I'm still voting for Edwards on Tuesday. Convince me why I should change it.

[begin_within]

I don't see any substantial difference between Obama and Clinton.

[Faygo Kid]

1. Out of respect for John's decision?

I won't lobby for my candidate, but I supported John Edwards first and put money behind it. Now he has withdrawn, and I respect that, although I was disappointed. So now I have made another choice with which I am comfortable. I expect that John Edwards would consider that sound reasoning. If he endorses and you wish to follow his advice, that's fine - but he is no longer a candidate, and probably would be the first to say that you should follow your heart and mind to another decision.

He is out of the race, but will still play an important role in our country's life. Nothing wrong with respecting that decision and respecting your own ability to make another decision.

[JDPriestly]

17. I'm voting for John, because he has been the only candidate

who has spoken to my issues: corruption; corporate dominance of our political system; loss of civil rights; poverty; rural issues; health care that covers every American and leaves no one out; safeguarding Social Security; reforming Medicare; saving the environment while jump-starting the American economy; ending outsourcing; decreasing privatization; ending predatory lending; de-privatizing student loans; and enforcing and renegotiating trade agreements, whichever is better for the American workers and the environment.

Of all the candidates I have had the opportunity to work for, John Edwards is the only one with whom I agree on every issue 100%. I am not going to miss my chance to vote for him. He comes from a background much like my own.

Also, I am sickened by the way the press ignored Edwards' campaign.

The media may be able to decide how most Americans vote, but it is not going to decide how I vote.

I studied the candidates and their policy views carefully and decided to back John Edwards. No one will deter me from my purpose. I support John Edwards, and I will vote for John Edwards on February 5.

[neutron]

23. Convince yourself. I'm not your mother.

Piss your vote away. Who cares.

[Faygo Kid]

24. I respect that. But, he has decided and announced that he is no longer a candidate.

My vote is too important to use on a candidate who has withdrawn, even John Edwards. Reminds me of the first candidate I supported with all my heart, Gene McCarthy in 1968. His heart went out of the campaign when Bobby was assassinated, and Humphrey got the nod. I despised Humphrey, but by the time the election came in November, I appreciated his passion for civil rights and the basic New Deal decency of the man (plus he had rejected the war publicly by that time - too late, it turned out). So I was surprised to find myself pulling so hard for him all night long that November night in 1968, and how by that time I recognized how much I did not want Nixon to become president.

If I could move from McCarthy to Humphrey, maybe some here can move from John Edwards to another candidate of their choosing. The reality is, John Edwards won't be elected president this year, despite my donation. But I want a voice in who does get the nod, and I'll be damned if it's a Republican while I choose to sit on the sidelines because my first choice is gone.

[Dems Will Win]

47. Then you are throwing your vote away. Edwards will not reach the 15% viability threshold in any

state now. So a vote for Edwards truly is an act of futility.

And aids the corporate influence over our party in the form of the Clintons.

[JDPriestly]

48. At this point, I dislike the other two equally.

I think others who volunteered with me for Edwards will also vote for Edwards. I feel that my vote would be wasted if I were to cast it for either of the candidates because I really don't want to see either them as the candidate.

[SammyWinstonJack]

62. Right on!

No one will deter me from my purpose. I support John Edwards, and I will vote for John Edwards on February 5:applause:

For me it will be on March 4.

[democracyindanger]

2. No.

I'm still going to vote for Edwards. A vote for Edwards is a vote for the issues.

[thunder rising]

3. Vote your conscience and let nobody take that away.

However, it has occurred to me that Edwards is not as honest in his statement that he is SUSPENDING his campaign because he does not want to be the king maker.

If he does not want that position he would DROP the campaign instead of SUSPENDING his campaign. Suspending his campaign allows him to keep his name on the ballots, keep his delegates and gather more (like from people like you). That keeps either of the front runners from getting the majority in a tight race and he indeed gets the shit on everybody at the convention.

He has sold you out. It's all about the politics now.

He did the same thing in '04.

[texastoast]

10. Shit on everyone at the convention?

I just don't see that as his style. And he if he is still viable then, may he be the nominee.

[Yossariant]

15. He has no obligation to pave the way for either candidate.

And I disagree that he has sold anybody out.

He has an obligation to his SUPPORTERS' issues and his own message to maintain as much influence as he can.

My first DU insult came from an Edwards supporter who called me a fool.

Ah! Memories. ;-)

[Zensea]

4. to prevent the institution of "royalty" in America

I don't see much difference between the two either and may still vote for Edwards.
But, if Clinton gets the nomination and gets elected, it means the same two families will have been in power for at least 24 years if not 28.
That's not really acceptable.

[JDPriestly]

19. You are so right about this.

Also, with the Adams and with the Bushes, we have had father and son presidencies. The second presidency was a disappointment in both cases. I suspect that Hillary's presidency will not have the energy that an Edwards presidency would have had. I just don't know what to think about Obama. He has a nice speaking voice, but he certainly does not speak for me. And talk about a lack of energy . . . . .

[neutron]

29. parroting msm talking points, are we?

[DJ13]

5. what if John ends up endorsing the candidate you ultimately reject in the nominee fight?

Your vote will become a component in any delegates he might obtain on Tuesday, and as a result your eventual new choice for the nominee could be damaged by those delegates.

[movonne]

6. I am a Edwards supported too and I have decided to vote for

Obama.. the Teddy Kennedy endorsement help push me over...I love the Kennedys and I find them to be on the liberal side...and also I feel Hillary will bring in too much baggage...

[JSK]

11. I love the Kenndys too

and I have tremendous respect for Bobby Jr as well as the faction supporting Barack. Bobby and his sisters, Kathleen and Kerry, are supporting Hillary. So...

I am voting for Edwards. So there.

[neutron]

28. Why don't you vote for JFK?

It would be a lovely tribute. Or be politically correct and
vote for Caroline.

[boston bean]

7. Don't vote for him if that's what you want. it's you're right. nt

[BlackVelvet04]

8. You have to make up your own mind...

I was an Edward's supporter but I had a second favorite picked out. I won't campaign for my candidate....I went with my gut, you should, too.

[flyarm]

9. John still wants on Rhode Island ballot..i say vote Edwards..i still have his signs up

and bumper stickers on my car..and i am still wearing his baseball hat and i will wear them through the election because i want people to know how this bullshit came down..we are no longer a represenative government..and i want people asking me why i am wearing his hat and shirts and stuff..i want them to ask and i will be happy to tell them ..they were just fucked by the media and their own ignorance!

IN a primary ..vote your heart.....

In a primary ..vote your convicitions...

In a primary vote your values and principles...

In a primary ..vote with your intelligence....

In a primary send your own message!
don't rely on others.
fly

[vanboggie]

34. Good idea

I'm going to do the same. Otherwise I will have to sit this whole season out. I will vote D but won't campaign for Hill-o-Bama. Starting discussions on what the media and stupid people lost for us could at least be educational to a lemming or two.

[sandnsea]

12. Hillary supported the war for four years

There is a very easy way to prevent anyone from being put into harm’s way, that is for Saddam Hussein to disarm. And I have absolutely no belief that he will. I have to say that this is something I’ve followed for more than a decade. If he were serious about disarming, he would have been much more forthcoming. . . . I ended up voting for the resolution after carefully reviewing the information, intelligence that I had available, talking with people whose opinions I trusted, trying to discount the political or other factors that I didn’t believe should be in any way part of this decision.
Hillary addresses Code Pink, March 7, 2003.

Tonight, the President gave Saddam Hussein one last chance to avoid war, and the world hopes that Saddam Hussein will finally hear this ultimatum, understand the severity of those words, and act accordingly. While we wish there were more international support for the effort to disarm Saddam Hussein, at this critical juncture it is important for all of us to come together in support of our troops and pray that, if war does occur, this mission is accomplished swiftly and decisively with minimum loss of life and civilian casualties.
March 17 2003 (Invasion)
We are in a two-front war. We are offense in Iraq and we have to finish the job
March 19 2003

“We must stay the course” in both Iraq and Afghanistan, and asked for more troops to finish the job.
“We have to exert all of our efforts militarily”
November 29, 2003 Hilary visits the troops In Iraq and Afghanistan

I am both a little optimistic and a little pessimistic, but what I'm trying to do is be realistic about where we are and what we need to be successful. We have no option but to stay involved and committed.
Dec 15, 2003 Speech to CFR

"The consensus was the same, from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration," she said. "It was the same intelligence belief that our allies and friends around the world shared.
"But I think that in the case of the administration, they really believed it. They really thought they were right, but they didn't let enough sunlight into their thinking process to really have the kind of debate that needs to take place when a serious decision occurs like that." (They believed it, but her people didn't??)
April 2004 Larry King

It's regrettable that the security needs have increased so much. On the other hand, I think you can look at the country as a whole and see that there are many parts of Iraq that are functioning quite well," Clinton said.
It is time for the President to stop serving up platitudes and present us with a plan for finishing this war with success and honor – not a rigid timetable that terrorists can exploit, but a public plan for winning and concluding the war.
Nov 2005 Letter To Constituents

nor do I think it is smart strategy to set a date certain.
June 2006 TBA

"Now it's time to say the redeployment should start in 90 days or the Congress will revoke authorization for this war,"
Feb 2007

When Obama was saying:

"However, I think what is also true is that the Administration launched the Iraq war without giving either Congress or the American people the full story. This is not a partisan claim - you don't have to take my word for it. All you need to do is to match up the Administration's statements during the run-up to the war with the now declassified intelligence estimates that they had in their possession at the time. Match them up and you will conclude that at the very least, the Administration shaded, exaggerated and selectively used the intelligence available in order to make the case for invasion.

The President told the American people about Iraqi attempts to acquire yellow cake during the State of the Union. The Vice-President made statements on national television expressing certainty about Iraq's nuclear weapons programs. Secretary Rice used the words "mushroom cloud" over and over again.

We know now that even at the time these unequivocal statements were made, intelligence assessments existed that contradicted these claims. Analysis from the CIA and State Department was summarily dismissed when it did not help the Administration make the case for war."
http://obama.senate.gov/speech/051122-moving_forward/

[neutron]

25. The Clinton Era was the most Peaceful in Modern History

if you want to spread bs that she's a war monger, it's your conscience. Hate monger

[ClericJohnPreston]

39. What would you ever have to say sandnsea

if they took away your links?

:rofl:

[2rth2pwr]

13. Who cares? Vote for Daffy Duck if it makes you feel good. nt

[smalll]

22. Daffy 2008: ready on Day One with Hope and Change (All Three!)

/nt

[2rth2pwr]

30. ha!

[comradebillyboy]

31. great slogan, don't be surprised if one of the

candidate doesn't adopt it.

[blm]

14. Because Open Government effects EVERY other issue. Obama is for more open

government and transparency of the process including cameras on legislative negotiations.

Clintons have proven they side with secrecy and privilege of closed government.


http://consortiumnews.com/2006/111106.html

And since Bill spent the 90s protecting Poppy Bush, Hillary will have no choice but to continue the protection of BushInc.

[Yossariant]

16. I might try to convince you. What state?

[begin_within]

41. California

[Yossariant]

50. OK. I'd like to convince you to vote for Hillary Clinton.

Hillary Clinton is a visionary, inspiring and prepared leader who gives me hope that she will change the direction of and unify our country to steer us to a peaceful and prosperous future.

HEALTHCARE:
Hillary, with John Edwards, has the best plan for healthcare of all the candidates and both plans require mandates because:

"Without a mandate the plan will fall far short of universal coverage. Worse yet, without a mandate health insurance will be much more expensive than it should be for those who do choose to buy it...

healthy people could choose not to buy insurance, then sign up for it if they developed health problems later. This would lead to higher premiums for everyone else. It would reward the irresponsible, while punishing those who did the right thing and bought insurance while they were healthy."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/07/opinion/07krugman.htm...

The mistake that President Clinton made was that, while he campaigned on the promise to try to get universal coverage, he had no plan ready to implement as soon as he took office. By the time Hillary had investigated and proposed the plan, the health care industry had time to mobilize and propagandize against it and the Presidential "honeymoon period" was over.

Hillary will be ready from day one.

THE ECONOMY
"On the Democratic side, John Edwards, although never the front-runner, has been driving his party’s policy agenda. He’s done it again on economic stimulus: last month, before the economic consensus turned as negative as it now has, he proposed a stimulus package including aid to unemployed workers, aid to cash-strapped state and local governments, public investment in alternative energy, and other measures.

Last week Hillary Clinton offered a broadly similar but somewhat larger proposal. (It also includes aid to families having trouble paying heating bills, which seems like a clever way to put cash in the hands of people likely to spend it.) The Edwards and Clinton proposals both contain provisions for bigger stimulus if the economy worsens.

And you have to say that Mrs. Clinton seems comfortable with and knowledgeable about economic policy. I’m sure the Hillary-haters will find some reason that’s a bad thing, but there’s something to be said for presidents who know what they’re talking about."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/14/opinion/14krugman.htm...

Bush has proposed and Congress has passed a rebate to stimulate the economy. If our last "rebate" is any indication, the current "rebate" is nothing more than an advance on next year's tax liability. They are giving us our own next year's money now so we can spend it to stimulate th economy.

THE WAR
I opposed the war from the beginning, after and since. My own state's Senators, Sarbanes and Mikulski, voted against the IWR and I have thanked them for it. BUT

I now can understand, though not at the time, how those who voted for it did it and, in good conscience.

At the time of the vote, fully 70% of Americans favored military action against Iraq, if necessary:

"It also found support for military action -- if it becomes necessary -- is still high, but it has slipped from just two months ago -- 64% now compared to 70% last November."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/01/23/opinion/polls...

I don't think our representatives voted as they did based on whether Bush was lying, as we know he was.

I think it is because, regardless of whether he was telling the truth or not, some Congresspeople did not believe that Iraq presented an imminent threat to our country.

And one of the lies was the Iraq/al Qaeda connection.

I don't think that the newly elected junior Senator from New York, devastated by 911, could stake the wishes of her constituency on the falsity of the connection.

I still recall the night Colin Powell left whatever integrity he had on the floor of the UN and, even then, I had hope as many did, that the war wouldn't happen.

I invite you to this excellent thread to read the original post which sets out her speech in the Senate at the time she cast her vote:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

FINALLY
Barack Obama wasn't there. Not present. Absent.

He can't be held responsible for votes he didn't cast, while he's busy taking credit for votes he didn't cast.

Thank you for your attention and consideration, bob weaver

[begin_within]

54. Thank you for all of that.

My big problem with Hillary is Bill. He campaigned in 1992 on a populist campaign theme of "Putting People First" and when he won, spent the next 8 years putting corporations first. Signing NAFTA. Telecommunications bill. Carl Lindner sitting next to Bill in Ford's Theater. The whole Clinton regime was a big lie - they put the wishes of corporations first, not the people. In my mind, Hillary is tied to all that, and I don't believe that either of the Clintons are populists or have the public interest at heart. That's my view of Hillary (and Obama, to a lesser extent). I would have to overcome a long, bitter memory of betrayal by the Clintons in order to vote for her.

[Yossariant]

60. It was a good and overdue exercise for me.

In fact, I agree with your objections.

Way back in 1975, when I worked for Jimmy Carter's campaign, my state was one of, if not the only, states that your own Jerry Brown won in the primaries.

And I supported him against Clinton when he ran back in '92.

Clinton ran from the left and governed from the right. Yes, NAFTA, Telecommunications, Welfare reform. YUCK. This guy's a Dem?!

OTOH, there really is an organized and vast right wing conspiracy with a sense of entitlement to govern.

And, when they lost the White House, they led that "Republican Revolution" with term limits promises, led by Tancredo. ;-)

I started liking Bubba more, and seeing the position he was in, when he stood his ground against them and let the government shut down.

So, thinking back, and having survived his presidency, I think he tried to accomplish what he could, given the GOP stranglehold on the Congress and the Democrats' penchant to "just go along to get along."

Last night, Mark Shields said that the Democrats have no winner-take-all primaries because the Democrats hate to see anybody lose. :) It's true. And I hate that.

I also believe that Hillary Clinton is about the only Dem in America who can stand up to them.

So, in the spirit of not throwing out the baby with the bath water, Bill Clinton did manage to achieve a few things.

The Brady Bill and more cops. The Family and Medical Leave Act. Cracked down on deadbeat Dads. Increased the Earned Income Tax Credit and federal funding for child care. Learning Tax Credits. Expanded Medicare. S-CHIP, expanding health care for kids. Insured the quality of tap water. Increased minimum wage. Worked for peace in Northern Ireland and Israel.

I won't talk about the economy because the facile "He was lucky" has been bandied about all too often. And, if that's the case, I'd have to believe that poor George Bush is just the "unluckiest" President in the history of America.

In any event, I am convinced that Barack Obama cannot win the general election.

And, given that the Republican Party is in decline and Hillary is not Bill, I'm looking forward to seeing what she can do with some Democratic support.

[begin_within]

63. ok thanks

[hiaasenrocks]

18. Because he lied about a major aspect of his campaign.

I voted for him in SC last weekend, based largely on his promise to stay in the fight for the long haul, all the way to the convention!

Then I watched him drop out a few days later.

[RevolutionStartsNow]

43. Perhaps he didn't lie, perhaps he was forced out...

consider that, please.

He was scheduled to speak near here today, I was so looking forward to seeing him.

Did you watch his speech? He didn't seem convinced about "letting history march forward" or whatever the heck he said.

[hiaasenrocks]

64. Perhaps you're pulling that out of thin air.

[RevolutionStartsNow]

65. Perhaps no one really knows.

[Krashkopf]

20. Unless you are intent on stopping Hillary from getting the nomination . . .

. . . and as long as you vote for the Democratic nominee in the General Election . . . there is NO reason for you NOT to vote for Edwards in the Primaries.

[sellitman]

44. Sure there is a reason.

I don't want someone elses vote to count more than mine.

My vote can make a difference voting either Clinton or Obama.

It can't anymore by voting for someone who is not in the running anymore.

I supported edwards until he pulled the plug.

Now one of the remaining two are the only REAL choices left.

I just haven't figured out who yet.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

21. Why do you want me to try and convince you to change a principled vote into something less?

Vote your heart. :)

[frazzled]

26. So you can have a voice in who the party's nominee will be?

It will be either Clinton or Obama. If you don't care, then knock yourself out. Vote for Mr. T. Whatever.

[comradebillyboy]

27. why? vote for the one you like

why would you care what a supporter of another candidate, such as myself, tells you to do? I'd love for you to vote for Hillary, but you should do what you think is best. Just don't vote for Ralph fucking Nader please.

[mckeown1128]

32. The votes are for delegates...and he won't recieve any

unless he reaches 15%. Which is unlikely now that he has dropped out. You just have to ask yourself....Who do you dislike least or like best out of the remaining two.

[DURHAM D]

33. Waste your vote if you like. It is your right. n/t

[krabigirl]

35. how is it a waste to vote for anyone you want?

[DURHAM D]

38. Is this a serious question? n/t

[ClericJohnPreston]

36. Sure they are different!

Different flavors of the same Corporate Candidate.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

56. Edwards seems to disagree with you somewhat

Considering he called Obama a 'powerful voice of change' as my sig states

[krabigirl]

37. I already "wasted" my vote on him via absentee, so I say go for it.

And I was kidding about "wasting" it. If I had known he was going to drop out, I'd probably have voted for Gravel.

[margotb822]

55. Me too

I already mailed in my absentee ballot, but I wouldn't change that. The point of the primaries is to get the best candidate into the nomination. If you believe, like I do, that Edwards is the best candidate, vote for him. Keep his agenda out in the open.

[ErnestoG]

40. Why? Just vote your conscience.

Don't hold your vote up to the one who will do the most doggie tricks. That's undignified and an insult.

[Clintonite]

42. Because if you don't, you cannot bitch about the outcome!

[OzarkDem]

45. No one has made a good case, have they?

One would think supporters of the other candidates would try to encourage you to support their candidate.

Instead all they do is attack you for supporting Edwards. Pretty shameful.

[robbedvoter]

46. I will not try. I voted Clark in 2004 - similar circumstances. Vote your heart

It's the primaries.

[balantz]

49. I'll be voting for John Tuesday.

[Politicub]

51. If that's how you want to vote, you probably shouldn't change it

but I happen to believe that Hillary will do something about poverty, and believe her healthcare plan is quite do-able. Though not quite as good as John's, I think it can get us to single payer - it will just take longer. And contrast with Obama's plan, which isn't mandatory, and will by default leave many people uninsured.

I admire Hillary's work to make sure millions of children recieved health insurance, and her nearly lifelong fight for the well being of the disadvantaged. I don't believe Obama has as much of a track record here as Hillary, so he is somewhat untested in that regard.

True, Hillary isn't perfect, but I do admire many of her positions and her positive history of affecting change. I think she would make a fantastic president, and I urge you to give her another look.

PS (on edit) - I actually like the idea of folks still voting for John as it would send a strong signal that his championing the poor and disadvantaged resonated, and won't die with his campaign ending.

[grantcart]

52. I changed because I saw a big difference between the two remaining

candidates but if you do not you should not change

[Hoof Hearted]

53. First, I'll start by saying you should absolutely vote with your heart.

Nobody has a right to tell you to do otherwise.

I would submit this if you should change your mind.

Healthcare.

The one thing that keeps swinging me back to Hillary is the Universal Coverage. She and Edwards plans were very nearly identical, and I'm absolutely sure she would bring him into the fold when it came time to hammer down the last of the details.

Without universal coverage the whole damn thing is going to fall apart. I don't get why Obama doesn't see that. I actually hope that he's being duplicitous, waiting until after the election if he's the nominee to make his plan truly universal.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

57. I actually think he does see that

its basically a case of Edwards and Hillary wanting everybody mandated first, then try to change other aspects

Obama on the other hand wants it to be cheaper first, which will make many more able to sign up of free will(if after a while he sees that the coverage is lacking he might use mandates but he does not see it as a good first step, besides mandates is a good bargaining chip to wrest a few more concessions from the corps rather then just hand it over to them )

[Lucinda]

58. I started with JRE and moved to Hillary. And I say, if you want

to vote for John, you probably should. If you're in a state where he gets enough support it might give him some leverage in the final outcome.

It's close in many states between Hillary and Obama, and if you DO favor one or the other, your vote could make a difference there too.

[cooolandrew]

59. The main reason is it's not a protest vote it's a no vote Gravel is a protest vote as it counts....

... Only being logical Randi was right on this one. If you vote a write in in the GE that is a protest vote it would count. It's just a pointless excercise in the primary, I can see it being an emotive vote though.

[Vinca]

61. Obama is inspiring younger people like no one I've seen since

the Vietnam war era. He's actually getting them out and interested. There's little difference, policy-wise, between Clinton and Obama, but the enthusiasm generated by Obama is stunning. I'm worried if he isn't the winner, the people he's brought into the process will fade into the woodwork again.

[RoadRage]

66. Because Obama wants to tax companies who outsource US tech jobs, and Hillary does not

Cross Posting this from another thread. Please vote for Obama!

Sun, Feb 03, 2008

Silicon Valley (California): With only days left for Super Tuesday's primaries, Indian-American outsourcing companies are listening hard for any hint of trouble. Managers of Silicon Valley outsourcing firms are clear that only a business friendly candidate will get their votes.


Vice-President GDA Technologies, Ravi Thummarukudy says, "I think the subject of outsourcing is of great relevance for this election and as an entrepreneur and a manager of an outsourcing company I'll be looking carefully at the candidates."


And the candidates so far have not fought any battles over the issue of outsourcing, in part due to other bigger domestic troubles including the Iraq war and a weak economy.


Two leading presidential candidates, John McCain and Hillary Clinton say they are in favor of letting the global economy dictate the flow of jobs and business. Senator Barack O'bama however has suggested taxing companies that ship American jobs overseas.


Silicon Valley based Venture Capitalist Vish Mishra of Clearwater Venture Patrners calls that idea immature.

"Business' purpose is to provide services and products to a consumer that has the right price and is good quality and business will go anywhere where it makes sense to ensure the consumer benefits. You try to put artificial constraints, the consumer is going to lose out, business is going to lose out and jobs will be lost," says Mishra.


Mishra believes Obama's proposals are political rhetoric that will not translate into any major legislative changes.


More than 300,000 Indian-Americans who live and work in the Silicon Valley will be watching all the candidates carefully to see where they stand on outsourcing. In an event of a tight race, the Indian community could help decide which candidate wins California and eventually the presidential nominations.

http://www.ibnlive.com/news/indian-techies-could-decide

[kurth]

67. You're doing the right thing

[pamela]

68. Vote your conscience. nt