Why Edwards is doing so badly in the polls

[quinnox]

I can hear the objections now from Edwards fans about Iowa, but John Edwards has been basically living in Iowa for 4 years and all he can manage is a tie for second place behind Hillary. That is not something to brag about. Edwards should be cleaning up in Iowa if he had any real appeal.

Regardless, Edwards is doing horrendous in the rest of the various states polling.

And part of the reason is his poor performance as a vice presidential candidate in 2004.

He was demolished by Cheney in the debate, and didn't help Kerry at all, even losing his home state of North Carolina.

Edwards was a failure as a vice presidential candidate so people think why should they give him a chance for the big chair?

Also, Edwards is increasingly coming off as an angry, self-righteous man who spouts platitudes about purity as if he was some crazy cult leader leading people to a promised land.

Anger is a turn off to voters, Edwards has learned nothing from Dean in 2004.

What happened to the optimistic Edwards who railed against the republicans? Now all we hear from Edwards is how evil Hillary Clinton is instead of what positive vision Edwards has for the country.

Edwards is copying Dean's campaign more and more, and he will have the same result as Dean.

[SaveElmer]

1. He has drunk the netroots koolaid...

Playing to a small minority of the liberal base...overestimating their influence...

He needs to stop listening to Joe Trippi...

[quinnox]

7. Trippi is poison

He needs to be fired, he is doing to Edwards what he did to Dean.

[Debi]

13. Oh man, on that we agree 100%

Firing Trippi might get Edwards a gold star as well as the nomination!

[venable]

96. Joe Trippi is a true progressive and an honest political mind

and if our country had more people like him, and our party more like him, we would be in a better place.

The emergence of a stronger, more straight-on John Edwards coincides with Trippi's ascendancy within the campaign.

[PresidentObama]

26. I'll take Joe Trippi over Terry McAwful or James Carville n/t

[Nederland]

28. Why?

You prefer losers to winners?

[Debi]

37. Sure, right up until you get his bill for tanking your candidate

But don't worry, he'll just do an interview after he gets fired making himself out to be a victim and then go get a cush job with MSNBC until 2012 :eyes: He's a POS and Edwards should dump him now.

[venable]

97. he makes very little by consultant's standards, and has accepted this because he believes

in Edwards.

As I understand it, he has also put the campaign on a path of greater fiscal responsibility.

You all complaining about him don't know what you're talking about, you're just spouting old rumors from the end of 04.

[Debi]

124. You mean he makes very little this cycle as compared to what he took from Dean in 2004?

What I know about 2004 isn't rumor, we were here when orange hats and fleece pull-overs and coffee mugs were being handed out instead of funding for precinct captain trainings (like the Kerry campaign did...and very well). I didn't need a damn t-shirt I needed HELP. But Trippi refused to help (he refused to come to Iowa fearing that his position in the campaign would diminish - that's not rumor he's stated that himself). Dean had no clue how much $$ Trippi spent on crap rather than staff and training. Who got the return on Trippi's free-spending ways? Not Howard Dean, but Joe Trippi.

Trippi originally moved into Edwards campaign away from the consulting job. Fine and dandy, he'd keep his paws off of Edwards' money. However, in August Edwards consultant resigned (and nobody heard about it until September - a month later) who's doing the consulting now? You got it, Joe Trippi.

He's a virus and he's an arrogant greedy jerk. I feel sorry for John Edwards, he'd be just fine w/out Joe Trippi.

[venable]

128. i respectfully disagree about what's happening now

what happened in 04 is something you clearly know something about, so I defer to you on that.

but you have it exactly backwards relative to this cycle, and the departed consultant and Trippi and money. I am pretty confident in this assertion.

(btw, I'm glad you like Edwards, if I read that right).

[NGinpa]

117. More needs to be said about this, IMO??

I am on the side of the liberal netroots, and that is why I read this blog and KOS. However, it has occurred to me that the few thousand folks on these blogs have an overestimation of their national power and effect, as if each of their votes counts for 1000 times more than anyone else's. Maybe the reason why so little changes in the direction advocated on these blogs is that those extreme netroot beliefs are just a small minority belief in the big picture of things. I think that possibility must be brought up more around these parts, and an attempt to extend a compromised policy to a much larger sphere become the objective??

[Basileus Basileon]

2. Edwards is only one solid debate performance away from leading Iowa.

It's a virtual tie. I agree that Edwards will likely not win the nomination, but this seems more a thinly-veiled attempt to bash Edwards than it does an honest explanation for his lack of success.

Also, it seems disingenuous to bemoan the loss of the charming, optimistic gentleman Edwards only several lines after you complain that the charming, optimistic gentleman Edwards was ineffective at campaigning and dewbating.

[saracat]

3. And this kind of a negative baiting post is a turn off. Edwards must really

be a threat for someone to bother posting this way.

[Basileus Basileon]

6. You don't have to be a threat to piss people off. nt

[Hieronymus]

69. I can't believe fellow Democrats are posting such nasty comments

about Edwards, who is a threat to Hillary. Hillary is falling and Edwards is rising.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

4. Yum

:popcorn:

[avrdream]

91. Move over on the couch DSB.

:beer: :popcorn:

[asdjrocky]

5. He's not rally doing badly,

Check CBS/NYT polls.

[Debi]

14. That's a great poll if you're Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or John Edwards

If you're anyone else - or if the reader of the poll is an Iowan who knows something about how the caucuses operate - that poll is garbage.

[sam sarrha]

8. he is getting shit on badly by the media..they dont cover him at all and the belittle him i he is

mentioned

[Clark2008]

9. I just hope Iowa doesn't give him to the rest of the country.

I really don't like any of the candidates running this year, but I like Edwards the least.

He comes across as a big phony to me.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

10. I Used To Like Him Until He Started To Beat Up Hillary Clinton

Where was the killer instinct when he debated Darth Cheney?

[FrenchieCat]

23. Edwards tends to do things that are advantageous to himself politically.....

which is why he didn't stand up against the IWR, but stood up for it....because that was the popular thing to do at the time in reference to his presidential aspirations.

Edwards was weak in his debate with Cheney because he didn't want to alienate the general voters during that general election by attacking not knowing how Cheney would react.

Now, Edwards is being a mad dog when it comes to Democrats and their spines because he knows that many democratic voters (and that is now his audience) want Democrats with spine. In other words, he'll be what he needs to be when he needs to be it if it will help him get where he wants to go.

Problem is that his leadership instincts don't understand that to be a leader, one must often take chances that may not benefit you personally. And example of this is when he decided to take public financing; In making that decision, the only thing important to John Edwards was to remain viable for the time being......it doesn't matter so much to him now that if he is chosen as the nominee, the Democratic party will have to make-do with limited funding therefore handicapping us greatly.

If Edwards was the leader that he claimed, and had faith in himself in being what he speaks of; the "most Electable" Democrat in the Democratic race, he would have hung tough on the funding issue (as he had said he would earlier in the year) knowing that Iowa would catapuled him in the primary towards the nomination and contributions....
instead, Edwards decided not to take this calculated risk for himself at this time......but chose rather to allow the Democrats as a whole to take that risk later on.

[IA_Seth]

33. Oh Frenchie...

Thank you for posting my thoughts so often!

[surfermaw]

90. Could it be republicans are helping some with cash

to stop Hill, with the vote, could be...someone need to do a lots of searching.

[sundancekid]

125. how do I thank thee??? let me count the ways ... perfect summary and perfect tone pitch

[zalinda]

115. He had to play by the rules of the Kerry campaign

I can't beat him up for that. If he goes down without a fight this time, it's his own fault.

zalinda

[Renew Deal]

118. Tell me about it.

There are 2 or 3 I would have supported unequivocally and none of them ran. :banghead:

[Debi]

11. Maybe in the polls, but I don't think so on the ground

I see more solid Edwards support that I do any other candidate. Sure, I see a lot of cheerleader support and crowds at events. But for Edwards I see 'ones', those who will be going to caucus for him on January 3rd. That's more important than any poll.

[asdjrocky]

17. I personally know more than 10 people going to the caucus

[Debi]

19. Okay.....

I don't understand the point you're trying to make.

[asdjrocky]

27. Sorry, meant to say....

And they are all Edwards supporters.

[Debi]

36. Oooohh, yes, I know several as well and I don't see them changing their support

At the JJ Dinner Saturday night there were many more Edwards supporters there (that actually have committed to the Senator) than were Clinton or Obama supporters. I'm not saying that the folks who went in with tickets from the Clinton campaign or the Obama campaign don't like those two candidates, I'm just saying that the Edwards supporters were with him BEFORE he paid their way into the event and gave them new t-shirts. I think the 'polls' are wrong on this.

[IA_Seth]

48. The JJ Dinner...

I didn't get to go, but I was offered tickets through my employer's PAC, one of the "Big 3"'s campaigns (guess who?), and one of the bottom-tier candidates' campaign...

It seems like there may have been a lot of "bussed in" support!

In my area (in my precinct anyway) I believe Clinton will take it, Edwards 2nd, with third being either Obama/Biden. I could be wrong but that is how I am calling it at this point! There may be less than 50 days remaining, but a lot can still happen in that time, ala Kerry 2004...

Have you decided yet?

[Debi]

123. Me? heck no, and I CAN'T!

Debi, Jr. is Biden to the Core (I have to thank him for the tickets :P) But neither Mr. Debi nor I can make up our minds.

There are a couple I know I won't caucus for, but the others are all in the running. AND it seems each debate or big event changes my opinion of some of the candidates.

Seth, I gotta tell you that I was not impressed that the Clinton campaign rented out the parking garage for only the campaign's supporters to use. You know our situation, I'm sure many are in the same boat and to be turned away b/c of that would probably piss a few folks off. However, she did a nice small event in Waterloo Sunday (and took questions from the crowd AND mingled w/the crowd afterwords)which somewhat dilutes the 'planned to perfection' reputation she keeps getting.

I am clueless in my precinct, with caucus training this weekend I hope to get a better feel for the county, but right now I'd say it's a tie w/five candidates battling for the top three. What craziness.

[IA_Seth]

126. Oh wow...

I hadn't heard about the parking garage situation. That is pretty shady and you would think they would make exceptions for those with extenuating circumstances.. what a horrible PR move! I hope you ended up finding something that worked for you.

Biden is one of my top 2, and he is looking better and better to me. I am hoping the next few debates/events will help me make up my mind one way or another. I can see him doing a lot better than the polls are putting him right now, but he is probably just one f-up away from being stuck near the bottom, so who knows.

Every candidate has strong/weak points, it's trying to figure out which weaknesses I can overlook and which strengths mean more in the GE. Ugh!

[Debi]

127. GE - you're right

You know where I stood four years ago and how I felt about the GE four years ago (OMG has it been that long???!!)

I don't want any mistakes from August to November ( I know, lots to ask of our nominee, huh?!)

Hey, cyberswede needs help - someone is bashing the Iowa Caucuses....again :eyes:

[alteredstate]

12. He's doing extremely well in Iowa. n/t

[brentspeak]

15. I think the public is turning away from People Magazine candidates like Hillary

Her triangulating non-answers, her support of Indian outsourcing firms, and her Wal-Mart past are finally getting the attention of the public.

[FrenchieCat]

58. People Magazine candidate is a label that I would be quite careful with.....

"In 2000, People magazine named Edwards the Sexiest Politician Alive"

John & Elizabeth Edwards Open Up About Cancer and Family
http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20016130,00.html

John Mayer Plays Political Strategist to John Edwards
http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20038973,00.html

Can John Edwards convince America that he's got what it takes to crush the red state/blue state divide? By Joe Hagan
http://www.mensvogue.com/business/politics/feature/articles/2007/06/john_edwards


ABC Gushes Over ‘Very Personal’ Photos of John Edwards's Wedding Renewal
despite the fact that the Edwards campaign provided them to both People magazine and ABC News. And, of course, Sawyer couldn’t resist mentioning the story, highly touted in the media, that the couple spends their wedding anniversaries at Wendy’s. The GMA host enthused, "And we should say, however, they did also have their ritual anniversary Wendy's burger." This observation came only nine days after the last story on the Edwards’s trip to Wendy’s:
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-whitlock/2007/08/09/abc-gushes-over-very-personal-photos-john-edwards-wedding-renewal

[PVnRT]

16. Dean was a victim of media assassination, but nice try

Hillary supporters are getting more and more scared.

[sandnsea]

18. He's right about the Clintons

It's just that his platform isn't different enough from hers for people to understand what his problem is with them.

[ecstatic]

20. That's EXACTLY it! I really liked Edwards

before the 2004 fiasco. Now my opinion of him is more on the negative side. I'd probably be banned if I said exactly what I thought of him now.

[brentspeak]

24. Let me guess: it's his "accent", right?

That little bit of flamebait you posted last night sort of gave yourself away.

[ecstatic]

29. That's just a minor thing

It's his hypocrisy that's pissing me off.

[brentspeak]

31. Oh, yeah, his..."hypocrisy"...

That was sure well-explained and well-detailed... :eyes:

[quinnox]

25. I know the feeling

Edwards is disgusting me more every day.

[brentspeak]

30. Are you a member of Hillary's campaign, or her Indian outsourcing donors' PR firms?

The Wal-Mart PR firm, maybe?

[quinnox]

32. lol, give me a break

No, but I wish I was a part of Hillary's circle! I'm just a normal joe out here like the rest of us.

[brentspeak]

40. LOL

Does the following sound like something a "normal Joe" would be caught dead saying?

She (Clinton) is so smart and the republicans don't like her for that, and she has the steel necessary to slug it out with the republicans in the trenches.

Hillary is also charming and she cares about the common man. She has so many sparkling qualities. It is very easy to adore Hillary, and many Democrats do. And her lovely husband ain't bad either!

Hillary Clinton - a shining light for America!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3173505&mesg_id=3173505

[Inspired]

114. Oh, that was hard to read!

Sparkling? Charming? Her lovely husband? (Don't get me started on that one!) Adore?

[feminazi]

38. me, too

I really liked him at the beginning of the campaign, but he's turned me off. I can't really put my finger on why.

[Renew Deal]

120. Is it worse than "he's an asshole" or "he's the devil"

Because that's the kind of shit getting posted these days.

[LisaM]

21. Cheney did not demolish Edwards in the 2004 VP debates

Cheney told a pack of lies as usual, and no one reported on them. Moreover, it was hardly in the nature of a debate. Cheney got to sit there and look creepy and scary and spew nonsense (like he did in the 2000 VP debates), and climb on his high horse about his daughter, and no one made a peep outside of progressive forums. Why no one ever deconstructs his loony ravings is beyond me.

[jenmito]

35. He took sips of water every 5 seconds, kept darting his tongue out, and just

looked very uncomfortable.

[XemaSab]

64. Is this Cheney or Edwards?

:rofl:

[venable]

98. that's your critique? can we do a little better analysis than that?

[FrenchieCat]

41. Edwards' job was to deconstruct Cheney during those debates, and he failed in his argument......

and it has to be noted that a real leader doesn't wait for others to do his/her job, i.e., the press. Since Edwards KNEW that he had met Cheney before, when Cheney said he hadn't met Edwards, Edwards should have called him on it.....but he didn't. If Edwards had challenged Cheney on that, Edwards could have masterfully linked that untruth to many other Cheney untruths and cemented Cheney's lying demeanor for the whole world to see.....but instead, Edwards basically took a pass (transcript below).....until the next day; a day too late a la "johnny come lately" mode. :eyes:

In fact, I just re-read the transcript to the debate, and it is my opinion that John Edwards was ineffectual against Cheney in that Debate...no matter how much we, Democrats, wanted to win that one.

Even when Gwen Ifill asked that each talk about themselves and not the presidential candidates, John Edwards was unable to do this......and was called on for bringing up John Kerry's name.

Edwards style just didn't work against Pit Bull Cheney.

Here....read it!
http://www.debates.org/pages/trans2004b.html

CHENEY: And Senator, frankly, you have a record in the Senate that's not very distinguished. You've missed 33 out of 36 meetings in the Judiciary Committee, almost 70 percent of the meetings of the Intelligence Committee.

You've missed a lot of key votes: on tax policy, on energy, on Medicare reform.
Your hometown newspaper has taken to calling you "Senator Gone." You've got one of the worst attendance records in the United States Senate.

Now, in my capacity as vice president, I am the president of Senate, the presiding officer. I'm up in the Senate most Tuesdays when they're in session.

The first time I ever met you was when you walked on the stage tonight.

<>
EDWARDS' (response): That was a complete distortion of my record. I know that won't come as a shock.
The vice president, I'm surprised to hear him talk about records. When he was one of 435 members of the United States House, he was one of 10 to vote against Head Start, one of four to vote against banning plastic weapons that can pass through metal detectors.

He voted against the Department of Education. He voted against funding for Meals on Wheels for seniors. He voted against a holiday for Martin Luther King. He voted against a resolution calling for the release of Nelson Mandela in South Africa.

It's amazing to hear him criticize either my record or John Kerry's.

IFILL: Thirty seconds.

CHENEY: Oh, I think his record speaks for itself. And frankly, it's not very distinguished.
IFILL: In that case, we'll move on to domestic matters. And this question, I believe, goes to Senator -- to Vice President Cheney.
--------------

Point is that Edwards' response didn't address Cheney's attack.....at all. And in reading the entire debate, Edwards did this quite a bit; not address the attacks directly made against him and John Kerry.

[Ninga]

44. Money can't buy the experience Edwards has gained and he has shown, that he does not

repeat mistakes.

When he has fallen, he picks himself up, and moves on.

He is a master at taking life's lessons, mistakes, missteps and learning the good from the bad.

It is that rare quality that makes him shine and makes him strong and makes him focused.

[FrenchieCat]

51. Bottomline is that Edwards seems to consistently make the mistake before

seeing that there was a mistake and then correcting it.

As a trial attorney, Edwards had the experience needed, if no other, to get to Cheney's credibility much more effectively than he did during that debate. He was unable to, and there was only one debate.

Most times, folks don't get chance after chance to get it right. Edwards is no exception.

This "rare" quality you speak of is no quality at all, rather it is a detriment.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

56. My Mom's Lawyer And Family Friend

She belongs to the "Inner Circle Of Advocates" which is a peer selected group of the one hundred best trial lawyers in America, the same group John Edwards belonged to... I couldn't see her in a million years performing so meekly against Darth Cheney... I just think Darth Cheney's dark presence literally intimidated him... It reminds me of the scene that opens the first Godfather movie where the man asks the Godfather to avenge his daughter's rape and the Godfather rebukes him for asking such a favor during his daughter's wedding... Cheney reminded me of The Godfather and John Edwards reminded me of the cowering supplicant...

And again, when he debated Hillary Clinton he tried to rip her heart out...

[Ninga]

62. Please don't go there. Your bravado is insulting to the many good people who have

thrown their hats into the political ring and found it to be a vicious fight.

What kind of person so viciously insults a man who in of the most conservative states, was elected to the Senate.

If in your eyes Edwards failed in the debate with Cheney.....then he failed. But to assert that some women of some obscure background who you don't identify as having any political experience, would on the national stage on national tv would do better.....is the most overwrought blustering I have ever heard.





T

[DemocratSinceBirth]

63. IMHO, Cheney Physically Intimidated Him...

There is nothing that will disabuse me of that notion...He was like a lamb before a lion...

[Ninga]

65. And if you are right? That means Edwards is a no-good=coward who withered before the

the entire country.

If you believe this......so be it.....but I bet Edwards has beat up on himself more than you ever could.

If you are brave, and you have been beat up, you get up off the floor and vow to never, ever let that happen again.....don't you???


You have a right to hold on to the negative feeling you have about that debate, and the miserable performance you believe you witnessed.


So don't move on, continue to live in the past, be bitter and negative and most of all vengeful......because we all know how useful and positive it is to be vengeful.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

70. I Wouldn't Go That Far

Cheney physically intimidated him...I'm not saying he's a coward...IMHO, he was just overly deferential...

[Ninga]

74. Please read what you posted in #56.

[XemaSab]

66. But if Darth Cheney made him go slinking back to his sky kennel

with his tail between his legs, how the hell is he going to deal with people like Pinochet, or Idi Amin, or other crazy-ass mofos? :shrug:

[Ninga]

67. Edwards would win hands down in a rematch. Watch the debate tomorrow night and you will see

a clinic on how to "handle" and "deal" with adversaries.

but you say....but, but, but,

[DemocratSinceBirth]

73. You Are Reinforcing My Original Point

If he can "beat up" Hillary Clinton why couldn't he "beat up" Darth Cheney...

[Ninga]

75. He's older,more seasoned, has more experience, has learned, won't make the same mistakes.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

71. Those Cats Are Dead

And you are inferring more from that performance than I am willing to infer...

My point is that he was a lamb when debating Darth Cheney and a lion when debating Hillary Clinton...


That's all...

[XemaSab]

72. But there's always new, evil cats around...

:P

[Ninga]

76. I'm terribly sorry your post #56 is vicious. Are you saying he "threw" the Cheney debate Oh my.

I hope that's not what you are inferring with your lamb and lion analogy.

What are you inferring by the way?????

[DemocratSinceBirth]

79. I Imply... You Infer...

I have been reserved in my criticism of Edwards... All I have said in this thread is that I am beyond pissed that he was deferential to Darth Cheney in their 04 debate yet he wanted to rip Hillary Clinton's heart out in their last debate...He should have shown the same level of savagery to a Rethuglican; especially one as contemptible to Cheney...

[Ninga]

61. The complicated dynamic of a presidental campaign is not an excuse, but a reality.

Edwards is getting another chance to get it right....because as you say, he was unable to shake Cheney during that debate. Then one could say that at that time, his trial experience wasn't enough.

That is why in my view, the political experience from 2003/2004 makes him a much stronger and wiser candidate now.


if he is able to overcome the massive amount of $$$$ and the polls, it will be a credit to his strategy, work ethic and message .

If he doens't make it....so be it.

[zalinda]

116. And, did Kerry's campaign tie his hands?

Before I condemn him, I'd like to know the answer to that question. Because the truth is Kerry didn't fight much either. Who the hell ran that campaign? It sure wasn't 2 lawyers who have been known to be fighters.

zalinda

[DemocratSinceBirth]

45. Cheney Physically Intimidated Him

Cheney physically intimidated him , not that Edwards felt the old man would hit him, but his presence intimidated him...Yet when he debated HRC he tried to rip her head off...

That was revealing and what it revealed to me wasn't pretty...

[Ninga]

55. Well you may be right....but Edwards is stronger now, older now, more seasoned and

focused.

We are the sum of our parts....we bring our history with us each and every day......it is the good and the bad that makes Edwards today a very tough and savvy competitor.

i want someone sitting at the conference table in the WH, listening to advisers, gathering intel, and knowing in the past that he had been snowed, burned and bamboozled, and not about to have that happen again.

[PresidentObama]

22. Who would have thought, a Hillary supporter with ANOTHER anti-Edwards post?

Surprising!!

:sarcasm:

[quinnox]

34. yea so

Edwards is making a lot of good Democrats uncomfortable with his smear tactics.

[ellisonz]

82. yea so

Edwards is making a lot of good Clintonites uncomfortable with his sharp criticisms.

[venable]

99. if your poor candidate (HRC) sticks her foot in her mouth and someone mentions it

it's not a smear. it's an observation.

[Catchawave]

59. I'm not worried :)

They'll all go away when he wins the nomination and the DU rules kick in :evilgrin:

[Josiah1982]

39. He has nothing new to offer.

besides, I only hear him spout off against other democrats when he should be attacking republicans. He just seems lacklustre to me.

[brentspeak]

42. "Nothing new"? A presidential candidate unwilling to accept corporate lobbying $$ is "nothing new"??

As for "spouting off only against other democrats when he should be attacking republicans," I take it you don't do much research before doing your own spouting off:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3u9Hib5LFOw

http://youtube.com/watch?v=eAz9Gr1FVqU

http://youtube.com/watch?v=uIM2aBLLHII

http://youtube.com/watch?v=5kfZlxbGtsc

[jenmito]

43. How about him saying he's taking matching funds as a "moral issue"?

Then challenging the others, who raised many millions more than he did, to do the same? He originally said he'd forego matching funds to remain competitive.

[FrenchieCat]

46. But Edwards' will take $$ from those who pay the Lobbyists....and will take

Bundler money.....

So we are talking about "surface" technical changes, not changing the system per se.

In 1998, Edwards received more than half of his outside contributions from lawyers. That support continued in 2003 during his presidential run, when almost two-thirds of his $7.4 million first-quarter campaign contributions came from trial lawyers, their families and their staffs.
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1175850246318&rss=newswire

And during the 2004 vice presidential debates with Dick Cheney, Edwards called for an end to offshore tax havens -- whether for corporations or wealthy investors -- as he cited the offshore vehicles Cheney's former company, Halliburton Co., used for tax savings.

"They ought to be closed. They ought to be closed for anybody. They ought to be closed whether they're personal, and they ought to be closed whether they apply to a corporation," Edwards said at the time.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/22/AR2007042201339.html?hpid=topnews

it was an unusual choice of employment for Edwards, who for years has decried offshore tax shelters as part of his broader campaign to reduce inequality. While Fortress was incorporated in Delaware, its hedge funds were incorporated in the Cayman Islands, enabling its partners and foreign investors to defer or avoid paying U.S. taxes.

Fortress announced Edwards's hiring as an adviser in a brief statement in October 2005. Neither Edwards -- who ended his consulting deal when he launched his presidential campaign in December -- nor the firm will say how much he earned or what he did.

But his ties to Fortress were suggested by the first round of campaign finance reports released last week. They showed that Edwards raised $167,460 in donations from Fortress employees for his 2008 presidential campaign, his largest source of support from a single company.

Nearly 100 Fortress employees or their family members donated to Edwards around the time of a fundraiser his campaign held at the firm in mid-March. Senior executives, individual fund managers, lawyers and a secretary gave the maximum $2,300 donation. Three administrative or executive assistants gave smaller amounts.

Edwards's connection to Fortress is only one sign of the emergence in national politics of the booming $1.4 trillion hedge fund industry. One of the fastest-growing and most controversial segments of the worldwide investment market, it has campaigned to fend off additional federal regulation and has become increasingly generous in campaign donations.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/22/AR2007042201339.html?hpid=topnews

[brentspeak]

81. Was that when Edwards was a presidential candidate, as he is now?

Answer: no.

[FrenchieCat]

110. Urh......read my post again, and lookit the dates....cause the answer is Yea-ah.

:eyes:

[asdjrocky]

53. Thank you.

Great info.

[cadaverdog]

47. What's totally lacking in this discussion is substance

It has the empty ring of Fox news - sound and fury signifying nothing. If you choose not to vote for Edwards because of his toothsome grin, or you don't like the way he combs his hair, or you're still carrying a grudge from 2000, well, more's the pity. But any candidate who can garner the enthusiasm of labor unions, who addresses the concerns of the working class, who competes without the help of special interest money, who was the first with a genuine healthcare plan, and who has a realistic plan for withdrawl from Iraq - well, he has my support in spades. Imagine, a candidate that has the guts to tell us we will have to raise taxes to help us out of this fiscal disaster we're in. And he points a finger at the rich who have been living high on the hog for the last eight years, and warns them that it's time for them to pony up and pay their fair share. No wonder he can't get a break from the media. They're scared to death of him, along with all the other corporate bloodsuckers. While you all are pissing about the tone of his voice, the powerbrokers are actually listening to his words, and they don't like what they're hearing one damn bit.

I thought this was supposed to be a site for intelligent progressive thought. I sure don't see any evidence of it in this thread. Hopefully this is just a minor burp, and the naysayers will take another look at John Edwards. You might find you like what you see. C'mon, what have you got to lose? We're all in this together.

[Clark2008]

57. I have taken a long look at Edwards and I don't like what I saw.

He seems to do whatever is politically advantageous for HIM at the time, including voting for the war and now not supporting it, voting for the PATRIOT Act and now stating it's unConstitutional and so on.

He ran in 2004 as a conservative Democrat and now he's alleging he's a populist. The only populist in this race on the Dem side is Kucinich, if you go by congressional records.

I simply don't trust Edwards and can't fathom why so many people - the groups you mentioned - are so enamoured with a man who really never lifted a finger to help them in the past.

[asdjrocky]

111. He is the only candidate that even talks about us.

You know, us working slobs.

[XemaSab]

68. Welcome to DU!

That being said, reasonable people can disagree about the candidates...

(edit: spelling)

[Mythsaje]

112. Welcome to DU

Don't worry about it...much of the grousing about Edwards is the same low-rent maudlin bullshit they've been spouting for months now. Like Howard Dean, he says the things that need to be said, that the public needs to hear, and the spineless proceed to shit their pants about it. "Oh, but he's so angry!"

Well, no shit. That means he understands the stakes of the game, which neither of the other front runners seem to grasp.

[ejbr]

49. What is unfortunate about Hillary

is that I was willing to vote for her against any Republican candidate in 2008 if it had come to that, but her recent actions have caused me to join the number of Democrats who would rather stay home picking toe jam from their feet on general election day rather than endorse a war monger. And in the face of a Guiliani presidency, I do not take this stance lightly.

John probably will not win the nomination, but at least I can vote my conscience.

[laureloak]

50. Blah, blah, blah. More baloney from Camp Hillary.

[johnaries]

52. Edwards beat Cheney in the debates.

CBS polls of UNDECIDED voters showed Edwards won.

[JohnLocke]

87. Link here

[OKNancy]

54. Because for the everyday, non-DUer type person

who is polled, Edwards is just average. Even non-DU Democrats like the idea of someone new and exciting. Being a white male is so 19th and 20th century. Having a black man and a woman in the race is exciting and I imagine a lot of Democrats feel good about doing something extraordinary.
Non-obsessed voters ( ie non-DUers)look more at the big picture, not the tiny details of each and every day on the campaign trail.

[Hawkowl]

80. Nonsense

The MEDIA wants something new and exciting. As to your typical voter demographic? Probably not so much.

So 20th century eh? The 18-29 yr old voting bracket is the weakest bracket in terms of both sheer numbers and voter turnout. The seniors are the ones who make the difference. This election a lot of seniors are also baby boomers. So ask your neighborly baby boomer-senior who they'll be voting for. That may give you a fairly accurate forecast, depending on where you live of course.

IMO, I don't see the majority of the country voting for either a black man or a woman. (At least these two candi ates). Call me a pessimist. I grew up in between the south side of Chicago and Gary Indiana in the 1960' and 1970's, and although things have changed, racism/sexism is still a powerful force. I doubt Obama or Hilary would carry a single southern state, and would struggle in a lot of midwestern states such as Ohio and Missouri.

All that being said, I encourage everyone to vote their conscience and NOT who they think will win.

[AndyA]

60. Could it be? Another planted topic by Hillco?

They tell people in the audience which questions to ask.

This seems all too close to what Bushco does, when they "stage an event" for the photo ops and public consumption.

Just answer the questions, Hillary. Don't filter, don't lie, stick to one position and don't change it to suit your current audience. And stop playing games with Democracy. I'm really getting fed up with the bullshit.

[bullwinkle428]

77. The biggest thing to come out of that Cheney-Edwards debate

was the alleged "outing" of Mary Cheney (:eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes:) that the wingnuts couldn't stop screaming about!

The lazy douchebags in the MSM kept on and on over what a terrible person that evil, mean John Edwards was to do such a thing to the poor, helpless little Cheney family....give me a fucking break!!

[BigDDem]

78. Edwards should just move to Iowa (if he hasnt already)

and keep campaiging. He can run every 4 years.

[skipos]

83. NC is to red for any dem to win unless we have a Lyndon Johnson type landslide

Just like Mitt would never win MA unless it was Reagan type landslide. Some states are too partisan to flip. Edwards got the usual 3-4% boost that VPs get from their homestate, but that didn't help in a state that is +14% Repub in presidential elections.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

84. I Thought Gore-Lieberman Did Better In NC Than Kerry-Edwards

DSB

[skipos]

85. You need to look at the difference between the Repub and the Dem in the state

compared to the difference between the Repub and the Dem in the popular vote, AKA the Partisan Voting Index. Check it out

North Carolina:
1988 9r
1992 6r
1996 13r
2000 13r
2004 10r (Edwards VP)

9r = 9% more republican than the national average.

[JohnLocke]

86. Your Cheney debate bullcrap is already discredited.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/05/opinion/polls/main647648.shtml

[Ninga]

88. Thank you for that link. I need to be more resourceful.

:hi:

[Terri S]

89. The only poll that matters is on election/caucus night

You'd think everyone would realize that by now.

Edwards is not my first choice, but this is just plain silly. He has not talked about how 'evil' Hillary is, he has called her out on issues they differ on. That's what candidates do. Hillary does it mostly through her 'people' .. Mark Penn et al. At least he's up front about it.

[BootinUp]

92. word. nt.

[mtnsnake]

93. You nailed it, quinnox

:thumbsup:

[The Doctor.]

94. Ummm....

That's a bunch of bullS**t.

Dean was defeated by the media and the way the media portrayed his passion. Voters respond to passion.

Aparently you fell for the media's manipulation of passion into anger.

[alittlelark]

104. The Dr has it right

The Corporatists were terrified of Dean and destroyed his chances (they were also scared of McCain, and did the same).

The Corporatists are also terrified of Edwards (class-action lawyer, populist).

Those that listen to the MSM corporate spin on him will come to the same conclusion the OP has come to.

[Bluebear]

95. "He was demolished by Cheney in the debate" - 41% Edwards, 28% Cheney for uncomitteds

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/05/opinion/polls/main647648.shtml

[calteacherguy]

100. I think there are better candidates. nt

[pointsoflight]

101. Iowa: 25% Clinton, 23% Edwards, 22% Obama

Edwards doing badly? The top three are now within the margin of error in the latest CBS poll for Iowa. It's a complete toss-up at this point.

[Renew Deal]

121. You could easily rewrite the OP and change the names around.

[RufusTFirefly]

102. Prop - a - gander!

Edwards is not my first choice, but it's obvious that he's got the Hillbots running scared.
That's always a good sign. Good for him!

Yo, Hill! Go sit on some corporate board somewhere and leave the country to actual Democrats!

[huskerlaw]

103. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhh!

Oh dear god. Edwards dared to point out that Saint Hillary is talking out of both sides of her ass. You have no way to answer the charges he raised, because HE'S RIGHT, so you're complaining about it instead. Shocking.

:eyes:

:nopity:

[Exultant Democracy]

105. So by tied for second place you mean in a 3 way tie right?

It seems like everyone lives in Iowa, from any speeches any of them give you would think the New Hampshire, Iowa and "place name of current location here" are the only three states in the union at any given time.

[K8-EEE]

106. I'm voting for him and haven't counted him out - with HRC trending down

I like the angry thing!! It's appropriate under the circumstances.

[Duppers]

107. no offense to you, quinnox, but...

some times I wonder how many paid operatives are on this forum.

:shrug:

[Truth2Tell]

108. he will have the same result as Dean. ??

You mean he will be submarined, mocked and then marginalized by the mainstream media in favor of a more compliant DLC "Democrat?"

Yes, yer probably right.

[stillrockin]

109. I loved Howard Dean in 2004, and I love John Edwards now.

[Stop Cornyn]

113. Last poll I saw had him in second place within the margin of error from leading. He's holding back

on purpose to avoid peaking too early (which killed Lieberman, Gephardt, and then Dean in 2004 and is killing Hillary at the monemt.

Sen. Barack Obama leads the pack spending $3.9 million on television spots and Sen. Hillary Clinton and Gov. Bill Richardson tied for second by spending $2.2 million.

Before this month, Edwards had spent only $23,000 for one ad in Iowa.

Starting this month, Edwards begins a $400,000 per week ad campaign in Iowa.

I'm curious to see how Edwards' strategy to delay his Iowa ad campaign to avoid peaking too early plays out.

If I was a gambler, I'd bet that Hillary is getting out foxed in Iowa, but we'll know one way or the other in less than two months.

[saltpoint]

119. We'll just have to see what happens.

[ileus]

122. people understand what a trial lawyers stands for.