgia, Missouri, Oklahoma," he added. "The people who want change don't just live in blue states."

Edwards was in Los Angeles to accept the endorsement of the California chapter of the Service Employees International Union, which was announced earlier this week. He also planned to attend a fundraiser hosted by filmmaker Brett Ratner.

In his remarks to cheering union members, he didn't mention any of his presidential rivals by name. But he repeatedly criticized the political status quo in Washington, which he said is out of touch with average Americans.

He said he would pressure Congress to rapidly enact universal health care, or risk losing their own coverage.

http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_7227975

[geek tragedy]

1. He should clear 15% in polls of Democrats before

bragging about what an awesomely effective GE candidate he would be.

Maybe if Hillary wasn't stomping all over him in North Carolina and if he weren't a DISTANT third in South Carolina I'd take his electability argument seriously.

[1932]

2. If Democratic primary voters hadn't nominated exactly one competive Democrat in 28 years, I'd take

your argument more seriously.

Why do Democratic primary voters have such a hard time figuring out who would make a good general election candidate?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

3. You Forgot Bill Clinton

The only two term Democratic president since FDR and the only one of three two term Democratic presidents in the twentieth century...

[1932]

5. That's the one I'm counting. Who did you think I meant?

[Rhythm and Blue]

4. I don't think that's quite fair.

Kerry and Gore were both competitive, as was Carter (until the final stretch). Clinton, of course, won twice.

[1932]

6. Gore got the nom because he had been VP, and we could have and should have

run someone who could have beaten Bush by a lot more than less than 1%.

J.F. KENNEDY is going to be the lass Mass. Dem to win a general election for a long long time.

[Rhythm and Blue]

9. And then we could have and should have run someone

who would have snapped their fingers and ended poverty, war, and racism. And then we all get free ponies, and there's rainbows and ice-cream for breakfast every morning!

[1932]

10. It would have been better than running a Larry Summers-Robert Rubin Democrat.

[surfermaw]

26. Carter would have won, if Reagan and the Republican connections in Iran

enabled them to hold the hostages until after the election,then releasing them while Carter was on his way home,I split my ticket until then, never again will I split a ticket to vote for a republican. To heck with the crooked B.

[Stop Cornyn]

8. You confuse Hillary's strength in a poll of red state Democrats with the ability to carry that state

in the general election.

I don't think anyone doubts that Hillary can win red state PRIMARIES.

It's the GENERAL election where Hillary can't win a red state and won't really contest those states and who may doom our entire down-ballot tickets in those states where she can't win and won't campaign.

We talk about maybe picking up a Senate seat in Nebraska or Alaska, but that possibility becomes less likely with Hillary at the top of the ticket.

Hillary polls the strongest in primary race polls of Democrats, but it is Edwards who polls the strongest in head-to-head polls, especially in red states.

Here's an excerpt from a recent Rasmussen head-to-head polling report:

Senator John Edwards (D) leads Senator John McCain (R) 47% to 40%. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey also shows that Edwards has a more intimidating margin over former Governor Mitt Romney (R), 52% to 35%.

A month ago, Edwards held a four point edge over McCain and an eleven point lead over Romney. Even before these latest results, Edwards was the strongest Democratic candidate in general election match-ups.

Contrast Rasmussen's head-to-head numbers for Edwards with the most recent head-to-head Rasmussen numbers for Hillary:

Democratic Senator Hillary Clinton nominally leads Republican Senator John McCain 46% to 45% in the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. But, the Democratic frontrunner easily outpaces former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney 49% to 40%.
...
Hillary Clinton is viewed favorably by 49%, unfavorably by 50%. Those numbers have moved little throughout the year. In the Democratic nomination race, Clinton's lead is holding firm as she routinely draws support in the 40% range.

A Rasmussen Reports national telephone poll of the frontrunners shows that Clinton is neck-and-neck with Giuliani, and enjoys a moderate lead over Thompson.

... and compare those numbers with Rasmussen's most recent head-to-head numbers for Obama:

The latest Rasmussen Reports survey of Election 2008 shows Senator Barack Obama now leading Senator John McCain 46% to 41%, and leading former Governor Mitt Romney just 46% to 43%.

Obama has been in a tougher struggle with former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani than with such other top GOP contenders as McCain and former Senator Fred Thompson. And until now Obama has enjoyed double-digit advantages over former Governor Mitt Romney in almost every Rasmussen Reports survey of the match-up (see history).

Here's some SurveyUSA numbers from Kentucky:

If there were an election for President of the United States today, and the only two names on the ballot were Republican {name} and Democrat {name}, who would you vote for?

50% Fred Thompson
45% Clinton

54% Fred Thompson
37% Obama

44% Fred Thompson
45% Edwards

46% Romney
46% Clinton

45% Romney
43% Obama

38% Romney
48% Edwards

All our candidates lose to Giuliani in Kentucky, but Edwards is the most competitive with him, and Edwards is the only one who beats both Romney and Thompson.

SurveyUSA numbers from Oklahoma:

If there were an election for President of the United States today, and the only two names on the ballot were Republican {name} and Democrat {name}, who would you vote for?

47% Giuliani
44% Clinton

54% Giuliani
33% Obama

40% Giuliani
49% Edwards

50% Fred Thompson
44% Clinton

55% Fred Thompson
35% Obama

41% Fred Thompson
47% Edwards

44% Romney
47% Clinton

46% Romney
40% Obama

32% Romney
53% Edwards

In Oklahoma, Edwards is our only candidate who beats Giuliani, Thompson, and Romney.

Quinnipiac national numbers (with the responses divided among Red, Blue, and swing Purple states):

If the 2008 election for President were being held today, and the candidates were {name} the Democrat and {name} the Republican, for whom would you vote? (asked of Red state voters, Blue state voters, and Purple swing state voters)

Red - Blue - Purple
44% - 52% - 43% --- Clinton
46% - 40% - 43% --- Giuliani

39% - 47% - 42% --- Obama
45% - 40% - 41% --- Giuliani

42% - 45% - 42% --- Edwards
42% - 43% - 40% --- Giuliani

44% - 52% - 45% --- Clinton
45% - 39% - 40% --- McCain

38% - 49% - 42% --- Obama
44% - 34% - 39% --- McCain

43% - 47% - 45% --- Edwards
40% - 36% - 36% --- McCain

45% - 58% - 47% --- Clinton
42% - 32% - 39% --- Thompson

41% - 56% - 44% --- Obama
38% - 28% - 36% --- Thompson
44% - 55% - 48% --- Edwards
36% - 27% - 33% --- Thompson

Among Red state voters, Hillary loses to Giuliani and McCain and beats Thompson by only 3%. Even among Purple state voters, Hillary doesn't beat Giuliani.

Obama does the same as Hillary in Red states, but at least Obama beats Giuliani in Purple states.

[AmBlue]

19. John Edwards..... The People's President

without a doubt.....

WHAT ARE WE WAITING FOR? This is the guy we all need to be busting our butts for. I love Dennis and I love Al, but right now, Edwards is the guy that can win this thing.

LET'S GET TO WORK!!

[calteacherguy]

7. Risk losing their own coverage?

I like some things about what Edwards says, but when he says things like "pressure Congress to rapidly enact universal health care, or risk losing their own coverage," I just don't get it. That's not politically possible. He can't take away the Health coverage of Congress. I don't understand that.

[AmBlue]

20. The HECK he can't!!

That's a courageous thing to say and shows he's willing to make Congress MOVE on things that matter, or suffer the consequences. What's to understand???

[niceypoo]

11. Why do they even try to get the republican vote?

[tom_paine]

15. He's not trying fort he Republic Vote. He's trying for the Independant Vote

and the Moderates and the Prinicpled Republicans.

Consider this: He's doing it while at the same time espousing such "leftist" ideals as restoring Constittuional Rule and Single-Payer Healthcare.

[surfermaw]

27. Some moderat rep votes helped Bill Clinton

Conservaative democrats in the south , are abou the same as moderate republians in the north, they ran this nation from 30's till the 50's could defeat or pass any bill.

[JohnLocke]

12. Kick

[tom_paine]

13. And I do believe he will do what he says, on that and many other things

Edwards is by far the best of the "Big Three" mainstream candidates, for sure, and as such will very likely garner my vote in the primaries, for what that's worth.

Although I have to say, Kucinich, Dodd and Richardson are quite appealing in the next tier, and we will see how they are doing if they have a chance when they get to my home state, or if they are still even in the race.

But Edwards, I like what I am hearing from him and I do believe he is one of the few Democratic candidates who will actually DO something, even if it isn't everything is a whole lot better than the NOTHING we are getting now, to restore the Constitution and the System of Checks and Balances.

[MethuenProgressive]

14. I call Bull Shit.

"Some Democrats say, 'Well, we can't win in the red states.' ... I know Democrats can win in those states because I've done it," Edwards said.

Name the Democrat who said,"Well, we can't win in the red states."
Name the Red state Kerry/Edwards won in '04.
Name the one state Edwards won in the 04 primaries.

[tom_paine]

16. Fine. Then we agree to disagree. However, some counterpoints:

You take issue with his rhetorical ohrasing and do what I consider nitpicking. I believe the entire Democratic Party in many ways "said" this by retreating from many congressional districts in the 90s and early 2000s.

Remember the big changes wrought by Dean's 50-state plan and how people STILL are criticizing it, even afer s has demonstrated effectiveness and common-sensically correct. Failing to support dozens and dozens of Democratic precincts over the course of decades, letting them wither.

Well, let's just say with actions like those, no one needs to SAY anything.

As to your second two points, I would say they are not relevant to the topic because the poolls DO, in fact show Edwards doing better than Hillary or Obama in Red States (make of that what you will, I likely won't disgree with you on that), so in spite of your rhetorical naming queries to us, I believe what data is available does support that statement.

So, I said my peace and gave my two cents. We disgree.

[MethuenProgressive]

17. The second two points *are* relevent - because Edwards isn't being honest.

Edwards says he's "won in red states".
That's not true.

[Stop Cornyn]

18. Good point. North Carolina was just left of Vermont when Edwards won the Senate race there.

[1932]

21. By what measure?

[Stop Cornyn]

24. By whatever goofy measure people use when they falsely say that Edwards has never won a red state

[venable]

34. this is patently wrong. not even close. nt

[1932]

22. Kerry was so convinced Democrats couldn't win Red States, he said in a debate "we can still win even

if we lose all the red states" as an argument for him being the nominee, and then Kerry didn't run in red states.

He pulled his campaign out of Missouri while Edwards was actually in the state campaigning, and then lost in narrowly. Had he not pulled out, he probably would have won it.

Edwards won in SC and NC, came in second in Georgia 46 to 41 (while Kerry was polling 60-70% nationally), and second in Oklahoma by .5% of the vote, and came in second in about 20 other states.

[Robbins]

23. Democrats

Some need to get their minds back on Reality.There are Democrats who don't like Hillary.And I can attest this from my own Family.I have decided to support Edwards because he can win the Electoral
vote.In a Hillary against Guiliana General Election Some Democrats who don't like Hillary could end
up voting for him out of his being called a Social Liberal,and Hillary's own Triangulation could
cause some Antiwar People to stay home,or deciding to vote Guilina.Here In Missouri Polls show Edwards and Even Obama would Beat him.Hillary would not.

On the most Important Issues compare Edwards VS Hillary

Iraq-Pay close attention to Hillary here.Out of all Democrats she Is the least likely to end
combat roles.She refuses to say she was wrong.Edwardss aid this In 2005,and while I know Edwards
won't take my postion of getting out entirely of Iraq as quickly as possible Edwards Is the ebst hope out of the top Tiers of getting some Troops home

Iran-Edwards attack Hillary for supporting the first step to war In Iran.This shows he has learned
from the Iraq vote.

Civil Rights-Edwards has spoken about amending the Patroit Act,and restoring the Constituation.
Hillary Is absent on these.

Social Security/Medicare-You want to perserve these you can't keep spending money on foreign wars
like she does.

Health Care-Similar to above yet It should be noted some called her Health Care plan a ripoff of the Edwards plan

Free Trade/Labor-Hillary Is In the pocket of the Corporations,and remember It was Bill Clinton who
pushed NAFTA through.If she wants to take credit for her husband's accomplishments then you have to
put NAFTA on her.Edwards would be the best of the top tiers on Labor Issues.

[venable]

33. you should be more polite, and do some research.

he was elected senator in very red North Carolina (re: "I've done it")

as for who said 'we can't win in red states'.... he's referring to the Kerry campaign's widely recognized decision to not try to compete in the South..as evidenced by many things, including, most tragically, keeping Edwards out of the limelight.

Edwards won South Carolina in the 04 primaries. by a whopping 15% over Kerry (45% to30%, IIRC), in spite of the huge military population, and Kerry announcing his candidacy in SC.

so, don't be 'calling bs'. it doesn't sound good, especially when you're so off-base.

Edwards favorability numbers in 04 were as high among Independents and moderate republicans as they were among democrats...very high, in the 70's, and considerably higher than Kerry's, and higher than anyone's this time around.

He wd be the president today if he had been on the top of the ticket. even the criminal Karl Rove knew this.

[jzodda]

25. He thinks Georgia and Oklahoma can turn blue? Fanstasy

Very unlikely Kentucky. Missouri could be in play however. It doesn't matter which of our people gets the nomination, those states are very hard targets. Focus on Florida and Ohio and the race is ours.

[surfermaw]

28. Gerogia was one time a solid democratic state

After FDR, a man like Bush could turn the state back, if might flip a quickly as it fliped rep. Goldwater wrote for one of the Atlanta papers for several years, that I think helped the Blue Ga, turn red.

[jzodda]

30. The entire south was solid democratic territory but not since the 1960s and the "Southern Strategy"

Since the republicans embraced the "southern strategy" back in the 1960s the deep south has been solidly republican. I don't see that changing this cycle, even with transplants to the region. As long as African Americans are supporting the Dems and our party embracing them, the Southern whites seemingly will not vote for our side in those deep Red states in Presidential elections. 1976 was an exception but Carter was well known to Georgia for the reasons we all know. I would take a look at the wiki entry, its very informative and imo pretty accurate, though there have been some well written books on the subject as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

[josh_edwards07]

29. I applaud Senator Edwards

For putting his "if I win the nomination" position out there. He has lofty goals and honestly a very good realistic chance to win the nomination. I believe that he is the best candidate, and will win the nomination

[BenDavid]

31. Hell Edwards is losing NC to HRC....Yep, he sure

as hell helped Kerry take NC in 04...uh huh right!!!!!

[wiseguy182]

32. I doubt Edwards could win red states

Why did Kerry tap Edwards as his running mate? Because he was under the wrong assumption that Edwards could carry southern states. (Kerry figuring that he would need a few to win the general election as Bush was still somewhat popular then, although not as popular as he once was.) the end result: every southern state lost: including:

North Carolina, where Edwards was still employed as senator. It's even doubtful that he could have held on to that senate seat as his job approval ratings in that state as senator were fledgling at best. A republican went on to take that seat, and that particular seat has a recent history of turnover.

and

South Carolina: Edwards home state, and I believe the only state he won a primary in. In fact, it wasn't even close.

and in 2000, we lost all the southern states.

Kerry should have went with Bob Graham, who was popular in Florida, could have taken the state, and brought the win home for Kerry. He also had the experience of both senator and governor.