John Edwards Landslide Is Becoming Inevitable As MSM Scrambles To Cover Their Keister

[DaLittle Kitty]

Ithought that this opinion by Mr Fox, given that I had heard the Moyers interview w/ Professor Walters on the radio earlier today was important so folks here it is. Go Johnny Go, Goooooo :think:

The John Edwards Landslide By Michael Fox

OpEdNews

Original Content at http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_michael__071216...


Back in October, I wrote that it was critical that Democrats select a surefire winner in our Presidential primary. At that time I made the case fore John Edwards’ win-ability. My prognostication has now been made official in the form of this week’s CNN poll, which pitted Clinton, Obama, and Edwards individually and Head-to head with each major Republican contender.
Once again, in every one of those match-ups, Edwards wins by the largest margin against any of the Republicans. And what could be more valuable a statement in the 2008 general election than a landslide?

Remember, after the 2004 election, George Bush made his bloviating statement about his perceived “political capital” – which, of course he squandered on a 60-city tour to sell his dead-on-arrival Social Security privatization scheme. That, with a 2-point “win” But, given (as in CNN’s Edwards vs. Huckabee race) a 25-point true landslide, the political capital would be palpable and spendable. Edwards, winning with a foreseeable 65% of the vote, would be coming in with that sort of long-unseen approval rating that would enable him to embark on populist policies with the actual backing of the populace (unlike the elitist policies of Bush ineptly attempted to be served to his handpicked audiences – and even they didn’t bite!).

Much has been written about Edwards as the worst nightmare of the corporate crowd. Just this week, on Bill Moyers’ Journal, Dr. Ronald Walters (director of Jesse Jackson’s Presidential bids) pointed out that only Edwards, of the three leading contenders, is speaking of poverty and universal healthcare; this from a leading Black academic who clearly sees Obama as not having policies that serve the larger Black community, those in the middle and lower middle classes and the poor.

Only Edwards (again, of the three leading contenders) has eschewed PAC and corporate donations. Clinton, Obama and Edwards all have law degrees. Clinton used hers, aside from early-career service on the congressional committee investigating Richard Nixon, as a partner in a law firm representing corporate clients; Obama was an Associate Professor of Constitutional Law at Harvard (this is the resume item I like best about him, as I think he may best be equipped to assess the damage done by Bush and his Republican Congresses); but only Edwards used his to take on corporations which have fought regulation and responsibility to consumers. Only Edwards is proposing immediate universal healthcare... Additionally, he has made it clear that the mistakes he has made, legislatively, are mistakes from which he has learned, and he is opposed to “free” trade expansion.

:woohoo:

Michael Fox is not connected to the Edwards campaign - or any other.:-)



Authors Bio: Michael Fox is a writer based in Los Angeles.

[Clark2008]

1. Still perplexed...

How is an Iraq-War-co-Sponsoring, PATRIOT-Act-writing, Yucca-Mountain-destroying, NCLB-supporting, bad-bankruptcy-bill voting hedge fund manager a populist again?

:eyes:

P.S. I forgot... he's white, Southern and male.

:puke:

[Little Star]

2. Well then just do as Wes advises VOTE HILLARY!

[JNelson6563]

9. Hey wait a minute! Isn't Wes a southern, white male????

One would think with a screen-name like Clark2008, that poster was hoping to be supporting a southern, white male in this race.....

Sometimes I could just OD on irony here at DU, how 'bout you? ;-)

Julie

[Cha]

14. The irony and the

bullshit meters are capable of going off the Richter scale at any given moment. ;)

[Cronus Protagonist]

3. If he delivers on his campaign promises. he's a shoo-in populist

Name calling isn't very informative. His speeches are about his populism, his anti-corporate stance is clear and unequivocal.

[DeanDem10]

7. Edwards populist

Hear, hear. At least some people (Edwards) are capable of learning something. Others don't (Hillary). She says she does. Where is the evidence? What if the "experience" is too many wrong big decisions? Yet another wants to "rise" above it all and pretend real diffs between parties don't exist. He wants to life in some altered space of la-la land where Republicans and Dems get along. Kumbuya. (Not!)

There are two populists running: Edwards and Kucinich. Only one has a chance. The choice is clear.

Edwards!

[Cronus Protagonist]

12. I really would prefer Dennis, but if I can't get him, Edwards is the best of the rest

IMHO.

[laureloak]

4. Looks like somebody's gotten desperate. LOL!!!!!

[killbotfactory]

5. He apologized for all that. It's cool.

Until the general election, when he'll stop making promises he can't possibly keep and he starts to sound like Hillary again.

[FrenchieCat]

6. the fact that Edwards is White/Male from the South will not be an advantage in the GE.......

Because the other candidate will be some of that as well....and so that type of a seen advantage in the primary will no longer be an advantage in the GE (rather these will be moot attributes)

It can be recalled that candidates' strength in a primary normally turn out to be a candidates weakness by the time the election that counts rolls around (think Kerry and his national security experience, Al Gore and his wealth of knowledge, ingeniouty and experience, or McGovern and his anti-war stance).

So with Edwards as the nominee, although the tactics used by one side against the other side will not be about gender and/or race (which would have had to be dealt with sensitively), or the Clinton era, it will be about other character traits and some issues (unfortunately, the GE is never as much about issues as we wish, or certainly not usually about the issues that we initially imagined) not yet obvious to us.

Funny thing is that we never have control over what we would think we should have control over, as it has been proven time and time again.

[K Gardner]

15. I think it will be a definite advantage IN the South.. he is very well liked down here.. n/t

[superkia]

11. Great points, I am hoping that he has decided to serve the ...

people now though. He has been to the bilderberg group also, so he definitely has an inside view of what is being done to the country and the world. I am hoping that the reason he has recently tried pointing out the rigged game and the corruption is because he sees where the elite are going with their plan and he has realized that it will be hurting Americans in a serious way.

I give respect to anyone that has attended Bilderberg and spoke out about the corruption going on. That takes some guts because those people don't play games, they want to win at ALL costs.

Clinton, Dodd and Richardson have been and I have never heard them speak out about the corruption that all of America has been seeing within our government. We all should question why the people that are elected to serve us are not speaking out about all of the corruption that exists? Why would any of us vote for someone that has a reason to hide corruption? Are they a part of it? Please ask yourselves that before you make that primary vote because it could be the last one we get to make.

[Truth2Tell]

18. I hope yer right that he's

really had a fundamental change of outlook. It's our best hope.

[bvar22]

17. I prefer the Edwards Populist Promises to the CERTAINTY...

..of more of the same, "reach across the aisle", "give them a seat at the table" CENTRISM that is being promised by the conservative, Business Friendly candidates.

At least Edwards is saying the right things, unlike HillBama.
I believe in redemption, and accept his acknowledgment of the wrongness of those positions.
I am willing to let him make amends.
There is a chance he will come through for us.
I am also willing to cut him some slack for his Freshman term in the Senate. It is easy to become intimidate by the Machine.

I'm a Kucinich supporter, but Edwards is my compromise candidate.
He is certainly a better bet for Americans who Work for a Living.
I won't be voting for any of the Chamber of Commerce Democrats.


"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans. I want us to compete for that great mass of voters that want a party that will stand up for working Americans, family farmers, and people who haven't felt the benefits of the economic upturn."---Paul Wellstone

[Lint Head]

8. There is nothing wrong with white southern males any more

than African American southern males or females, Mexican American northern or southern males or females, Italians, Jews, Japanese,
Portuguese, Arab etc. We are all Americans. This country needs to be purged of the criminals that are in the White House.
The strongest candidate the Democrats have needs to run because the criminals need to be beaten. :dem:

[cali]

10. While I think he'll win in Iowa

he's no more inevitable than Clinton was when she was the inevitable one. You'd think supporters of other candidates, would have learned something. Evidently not. And Iowa won't give him the nomination. It'll simply improve his poor odds at winning it.

[K Gardner]

13. Kicking as an anti-sleeze measure

[polichick]

16. Well, it does seem as if there's been a lot of butt covering lately...

Suddenly he's everywhere.