fairfaxvadem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-01-03 07:25 PM
Original message |
John Edwards on C-Span,..saw him in June... |
|
at a fundraiser.
I really like him. Just wish it was his time and I'm not sure it is. I'm not on any particular bandwagon but I admire Edwards' public statements at these events on Bush. I've found him to be a bit more "plain spoken" about how Bush will protect his wealthy friend and benefactors come hell or high water and people better wake the heck up about that.
Edwards would do a good job. Doubt he'll get the chance though and that'll be a shame, I think.
His message is pretty positive.
|
Catshrink
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-01-03 07:27 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Been listening... I like him |
|
And, hate to say it, but he's damn good looking, too.
I like his pro-union message, too. My brother has insurance because of a union, etc. Nice touch.
|
corarose
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-01-03 07:30 PM
Response to Original message |
2. I like Edwards and he is very good looking |
|
I think that he should be picked as the VP because the media has picked their two choices for President.
|
AP
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-01-03 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
3. Do we do everything the media tells us to do? |
|
Since I have money in the bank, I obviously don't do everything the media tells me.
|
fairfaxvadem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-01-03 07:37 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
4. he's just as good looking in person... |
|
although I'm glad he got a haircut!!
Honestly though, he is just like that in person and has a lot of charisma. His two little kids are beyond adorable, and I hate to say it, but the media would be having a "Caroline and John-John" moment with those two. Think they are 3 and 5 or thereabouts.
Anyhow, I was glad to see him in person. I would feel very at ease with Edwards in the WH. He is as bright and competent as they come, I think.
|
Bombtrack
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-01-03 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
5. the corporate media has a clear anti-Edwards agenda |
|
it's obvious that the GOP has been doing everything to stifle his campaign. Look at the huge propaganda memo they released when he anounced(compared with previous anouncees Kerry and Dean that were gleefully welcomed).
Consider the billboards they put up through a GOP front group or the disruptors from those groups at his events
Compare Edwards surprise fundraising victory in the first quarter( completley ignored) to Dean's fundraising victory in the second quarter(complete media saturation).
When have you EVER heard in the media, the fact that he is within the margin of error for first place in South Carolina, up from 5 percent a month before, and that he doubled his numbers in both NH and IO, while every other candidate besides Dean went down.
he can get third in New Hampshire, and fourth in Iowa, and thats all he needs
but the media would have you believe that because he isn't going to beat 2 people from bordering states, shared media markets, for a combined 3 decades - that he's somehow floundering
it's bullshit and its obvious
They want Dean, they'll settle for Kerry, they're doing whatever it takes to stifle their true threat
|
uptohere
(603 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-01-03 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
6. game, set and match to you Bombtrack |
|
Edwards is the golden child and they know it. They don't even want him on the ticket as VP for the harm it makes for them (any takers as to why Clark, VP candidate du jour, came about ?).
|
Bombtrack
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-01-03 08:37 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
8. he isn't a friggin vp candidate, please stop throwing that around |
|
Edwards is the best person there is to take on George W Bush, period.
He can't win North Carolina, Arkansas, Tennesee, Georgia, or even Florida FOR a candidate that wouldn't come close on their own merrit
That includes the only other candidates who have a shot at the nom, Kerry and especially Dean
he won't be veep. Those candidates will be crushed in all of dixie, and particularly in the rural south no matter who is there veep
Now Kerry as Edwards veep makes sense, although it may be unlikely
he needs to be the one to contrast with Bush and to debate him.
|
uptohere
(603 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-01-03 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
11. you're preaching to the choir |
|
I'm all over Edwards for the top spot but you can't deny that there are many who keep pushing for him in the two spot and its undeniable that he would be an excellent choice.
He may not be able to garner the Democratic Leadership's approval to get the top spot, thats the real worry. I have no doubt that he'll mow the others down once the time is ripe but the party does control the show.
With Dean's apparant meltdown this would be an excellent time for Mr Edwards to spend a few of those bucks capitalizing on that. But he knows his game plan.
|
Bombtrack
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-01-03 09:11 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
17. he'd be a horrible choice, did you even read my post? |
poskonig
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-01-03 08:31 PM
Response to Original message |
7. Uh, Edwards voted to send "regular people" to die in Iraq. |
|
That's why he is sucking, not because of a media conspiracy. He is certainly buying enough media time.
|
Bombtrack
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-01-03 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
9. So why is Graham also "sucking"? |
|
Graham would be being propped up by the right through exposure and donations just as much as Dean, if Graham was unelectable like Dean
if you read my whole post, you'd see that Edwards isn't even close to bottom tier. He's doing what he needs to in the states he needs.
The mass media is ignoring South Carolina and Oklahoma polls for a reason.
Rove and half of the weekly standard and national review staff have indicated the fact that Dean is there dream candidate.
but THAT's the conspiracy right? mass reverse psychology because they are so afraid of going against a candidate who's disagreed with by 3 thirds of america on every major issue, being outspent 4-1, while trying to not lose 10 senate seats held by candidates who avoid him?
|
AP
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-01-03 08:49 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
10. Another thing they ignore... |
|
Edwards has outraised all other canidates combined in several key states (like TX and SC). In TX he raised twice as much as all others combined.
|
poskonig
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-01-03 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
12. Graham wants to invade Syria and Iran. |
|
He voted against the resolution because it didn't give Bush enough power.
Given the way the primaries are piled on top of each other this year, if one doesn't come in first or second NH and Iowa, they're doomed. One could try to make a stand in Arizona or SC, but competing against 50-80 million dollars of free airtime for two weeks is going to be extremely difficult for the NH & Iowa losers.
|
Bombtrack
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-01-03 09:03 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
14. the new primary schedule DEcreases IO and NH signifigance |
|
that's the whole reason for the change, other states didn't get a fair shake.
|
poskonig
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-01-03 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
15. If other candidates believe that, the better for Dean. |
|
Edited on Mon Sep-01-03 09:08 PM by poskonig
But they don't. Why?
Most of the primaries were moved not back, but up. And there is still two weeks of free airtime between NH & Iowa and the first Feb primary.
|
SharonAnn
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-01-03 09:31 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
18. BTW, It's IA for Iowa, not IO |
Adjoran
(650 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-01-03 08:58 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
|
Graham did vote against the Iraq resolution. I think I included him with those who voted for it, on another thread. My apologies for that.
Nobody is "unelectable" 15 months before the election. Bush I was at 90% approval ratings back in '91, but by Election Day '92 he had become "unelectable!"
Okay, Sharpton is the exception that proves the rule.
|
Bombtrack
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-01-03 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
16. least electable, of the real contenders for the nom |
|
He would need a second recession, a huge tet offensive-like occurance in Iraq, no positive international developments(Israel, North Korea, Iran collapsing etc) and or for Rove to completely go retarded to have a chance at 270 electoral votes
going into super tuesday(march 2) I believe it'll be between Dean, Kerry, Gephardt, and Edwards. Maybe not even Gephardt. Of those Gephardt and Dean are the least electable by a wide wide margin
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri May 10th 2024, 02:46 AM
Response to Original message |