The Progressive Dilemma, K,K, or E?

[katieforeman]

Very good analysis. I agree that Edwards is the most electable and more progressive than Kerry.

Here are a few more reasons to vote for Edwards:

John Edwards can do for Democrats what Reagan did for Republicans- articulate a coherent philosophy of government and define a vision that inspires a generation. Remember Reagan had his shining city on a hill. John Edwards has the dream of One America. Kerry and Edwards both have some very good policy ideas, but John Edwards is the only one who puts all of these policies within the context of a unified vision. A generation later we are still dealing with the Reagan true believers. John Edwards will create a generation of true believers in Progressive causes.

John Edwards has all of the hallmarks of a very popular President. His coattails will likely be longer. Because he is so articulate and likeable, John Edwards is the candidate best able to make effective use of the bully pulpit. Furthermore, a popular President has much more leverage with Congress and is more effective at pushing his agenda. Remember how cowed Democrats were when Bush was riding high.

John Edwards is the best candidate to help improve the tone of political debate in this country. He has a future-oriented, positive vision. An Edwards victory would demonstrate that it is possible to win without engaging in the politics of personal destruction.

Kerry's "bring em on" attitude is a mistake. First, it lets Republicans frame the debate. Second, Republican negative attacks are less effective against a positive, future oriented candidate.

If John Edwards is the nominee, the Progressive vision will be at the center of the debate. If Kerry is the nominee, the debate will be framed around divisive issues of the past like Kerry's voting record and Vietnam.

Finally, Edwards generally finishes much better than the polls indicate. Edwards usually has a stronger intensity of support, and this is not usually picked up in the polls. In SC, the las poll showed a statistical deadheat with Kerry. However, Edwards won by a significant margin. In Wisconsin, Edwards was way behind in the last poll, but he almost pulled off an upset.

[AmericanErrorist]

1. It's on the front page of DU

http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/04/02/25_dilemma.html

[katieforeman]

2. Right . I was trying to write a response.

When I clicked on discuss article, it sent me over to the 2204 primary discussion board. When I tried to go to the publishers website, I couldn't find a way to respond. How do you respond to the posted articles?

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks.

[Sugarbleus]

11. I think this article is spot on. I also think I will try the strategy the

author suggests. Kerry was never "my man" but I will vote him if he is last dem standing just to oust bush. I prefer Kucinich or Edwards.

[katieforeman]

13. I think the author suggested voting for Edwards if Edwards might win

because he prefers Edwards to Kerry. If Edwards had absolutely no chance he would vote for Kucinich because he agreed with his policies. He's not planning on voting for Kerry at all in the primaries.

Follow his example and vote for Edwards.

[AmericanErrorist]

3. I was just pointing the article out

to anyone who comes to straight to the DU boards.

[elsiesummers]

4. Interesting article.

Like this first response especially the ideas on Edwards offering (1)coat-tails and (2)future inspired vision.

I think the anti-establishment message of Dean, Kucinich and Edwards will die with a Kerry nomination.

Also - don't agree with the article finish that Edwards would likely be on the Kerry ticket - I think it is unlikely. Kerry wouldn't have suggested that Edwards can't bring NC if he had any intention of picking him for VP. Kerry insiders keep suggesting Evan Bayh and this is where I would place a bet. Richardson has said he won't. Would think Gephardt, Clark and maybe Graham would be possible options, also.

[mistertrickster]

6. Not Bayh, please God no

The Democratic Dan Quayle? The man that still believes WMD's will be found? No thanks.

It ought to be Edwards or Clark . . .

[lefthandedmc]

5. uh... did we forget sharpton?

this is in reference to the article, not the posting. I am extremely insulted that this article acts as if Al Sharpton doesn't exist. Shouldn't it be K, K, E, or S? I would understand a bit more if the article excluded all non-viable candidates, but including Kucinich and excluding Sharpton is just insulting and smacks of a racism.

[katieforeman]

7. You're right. I'm sorry I didn't say something in my posting.

You should go to the author's website and write a letter to the editor.

It's amazing how even some Democrats (myself included) aren't always aware enough of our own implicit biases. This is a point about recism that I've heard Sharpton make well, and I will do my best to keep in mind in the future.

[newyawker99]

12. Hi lefthandedmc!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Adam D]

8. electability

Talk of electibility is pathetic. It completely absolves any importance to the issues and focuses everything down to how nice somebody is.

[katieforeman]

9. I gave reasons in addition to electablity to vote for Edwards.

[KG]

10. kerry and edwards are progressives?

snorf! :crazy: