Edwards Is Very Authentic - He's For Real!! Go John!!

[Radicalman]

Edwards is making poverty - the two Americas - his major theme on his America One web site. Political insiders have been saying that this is a big mistake because poor people don't vote compared to the middle classes. But the focus on the poor is evidently what he personally wants to do. Edwards himself worked along side his dad in a textile mill and then put himself thorough college. He comes from a relatively poor family. I just hope he ties in his concern for the working classes with the disappearance of the middle classes.

What I particularly like is that he is rated 0% by the Christian Coalition on his "pro-family" voting record - a gang of pathetic kooks if there ever was one.

I also like his apology for initially supporting the Iraq misadventure and his calling for all troops to be re-deployed from Iraq within a year.

[PearliePoo2]

1. I too believe he's real

As more and more people every day get their pink slips, there will be an increasing number of poor.
We are fast becoming a nation of two classes......the rich/wealthy and the slave workers.
Outsourcing is a huge factor here. Kerry was so right on when he said we need to reward companies by giving them tax breaks to keep their manufacturing and production HERE stateside.
Every day we read about another large company slashing jobs. Gawd, I hope it's not too late for this country. January can't come fast enough for me. Words can't express how I hate the bastards.

[journalist3072]

2. Love John Edwards to pieces, but I have one major problem with him

I love John Edwards to pieces. I love what he is doing focusing on poverty. But I have one major problem with him.

During the 2004 presidential primary season, D.C. held the first-in-the-nation (non-binding) presidential primary.

Our city wanted to focus on the fact that we do not have representation in the Congress, and our local leaders thought the best way to do that, would be to have the first-in-the-nation primary.

Some of the Democrats running for President apparently felt like tradition was more important that voting rights for people in D.C.

And some of them, including John Edwards , requested that their names be removed from our ballots here. There were five candidates who asked to have their name removed from the ballot: Joe Lieberman, John Edwards, John Kerry, Richard Gephardt and Wes Clark.

I take the issue of D.C. voting rights very seriously, and I cannot in good conscience support someone who does not understand that. I cannot support someone who feels that tradition is more important than voting rights for D.C.

[IndyOp]

3. Since he can't change the past, what could he do now?

I am trying to think in fair-minded ways about all of the potential candidates and am trying to ask myself this question.

I am disappointed that John voted for IWR. I am pleased that he has admitted this was a mistake and that his current plan includes drawing down tens of thousands of troops immediately and then removing the rest within 8 months.

What could he do now re: voting rights?

[journalist3072]

4. There are several things I would like to see him do, re: DC voting rights

- Admit it was a mistake to ask the DC Board of Elections and Ethics to remove his name from the ballot. Admit that he was wrong to put tradition ahead of DC voting rights.

- Acknowledge that DC residents pay federal taxes just like everyone else, and that we are being taxed without representation.

- Encourage the House of Representations to pass a CLEAN bill for D.C. voting rights, that does not include an extra seat for Utah. My main problem wtih the DC voting rights bill that got stalled in the House, is that it would create an extre seat for Utah. It's almost as if the Republicans are saying that they will go along with a seat for DC (a seat that would obviously belong to a Democrat), only if Utah gets an extra seat (mostly like going to a Republican).

- Encourage the Senate to then begin to create legislation that would give DC representation in the Senate as well.

- Pledge that if these goals are met, he would sign the legislation as President.

Like you, I've been asking myself this about other candidates as well. For example, as much as I adore Barack Obama and find him awe-inspiring, I still cannot move past his vote (within the Senate Foreign Relations Committee) to send Condi Rice's nomination to the full floor of the Senate. He voted to confirm her. I will be weighing that VERY heavily if Barack Obama decides to run. I'm not sure I can support him, because I thought he was wrong to vote to confirm Condi.

[IndyOp]

11. I read somewhere that when seats have been added to Congress in past

they have almost always been added in such a way that one would be a Dem seat and one a Repub seat - for a foreseeable future. Time can change that -- the seat in Utah they expect to be Repub could turn Dem in a few election cycles (maybe less). I don't see adding a seat in Utah as a deal-breaker - D.C. needs representation.

:shrug:

[The Count]

8. he didn't just "vote" for IWR - he co=sponsored it. With Joementum

That's real indeed.

[still_one]

5. appologies are empty to the dead in Iraq

on the other hand those who saw the fraud of the IWR, and the unconstitutional nature of it,and voted against it have NOTHING to appologize for

[WiseButAngrySara]

15. Very well stated! The IWR was UNCONSTITUTIONAL! Why

is nothing ever said about this? Congressmen/women take an oath to uphold the constitution, and those that signed the IWR basically violated their oath!

[hamerfan]

6. K & R!

"Two Americas". That is what it comes down to, people. And sorry to say, it is getting worse every week. It needs to be reversed, and Edwards has as good a chance as anyone to make it happen. Let's quit eating our own vis a vis "single-issue politics" and get behind John Edwards. He CAN win this!
dumpbush

[Seabiscuit]

7. Edwards and Clarke are the only 2 right now who make sense to me.

Unless, of course, Al Gore has a change of heart and declares his candidacy. Then I'd love Gore to choose Edwards/Clarke as his running mate and the other in a high position in his cabinet.

[rman]

9. Poverty is relevant to foreign policy as much

as it is to domestic policy.

How about making "the two worlds" his major theme?

Surely most Americans would not support exploitation of less privileged parts of the world for their own enrichment (if they'd know about it) - surely America is not a nation of robbers.

[IndyOp]

12. "Two worlds" - wow. I like that theme a whole lot - wouldn't it mean

that he would appear (to many internationally "unconscious" US citizens) to be advocating for the world instead of the US? I am sorry to say it but I think we can count on the self-absorption and self-centeredness of the US population. I would love to see an elected President work the theme of "Two Worlds" to educate our citizenry, but I am not sure that theme would win the election.

[rman]

13. Fair enough

I to am not so sure that would win the election.
But along the lines of what Kucinich is doing, running for president on a highly controversial yet reality-based platform can serve the purpose of educating people even if it doesn't win the election.
Then again, one doesn't have to wait for election time in order to educate people.

[AuntiBush]

10. I Agree! Run John!

He'll get my vote -- you can count on that.

[WiseButAngrySara]

14. I've always been struck by his sincereity and that of (I hate to

use the phrase "and his wife" but I have to, cause I'm blanking on it!....)

Elizabeth! Just came to me. I read all of her posts here at DU. I could support Edwards. More than Hillary or O'Bama... (I'd still prefer Gore, Kerry or Kucinich though.)

[depakid]

16. He'd seem a lot more authentic

If at almost the same time as he started his "poverty tour," he hadn't gone to work as a high priced consultant on Wall Street at Fortress Investment Group (which primarily deals with hedge funds).

http://www.fortressinv.com/

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/oct2005/nf20051013_3314_db016.htm

There's also that little matter of his vote for the bankruptcy Bill in when it came around in 2001.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/0316-03.htm

My recollection is that he now claims that "was a mistake," but seeing as how his wife used to practice bankruptcy law, I don't know how much of a mistake that could have been.

I'll cut him some slack for "making a mistake" by voting for the war- though I expect others may be less generous on that point. After all, it would have taken a LOT of guts to go against the flow, especially considering that he hails for North Carolina.

The way I see it- he's just another opportunistic politician.

[G_j]

17. in honesty, as a NC voter it is hard to forgive

the way he completely ignored all of us peace activists leading up to the war.
ignored our letters, phone calls, office visits..
He dissed us big time. It was very frustrating.

[TahitiNut]

18. I see nothing wrong with LIKING hiim while still not supporting his candidacy.

I like both John and Elizabeth ... and regard the whole family as entirely likable and people I'd enjoy spending time with. At the same time, I find his votes on both the IWR and Bankrupcy Deform as appalling. I look to people who show far broader perspectives, a duty-based ethical system, and the courage to make the unpopular vote - particularly one which history shows was 'right'. This is why I support Kucinich. I don't give a rat's ass whether he'd win a Mr. Universe title or has the superficials People Magazine adores. Kucinich has been unflaggingly on the side of a mainstream liberal position - and has never become a Quisling collaborator.