If Edwards loses to Dean again in WI, should he drop out?

[stickdog]

Edwards has lost 8 of 15 battles head to head with Dean so far.

If he loses to Dean again in Wisconsin, should he drop out for good?

[Tinoire]

1. Absolutely not! None of the candidates should even be ALLOWED

to drop out once they commit to representing people. The should all remain on the ballots until the last vote is taken with none of these back-room & "here you can have my supporters for your coronation" deals.

[HuskerDem]

32. My version of the same thing you just said is

We should have all the damn primaries on the same day, so that all candidates would have to campaign nationally and two lily white and nonrepresentational states don't effectively choose the nominee for the rest of us.

At the very most it should be broken into 3 blocks with scattered and diverse states represented in each block. Have block one contain California, Iowa, Georgia, and Maine etc,,,,,, then two weeks later block 2 with New York, Kansas, Oregon, Hawaii etc.......

[BootinUp]

41. Heres my idea

The cost to campaign in larger states, (or more states at the same time) is much higher than campaigning in Iowa and NH.

Personally I would like to see us keep a similar pattern as previously in '92 or '00. But regulate election coverage on radio, tv and newspapers. I think we should require the media to limit opinion/pundit coverage and also to limit coverage of polls. They should be required to provide time to the each candidate provided the candidates get sufficient signatures on petitions or something like that.

[boxster]

2. "Edwards has lost 8 of 15 battles..."

Which means that he's won 7 of 15.

8-7 isn't a terribly convincing argument in supporting that Edwards should drop out. At least Edwards won a state.

[stickdog]

8. His home state.

Dean has beaten Edwards quite soundly outside the South.

[boxster]

12. SC is not his home state.

He was born there. His home state is NC.

I was born in SD, but have lived in NE for 15 years. Does that make SD my home state? I think not.

Edit: and what about the other 6 states where Edwards beat Dean? Are those all his home state, too?

[HuskerDem]

33. Hi Boxter!

:hi: I'm in Kearney. Where U?

[boxster]

42. Omaha.

Wow, it can't be easy being a Democrat in Kearney. Or maybe you're "the" Democrat in Kearney!

Hehe.

[HuskerDem]

57. There's a few of us here, it's actually much easier here than say GI

because we have the university, but still......... no picnic.

Ahhhhhhh......... the life of a plains Democrat.

[Edwards4President]

59. Not to mention that Edwards has gotten more than twice as many votes

as Dean - app. 611,000 votes for Edwards to app. 257,000 votes for Dean in the primaries so far.

Dean is hardly in any position to expect Edwards to bow out if Dean gets more votes in Wisconsin.

[AP]

3. Dean is searching for floor of support. Edwards, for ceiling.

Everyone knows Dean. He got more press coverage than all other candidates combined up through January, and he had the most money. Even with that, we're seeing how low he can go after being on top.

Primaries are about the opposite: looking for how high a candidate can go once people start paying attention.

Edwards has a very difficult road ahead of him, but I see no reason why he should get off of it.

[stickdog]

6. It's not just about press coverage. It's about positive vs. negative

press coverage.

Edwards' press coverage has been unrelentingly positive. Dean's has been unrelentingly negative. Yet Dean has still beaten Edwards head to head in 8 out of 15 contests!

http://www.mediatenor.com/US-Election_040209_monthly.pdf

[AP]

11. In that study that people cite about dean's negative press

coverage, it said that his coverage dramatically improved in the last month of the study (which, presumbably, was December).

So it was "negative" when his numbers were going through the roof. When his numbers started to slide in IA, the coverage got better.

I listen mostly to NPR, and I'll tell you, their coverage of Dean was extremely favorable for Dean right up to YEARGH. In fact, they stuck with HARKIN's (!!!) speach at the Dean rally rather than cut to Edwards. Shocking.

In the week before IA, NPR didn't tell anyone what Dean's new problems were and instead acted like he was just that he was tired and ready to move on toward inevitable nomination.

[stickdog]

18. I just linked you a NEW STUDY by a DIFFERENT organization that

shows Dean's negative stories rising sharply in the week BEFORE the Iowa caucus and continuing to get more and more negative as thre month of January continued. Meanwhile, Edwards has the highest percentage of positive vs. negative comments of any candidate over the same period:

http://www.mediatenor.com/US-Election_040209_monthly.pdf

[AP]

34. Dean had more neutral stories than Edwards had total stories.

[AP]

35. And it looks like interest in Dean was at its highest in the week before

Iowa, and only dropped AFTER he lost.

But I'm skimming -- reading quickly -- let me know if I'm wrong.

[stickdog]

36. Look at pages 9 & 11. (nt)

[AP]

52. At the most, this study shows that after Kerry and Edwards did better

than Dean in Iowa, the coverage of Kerry and Dean got better. (And that they laregly ignored Edwards before that, and they still don't cover him in a way that allows people to get to know him . See p 18.)

The graphs that show Dean didn't do well don't distinguiss between pre- and post- Jan 19 coverage, and the one that shows the trend still shows him getting more positive coverage than negative coverage prior to Jan 19. Are you saying that Dean lost Iowa because he didn't get enough positive coverage? See page 11.

Page 9's overall negative is noted as a product of "recent" bad press -- ie, after the caucus, which he did poorly in despite getting more positive than negative coverage in the lead up to it. And page 9 also says Kerry's positive coverage came late in the month -- ie, after he earned it with a win. Incidentally, the information on p. 15 also puts into doubt the claim that the media destroyed Clark . It probably suggests that Clark hurt himself by not going to Iowa, which meant that he missed out on coverage.

I don't see where, from this study, you can make an argument that the media decided to go negative on Dean and positive on Kerry and Edwards prior to Iowa.

And it looks like Iowa drove the tone of the coverage after the 18th.

My theory is that the media promoted Dean for a year, and when it became clear that, even with all their promoting of him, he wasn't going to win (because he was a faulty candidate whom they were promoting solely because he was a faulty candidate) they moved on to plan B, which was to nominate the candidate who would still allow Bush to run on homefield advantage -- to wit, terror and not the economy or middle class opportunity. And to repeat for emphasis, this shift happened AFTER it became clear that the media could do nothing to make Dean a winner.

[stickdog]

65. At most, you post shows a tireless appetite for arguing against the

indiputable.

Because I do not have the same appetite for reiterating the blatantly obvious, I will only invite anyone who gives a damn to simply peruse the study for themselves:

http://www.mediatenor.com/US-Election_040209_monthly.pdf

[Tweed]

39. Edwards has already hit his ceiling

The rest of America can sleep better

[AP]

55. Oh c'mon. He goes up up up in every state he visits. The more

people who hear his message, the better he does.

(And I'm glad to see my "floor"/"ceiling" terminology being adopted, however, I originally used it in this context: Dean is searching for the floor, and we don't know where Edwards's ceiling is.)

[loudnclear]

4. They should all stay in unti the convention. The media can go to hell!

We need as many voices as we can muster. We need to drown out the media where we can.

[mohc]

5. Current pledged delegate count

Edwards: 140
Dean: 91

If Dean beats Edwards by 49 delegates in WI, then maybe he should consider dropping out, but thats not going to happen.

[stickdog]

7. Excluding the South: Dean 88, Edwards 50

Edwards is a regional candidate.

[bornskeptic]

44. I prefer that neither one drop out,

since as long as there is a semblance of a contest the media has to keep covering Democrats. But at least Edwards has a few states in the South where he has a reasonable chance to win. If Edwards drops out, the only place I can see Dean winning is Vermont. Most of Edwards' support would go to Kerry and Kerry would probably wrap up the nomination on Super Tuesday.

[NoPasaran]

9. He's welcome to stay in

Just like everyone else

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RetroLounge]

13. Why should he?

eom

[stickdog]

14. Actually, I made a mistake. Dean has beaten Edwards in 9 of 16 races. (nt)

[AP]

15. Yet Edwards has won more pledged Delegates, right?

And Edwards is higher in the polls now than he was two months ago, while Dean is going down, right?

[stickdog]

16. Edwards has gotten only good press. Edwards hasn't been shot to hell

by Kerry, Gephardt, Lieberman and Sharpton. Edwards benefited in Iowa by having Kucinich team up with him.

Yet Dean has beaten Edwards head to head in 5 of the last 7 races -- losing only in Tennessee and Virginia.

[boxster]

21. Edwards also hasn't attacked the other

candidates, while Dean seems to spend a lot of his time doing exactly that. Perhaps what comes around, goes around.

[stickdog]

23. And who has attacked Edwards? My God, Gephardt & Lieberman

both went kamikaze on Dean and Kerry came close as well.

Even Sharpton's harshest attackes, by far, were against Dean.

[boxster]

27. You missed my point.

My (admittedly simplistic) point was that Edwards hasn't attacked anyone. In response, no one has attacked him. He's running a (mostly) positive campaign.

Dean, however, attacked the other candidates nearly from day one, well before Iowa, well before the media storm pre- and post-Iowa.

He called Congressional Democrats cockroaches. He called at least two of the candidates Republicans and most of the candidates Bush-lite. He spends more time attacking and generalizing than he does speaking about specifics re: the issues.

Then, he whined to the DLC about getting picked on. He has since attacked Kerry and Clark nearly non-stop since Iowa, until this week when he inexplicably rolled over and played dead at the last debate.

So, is it your assertion that Dean should be allowed to attack whomever he wants, but they should leave him alone? That's obviously been his position, but his position is hypocritical. He does that which he pretends to abhor.

Besides, this is politics. If he can't handle the pressure in the primaries, he certainly wouldn't make it through the general election. This is just the warm-up. What Dean has been through in the primaries is going to look like nothing by the time November rolls around.

[stickdog]

40. The media Gored Dean and adored Kerry & Edwards.

http://www.mediatenor.com/US-Election_040209_monthly.pdf

see pages 8, 9 & 11

Dean, however, attacked the other candidates nearly from day one, well before Iowa, well before the media storm pre- and post-Iowa.

This is politics.

He called Congressional Democrats cockroaches.

No, he didn't.

Then, he whined to the DLC about getting picked on.

Why does Kerry want Dean to drop out, again? I mean, if he can't handle the pressure in the primaries, he certainly wouldn't make it through the general election. Right?

[boxster]

46. Semantics.

Ah, so Dean attacking is politics; the others attacking is to be deplored. I got it.

Dean said that he would have the Congressional Democrats "scurrying like cockroaches." If you want to argue semantics, fine. I'll agree that he did not flat-out call them cockroaches. The differentiation is irrelevant. The reference was an attack regardless.

Re: Kerry wanting Dean to drop out. I haven't seen a single reference to anything Kerry has said requesting that Dean drop out. Please provide a link to back your assertion.

[aldian159]

30. I seem to remember JRE attacking Dean

about the whole confederate flag deal.

[spooky3]

31. That's a matter of subjective judgment...

Dean made the opening comments that JRE viewed as objectionable re: Southern men, of which he is one. I thought his response was fair in stating his indignation at what is insulting to many Southerners, and in its content. Recall also that Dean later apologized for his comments, which I thought was admirable.

[boxster]

45. The problem was that Dean misspoke, necessitating a response

from Edwards and the others.

Dean stated that he wanted to represent the Confed flag guys, of course, as opposed to stating that they should be voting Democratic in their best interests. Edwards couldn't really allow that to stand unchallenged. And, as you noted, Dean later apologized.

[spooky3]

25. That's really not so, according to the study of media coverage

you linked elsewhere at DU. If you look at the table on p. 4, you see that Edwards has gotten *less* coverage than have other leading candidates (Dean, Kerry, & Clark) and that much less than half of it has been positive (the majority of coverage of him, and of most other candidates, seems to be "neutral").

[stickdog]

37. Wrong. Look at pages 8 & 9. (nt)

http://www.mediatenor.com/US-Election_040209_monthly.pdf

[spooky3]

43. sorry, you're wrong.

All that appears on p. 9 is a graphical simplification of the same data that are more clearly described in more detail on p. 4.

On p. 8, there is simply another way of looking at PART of the data on p. 4. It is rather misleading in that it simply compares the positive to negative %. That is merely one piece of the puzzle. It leaves out that the majority of coverage of Edwards and others is neutral, and it ignores the differences in overall quantity of coverage.

[stickdog]

48. You are ignoring the most important measures.

Neutral stories are NOT good. If anything, they are bad because people tend to vote AGAINST rather than for in a primary field.

The most important measure is that of positive vs. negative coverage. The second most important measure is the total number of media mentions.

Page 8 clearly shows that in January Kerry & Edwards were the biggest media coverage winners while Dean was the biggest media coverage loser.

[spooky3]

49. Sorry, you are wrong again.

I did not maintain that neutral stories are good. The graphs YOU are citing ignore those "neutral stories" (on pp. 8-9). I am using them to make my argument that page 4 contains the most complete story, because it points out that the vast majority of Edwards' coverage is neutral, not positive.

Once again, you need to look at ALL the data. These are reported on page 4. Page 8 and 9 are pieces of the puzzle, and they present an incomplete and arguably distorted view. If you don't understand pages 8 and 9, go back to page 4 and look more carefully at it.

[stickdog]

50. OK, which Democratic candidate other than Kerry got better coverage than

Edwards and why?

(Hint: this is a trick question.)

[AP]

54. Dean and Kerry both got more "positive" press in January.

judging from green ink on p.4.

And if you look at p 19, you see a very interesting story. They talk about Edwards's policies the least of all the candidates covered, and those are his strenghts -- that's what he needs to get accross to the public. That's why he has Real Solutions. The media is studiously ignoring his hard work trying to establish himself as the guy with the most elaborate and extensive set of policies.

[stickdog]

58. Pure sophistry. Nobody but Kerry got better coverage than Edwards.

It's not even close to being arguable.

Might I suggest that anyone who thinks otherwise for even a minute simply peruse the study for themselves:

http://www.mediatenor.com/US-Election_040209_monthly.pdf

[AP]

63. "Pure sophistry" on the internet = "don't bother me with logic and facts."

[AP]

53. Edwards deserves only good press, and more of it.

That study floating around shows how little he gets.

[boxster]

19. No, you were right the first time. It's 8-7 Dean/Edwards.

IA: Edwards
NH: Dean
AZ: Dean
DE: Edwards
MO: Edwards
NM: Dean
ND: Dean
OK: Edwards
SC: Edwards
MI: Dean
WA: Dean
ME: Dean
TN: Edwards
VA: Edwards
NV: Dean

The number of states won is still 1-0, Edwards/Dean.

[stickdog]

24. DC: Dean

Democrats Abroad: Dean

[boxster]

29. Ok, as soon as elections are decided by the number of states you win,

we'll let you know.

[krkaufman]

17. Should drop out if Kerry beats him by 20+ points yet again...

... regardless of his relative finish to Dean. Let Kucinich go man-to-man against Kerry, and *then* we'd see some real contrast. Maybe some of Dennis' health care and anti-NAFTA thoughts will find their way into Kerry's campaign.

[BootinUp]

22. The problem is

By the time the major contenders are minimized or withdraw, the media will stop covering the race for the most part. This last debate is the last time Kucinich and Sharpton will get major national coverage IMHO.

[krkaufman]

26. Yeah, true. But maybe....

Maybe we should press the Dems to have a "Candidate Reunion Debate"?!? :) And just have them all light into The Chimp's failed policies.

[BootinUp]

28. Sounds like fun :)

[funky_bug]

20. Hell no!

I haven't heard any fat ladies singing... unless you count Rush.

[bigwillq]

38. No one should drop out now until after

Super Tuesday

[gyopsy]

47. Depends on how close it is

If Edwards picks up some delegates, i suppose he still has a shot.

[DjTj]

51. This Edwards supporter voted "of course"

...because it's not going to happen.

We're going to finish far ahead of Dean in WI.

Besides NH, we have beaten Dean everywhere we have seriously campaigned. We've had a week in Wisconsin, and I fully expect us to beat Dean there.

[VOX]

56. No. Edwards is just now finding his audience...

He should hang in at least until March 2.

Even if he can't best Kerry, Edwards would make a terrific VP. He is one of the most promising stars of the Democratic Party.

[MurikanDemocrat]

60. Of course not

[hope42mro]

61. No. A long primary means more media attention, hurts Bush

[DebJ]

62. What a relief to see someone asking why doesn't someone other

than Dean drop out! Thanks stickdog!:-) :D O8) :pals:

[Mattforclark]

64. If he feels like it

Yes.

If he does not feel like it,

No.