I renounce my support for Edwards. Im' officially with Clinton

[antiimperialist]

I started with Kucinich, then realized he wasn't going to win, so I switched to Edwards.

Now Edwards definitely cannnot win the primaries, so I must switch again.

Sorry, conservatives love Obama too much. It's not a good sign and to put it bluntly it pisses me off. I don't like Obama's rhetoric against "petty politics" either, which is nothing but code language for "progressive agenda". I'm going with Hillary.

Hillary voted for the Iraq war, you might add, but I think she learned her lesson and won't screw up this way again. Other than that she's not significantly different than Obama on the issues.

[99th_Monkey]

1. Whoever told you Rethugs/Cons love Obama is misinformed or lying

So if that's your reasoning, it seems like you should re-consider, and support either Obama or stay with Edwards.

Conservative Right Confused and Depressed by Clinton's Failing Candidacy
by Steven Leser Page 1 of 1 page(s)
http://www.opednews.com

For the last eight years, Republicans and the Conservative Right, like those at the website Free Republic ( http://www.freerepublic.org ), have been sharpening their knives waiting for an impending Hillary Clinton candidacy. There hasn’t been a right wing pundit on TV or the print media who hasn’t warned of the impending doom and inevitability of a Hillary presidency. If you want one example, see this one http://www.townhall.com/columnists/TonyBlankley/2007/03/28/hillary_on_track_for_nomination . Democrats/Liberals/Progressives, take note, this Blankley article has become so funny as a result of recent events that it should not be missed. If you want another, more churlish example, see this thread on Free Republic in response to an article in the UK Telegraph http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1907608/posts

All the Republicans have wanted to do for the past eight years is fight against a Hillary Clinton Presidential run. Now it looks like they will never get the chance. I don’t think they can deal with the letdown.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_steven_l_080108_conservative_right_c.htm

[terisan]

2. Obama is the Unity08 candidate. That is a conservative outfit with chapters in

lots of colleges.

It is pro corporation and neutral on media consolidation. It ignores outsourcing as a problem, and is bullish on Homeland Security and National Defense.

[99th_Monkey]

8. you managed to ignore my links. how come?

1) Obama's Unity08 affiliation pales in comparison to the information I sent you re: the RW Neocon's love-to-hate affair with Clinton, they figure with her they win, win or lose in the General Election.
2) You also don't explain why, if you are so progressive and anti-corporate, you don't support Edwards. He's still a significant factor in the elections despite what the M$M is saying.

[aquart]

17. You use Blankley as a source? TONY BLANKLEY?

Were you born a minute ago?

[terisan]

23. I believe you are responding not to me but to the OP nt

[99th_Monkey]

28. The source is OpEdNews.com, authored by Steven Leser ...WTF are you talking about?

[aquart]

38. This:

For the last eight years, Republicans and the Conservative Right, like those at the website Free Republic ( http://www.freerepublic.org ), have been sharpening their knives waiting for an impending Hillary Clinton candidacy. There hasn’t been a right wing pundit on TV or the print media who hasn’t warned of the impending doom and inevitability of a Hillary presidency. If you want one example, see this one http://www.townhall.com/columnists/TonyBlankley/2007/03... . Democrats/Liberals/Progressives, take note, this Blankley article has become so funny as a result of recent events that it should not be missed. If you want another, more churlish example, see this thread on Free Republic in response to an article in the UK Telegraph http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1907608/posts

[99th_Monkey]

43. That was a cite to make the author's point silly. Rethugs love Hillary, get over it.

[aquart]

37. To impeachment monkey. Is that someone you filter?

[99th_Monkey]

45. Is WHO :"someone I filter"? again, I have no clue WTF you are talking about.

[TheWraith]

34. Who told you that nonsense? Obama has nothing to do with Unity08.

And Unity08 is not a "conservative outfit." Stupid, to my mind, but not conservative.

[99th_Monkey]

49. If the OP was trying to make points for Hillary, he/she has so far have failed to make them.

IMHO.

[ellisonz]

60. Barack Obama has nothing to do with Unity08.

If you're going to make outlandish claims, you better have something to back it up.

Edit: grammar.

[aquart]

3. That's so...rational.

Edwards was my first choice. Hillary my second. But I was so depressed over Iowa, and all the Messiah Obama nonsense, and the piling on Hillary...and then Edwards opened his mouth and joined the bandwagon. And suddenly my vote was up in the air and came down for Hillary. Turns out that the treatment of women is my biggest issue, who knew?

[AshevilleGuy]

10. I was very disappointed with Edwards treatment of Hillary

after Iowa as well. It was silly, claiming that she was out of the race, and I fear that he paid for it in part in NH. Who the hell gave him such advice??

I'll hang on with him through SC, but then it will be Hillary: we HAVE to win this year!!!

[aquart]

19. Do hang on. His policies are more than worth keeping in the race.

I WANT him to have a respectable showing. But this is coming down to personalities, not issues. And sexism vs racism and we're going to learn some nasty things about ourselves before its over.

[AshevilleGuy]

25. Oh, I want him to win!

For five years he has been my favorite. His policies are exacly what I like. But he isn't going to make it, you know why... The corporate media are shoving someone else down our throats and it isn't Hillary. Personalities, yes, it isn't issues, but is it ever? It's all about emotions, not logic, as to who is most electable, and that is what I am about.

[aquart]

35. Yeah, the media, but something else.

Which shouldn't be discounted. This election has two firsts as possibilities. There's a glory for the ages in telling your descendants that you were one of the people who made that first happen. Whichever one you choose. There's a personal little glow in being part of an historic moment.

There is no attendant glory in voting for the white guy. No matter that his ideas are better. We are grappling with much bigger things and it's so awful that we have to choose between these two great moments. Like kids in a candy store when they tell us we can only have one.

[goodgd_yall]

18. You too?

I, like the OP went from Kucinich to Edwards to Hillary. I have to say the debate and Edwards' piling on turned me off to him. Besides I want to determine who our nominee is going to be and the race is between Obama and Hillary. Edwards is not going to suddenly pick up support.

[aquart]

21. Uh. I refuse to call any race after NH.

I believed the pundits and polls. I am humbled.

They say when you have to make a hard decision, flip a coin. Are you happy or sad at the result? I was devastated after Iowa and calmly at peace after NH. So at least I know that about myself now.

[goodgd_yall]

31. I like what you said

about the treatment of women. I found myself having stronger feelings about having a woman (Democrat, of course)in the White House. That was one thing that I had a lingering regret about while supporting Edwards. I feel comfortable in my choice now.

[lvx35]

4. I hear you. Hillary is very appealling, and I like Obama, but some things really worry me.

About his overall stability.

[aquart]

11. I have some questions, but why do you?

What have you noticed? What's nagging?

[lvx35]

106. Its lack of solidity and commitment in his base.

Its kind of hard to explain, but the "surge" in Iowa scared the hell out of me. I knew that if they flipped that fast FOR Obama, then they must also be willing to flip against him. Building a base of support off people using cool headed reason takes time, and also lasts. So I can see Obama supporters as being easily manipulated, and that scares me in the GE.

Also, the support from the religious left AND atheists, far left progressives AND conservatives strikes me as really scary, really unstable. One of these two is going to notice the guy standing next to them after awhile, and that's bad. I could see secularists weakening his religious support from within, while replicans hammered it from the outside...I had the most HORRIBLE vision, aquart. It was a video, in the GE, targetting his religious supporters, comparing him to the republican. It went like this: (supposing Romney won)

"Both Romney and Obama have a vision of where this country needs to go, but which vision in righeous?
A right to life, all children protected. THAT'S a Romney nation.
Abortions, sin, blah blah blah. That's an Obama nation. In the eyes of God, which is more righteous?"

But Obama was pronounced "Uh bomah" a little, so it sounded like "That's an abomination in the eyes of God, which is more righteous?" It scared me and I wanted to warn Obama about it right away.

[Mythsaje]

5. I'm with you on the "petty politics" thing.

Straight pisses me off. Like I said in a recent post--when one side wants to destroy the constitution, rob the country blind, and marginalize all but the most affluent while the other is trying like hell to defend civil rights and civil liberties for ALL Americans, and spare a thought or two for the disadvantaged in the third world at the same time, to suggest that it's "bickering" is DAMNED disrespectful.

[aquart]

13. I would agree with that.

[Barack_America]

6. Good for you. Although I'm pretty sure you're too young to vote anyway. n/t

[Liz7]

7. there's no "definitely" about it

It's still early. Clinton didn't win Iowa or NH in '92.

[Cameron27]

9. Good choice

:-)

[Anouka]

12. When did you leave Clinton in the first place?

Kucinich never had a chance of 'winning'........ so why abandon him because you didn't believe he had that chance?

Either you're with someone's message,
or you're a bandwagon jumper.

I'm not buying this.

[Red Knight]

90. That is BS

My guy had nearly 2 percent in New Hampshire.

With that bump South Carolina may give him 3. From there--it's anybody's race.

I'm sticking with Dennis---and I don't care who has a chance of winning this thing. I tend to vote for my favorite candidate. I know--it's weird.

[regnaD kciN]

14. And her vote for Kyl-Lieberman proved that "she won't screw up this way again," right...???

And, for the record, Obama's proposals are far more progressive than Hillary's DLC-based "centrism."

In other words, as they sing in the song-clip played on the Stephanie Miller show:

You are an IDIOT!
Ha ha-ha ha ha ha ha,
Ha ha ha ha ha!

:spank:

[IndianaJones]

15. present. nt.

[TheWraith]

32. Windowpane. Flibbertigibbet? NT

[aquart]

40. Flailing.

[LostinVA]

76. HRC has a higher progressive rating than Senator Obama

[goodgd_yall]

16. I've gone through the same path

and for the same reasons. I switched to Clinton after the last debate. You'll get sh__ for your decision, but I hear ya.

[RummyTheDummy]

20. Hey, at least you're thinking about it

But you do realize that people like Bill Kristol, Dicky Morris, Hannity et al obsess about over Hillary for a reason and I don't think it's because they like her. I think it's because they relish the chance to whip her ass in a GE. Remember when Tweety was fast forwarding Hillary through the primaries and into hypothetical matchups with Repugs not 6 months ago?

[avrdream]

22. Umm, I'm glad you are switching but am just curious:

why don't you think Edwards can pull it off? Seriously, there are still 48 states to vote. He isn't my guy but I haven't counted him out yet.

Just wondering.

[aquart]

26. Don't count him out.

He has a lot to say and the rest of America should get a chance to hear. And he gets good attendance...so other people haven't counted him out, either.

[K8-EEE]

57. I noticed both Hill & Obama putting Edwards speech into theirs

I like all three candidates, but I LOVE Edwards' agenda, the fact he's not taking PAC money, and he's forcing the discussion on corporate welfare, middle class squeeze, etc.

[aquart]

67. A completely worthy candidate.

[Two Americas]

24. that isn't "support"

Switching candidates to go with the winner in the primaries is not "supporting" candidates, it is picking a horse in a horse race.

Support or vote for Clinton, but you aren't "renouncing" your support for any other candidate. You were never really supporting them.

How about you move to Clinton - which I have no problem with - without trashing your former loves in the process?

[goodgd_yall]

33. This gets me

how changing one's support then becomes "you never really supported them." I'm glad I'm not as inflexible as you are.

[Two Americas]

47. whimsical choice versus serious support

If one changes candidates based on who might win, that precludes supporting them in any meaningful way does it not? It would seem to me that "support" would mean support for the message of the candidate, based on principles and ideals. The primaries are an opportunity to express support for that message and for principles and ideals, not an opportunity to pick a winner like picking a team in a football betting pool. Picking a winner is not "support." I pick the Packers to win the Super Bowl. That is not support. On the other hand, hiring on and working for the Packer organization as a player would go on until the season was over. That is support. You don't walk off the field and abandon your teammates who are depending upon you when the going gets rough.

"I support you until something sexier comes along" strongly suggests that there was never any support to begin with.

By the way, I gave someone who switched to "my" candidate for the same flimsy reasons the same lecture a few days back.



on edit - found a couple of typos

[goodgd_yall]

54. I've never been anti-Clinton

so it's an easy transition for me to go from Edwards to Clinton. You seem to think picking one out of the 2 candidates who can realistically (in my opinion) become our nominee is frivolous. If I were to believe it's either going to be Obama or Clinton, why wouldn't I want to have a say in that decision.

Besides as I mentioned upthread, I have been finding Edwards' behavior towards Hillary in the debates and his comments about her bothersome. I've gotten to a point where I can't ignore his piling on and dissing of her.

[Two Americas]

59. do what you want

People can vote (or actually talk about voting) upon whatever basis they want.

I think there is an anti-Edwards subtext in the OP and also in your posts. Be opposed to a candidate if you want to, but be upfront about that is all I would ask. From the OP and from your posts there is no way to tell exactly upon what criteria you make your choices. That makes for pretty stale and shallow discussion, and ill-iniformed political action - as though we are mere observers of a horse race, as I said.

[Buck Stopin Harry]

108. It sounds like to me you

are choosing to support her because you see her as the victim.
And she may well be. But I do not see how you can base your decision for Pres on that kind of critera. I would ask you to reconsider and not be taken in by her as she plays up to the camera.
That is not honest behavior.

[redqueen]

98. THANK YOU!

Politics... *sigh*

[Anouka]

85. S/He never loved them in the first place.

[jackson_dem]

27. If you truly supported Edwards you would at least give him until Super Tuesday

[yurbud]

29. kucinich to edwards I can buy, but all the way to hillary makes this satire

[aquart]

41. No. It doesn't.

[99th_Monkey]

50. I double-clicked hoping to see SOME reasoning behind your flat "nope", but alas, to no avail

[DaLittle Kitty]

75. Obama Mom and Dad pic

[TheWraith]

30. She learned so well, she sides with Bush on Iran! NT

[99th_Monkey]

36. Word has it, RW Rethugs were "confused & depressed" when HC lost in Iowa

so sez this OpEdNews article anyway..
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_steven_l_080108_conservative_right_c.htm

The OP author however has "declined" to comment on it.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4031310#4031333

[antiimperialist]

42. Meanwhile, Howard Kurtz said, "Even Conservative Media Chorus Sings Obama's Praises"

"You'd have to have a heart of stone not to be moved by this. . . . This is a huge moment," one commentator wrote.

An unreconstructed liberal? An African American hungering for a racial breakthrough? No, it was David Brooks, the conservative New York Times columnist, and he's got plenty of company on the right.

The media overall are being swept up by a wave of Obamamania, in which normally hard-bitten journalists watch the orator in action and come away dazzled by his gifts. A New York Times piece Saturday compared the Illinois senator to JFK and Martin Luther King in the same paragraph. A Newsweek cover story out yesterday gushed that Obama, "tall and handsome and blessed with a weighty baritone, knows how to bring along a crowd while seeming to stay slightly above it." The journalistic scrutiny usually visited on instant front-runners has been replaced by something akin to a standing ovation.

In the wake of Obama's remarks about unity on the night of his Iowa caucus victory Thursday, MSNBC's Joe Scarborough, a former Republican congressman and self-described conservative, called it "one of the most remarkable speeches I've ever seen."

Bill Bennett, the conservative author, said on CNN that it was a "remarkable breakthrough" for "Barack Hussein Obama, a black man," to win in a "rural, white farming state." Rush Limbaugh added his voice on the radio, saying that Obama and Mike Huckabee, the Republican winner in Iowa, "had really uplifting, inspirational speeches."

[aquart]

46. I think I'm going to be sick.

[99th_Monkey]

53. I'm not wild about either HC or BO, for similar reasons ...

the RW seems to thing they can "work with" either of them.. how do you think they got all that money?

it wasn't "grass roots donations", or union money for the most part; it was MegaCorpU$A.

which is precisely why I'm sticking with Kucinich and/or Edwards... just so you know where I'm coming from.

[aquart]

44. What Republicans want is irrelevant to a Democratic primary.

Just as their votes are irrelevant to this election.

[99th_Monkey]

48. For once, I at least partly agree with you ... It shouldn't matter, except the OP made it an issue

and I responded with information the OP still has not responded to.

[...of J.Temperance]

39. Welcome to the Hillary camp!

We're glad to welcome another supporter :)

[JDPriestly]

51. You better stick with Edwards. Vote your conscience.

You don't know what will happen in the future. Edwards could win a few. Hillary or Obama could drop out for one reason or another.

Edwards is the pro in this. Stick with him. You are overreacting. You know you can't go wrong with Edwards. He is the true progressive in the bunch. He is the most levelheaded in the bunch. He is the most experienced when it comes to handling the stress of a campaign. Stay with Edwards. He won't let you down.

This is about winning delegates, not winning states. This is about having the integrity to stay true to yourself. Edwards is winning delegates and staying true to himself. What more do you want?

[Clintonista2]

52. Welcome! Glad to have you!

:toast:

[ArkySue]

55. Strange bedfellows

The Scooter Libby Legal Defense Trust

A source close to the trust said more than $5 million has been collected to pay Libby's legal bills. The public face of the defense fund is a cadre of Republican heavyweights that include Mary Matalin, Steve Forbes and Jack Kemp.

Dennis Ross, (advisor to Barack Obama) was a friend of Scooter's for 25 yrs and was also served with a select coterie on the Advisory Committee of the Scooter Libby Legal Defense Fund, raising the multiple millions needed to assure Scooter would not be convicted.

Ross served under Bush I, Reagan, and Clinton (ah!Proof!! He's 'bipartisan'!) and is a Distinguished Fellow at WINEP with Wolfowitz, Pipes and Perle.

This is certainly not his first stint on a presidential foreign policy team. This appears to be where the Libby/Ross friendship was initially forged:
________________

Libby caught the eye of then Defense Secretary Cheney. In 1981, following the election of U.S. President Ronald Reagan, the newly appointed U.S. National Security Advisor Richard V. Allen was put in charge of putting together the Reagan administrations foreign policy advisory team. Allen offered Paul Wolfowitz the position of Director of Policy Planning at the U.S. State Department. In this position Wolfowitz and his newly selected staff, that included Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Francis Fukuyama, Dennis Ross, Alan Keyes, Zalmay Khalizad, Stephen Sestanovich and James Roche, were responsible for defining the Reagan administrations long-term foreign goals.

_________________________________________________

Steve Clemons on Ross:

-----

But Ross can't be considered as just a Libby personal pal in this.

He works and operates at the nexus of America's relations in the Middle East -- and those relations in Israel, Iran, with the Palestinians are fragile on all fronts and at all levels now.

His involvement with Libby's funding needs won't come off to anyone as just personal.

He's there for big time institutional reasons - representing Libby's interests to another nation, and representing that nation's interests to those in Libby's circles -- particularly Dick Cheney.
____________________________________________________

From MEDIA MATTERS

The New york Times later noted that Libby's legal defense fund "has a board that would be the envy of any conservative institution, including five former cabinet members, five former members of Congress and seven former ambassadors." The paper did not report, however, that Ross, Matalin, and Fukuyama are all members of the fund's advisory committee and, as such, are apparently helping raise money to "defray" Libby's legal costs.

"I don't often use the word 'incomprehensible,' but this is incomprehensible to me," said Dennis Ross, the veteran Middle East troubleshooter who is now at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

Ross said, "He's a lawyer who's as professional and competent as anyone I know. He's a friend, and when he says he's innocent, I believe him. I just can't account for this case."

http://mediamatters.org/items/200701180001
_____________________________________________

FROM SLATE

Despite Scooter's troubles, an incredible array of GOP rainmakers and powerbrokers stand with him. The advisory committee would make any GOP candidate salivate.

The soft Scooter sell is about more than just raising money. It's also about cleaning up his image for the public, the press, and potential jurors. <...>

The defense team needs to overcome the image of a White House apparatchik hellbent on destruction. So, out will come the testimonials to his decency and humility. The site offers a preview:

"He's cared much more about trying to do a job than trying to get visibility for himself," says Dennis Ross, Clinton's envoy to the Middle East and Libby's colleague in the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations.

http://www.slate.com/id/2136889/
______________________________________________

FROM NYT JAN 07

“I don’t often use the word ‘incomprehensible,’ but this is incomprehensible to me,” said Dennis Ross, the veteran Middle East troubleshooter who is now at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “He’s a lawyer who’s as professional and competent as anyone I know. He’s a friend, and when he says he’s innocent, I believe him. I just can’t account for this case.”

*************
Sorry I don't have some of the links....no longer available. :/

[VotesForWomen]

56. Ditto; it seems like the powers-that-be want Obama. nt

[stickernation]

58. I feel like I am repeating myself endlessly - WHERE'S THE BEEF ?

Tell me WHY HILLARY ? What has she done or said since you last monitored her that has swayed you ? is it sort of an affirmative action for women thing or did she actually SAY or DO something to DESERVE your new "allegiance" ?

You have explained why NOT obama, and I agree to an extent, but WHY HILLARY ? just because she can win ? i don't see much in terms of reason-to-switch-to-hillary in your post. "not significantly different from obama on the issues" to me means "doesn't really have any issues either".

JOHN EDWARDS IS THE ONLY SERIOUS CANDIDATE IN A NATION THAT IS TOO FAR GONE TO BE SERIOUS ABOUT ANYTHING ANYMORE. I pity your decision, not because Hillary is not the right choice (she might be) but because you flit around according to who you think might win.

Tell me, if I sat down with you, could you give me ANY REASON to support Hillary ? Just one ? What exactly led to your switch ? I am incredulous at your mewling abandonment. It sounds silly and spastic to me. BYE BYE !!!

[GreenTea]

61. If you were a republican what Dem would you want to face....

Certainly not Edwards, the republicans insist, anybody but Edwards....a progressive who will challenge their continued imperialism of the world workers,us and the people,....Corporations will remain in control...it's simply good business for them.....it's not the flag they care about, it's their sucking up everything....Capitalism! (Eating us alive, they can't help themselves, it's how it's structured).

However, the big two, that they keep pushing on us as our ONLY choices.....either of which, as the republican media pounds into us are the our best and only choice, you believe it....not to mention how much easier it'll be to run against either of them and give the republicans a much better chance to win and maintain control as they eat away, chew us up and spit us out and receive tax breaks while enforcing it.

Moderates Clinton are going to change it, or Obama, No.....

So we will play the republican game..............See through the trees..........

[Inspired]

62. Fair weathered supporter that you are.

[BootinUp]

63. Welcome aboard

I pretty much agree with your take on this race right now. The Obama camp "Democrat Disease" rhetoric and the whole unity08 threat shit has really gelled in the last few days into something I cannot support. If we make our bed on this rhetoric we will have to lie in it. Of course I am not that confident he could survive a General Election anyways.

[harmonicon]

64. so....

...if in the general election, it looks like the Democrat won't win, you'll vote republican? Your logic is infallible.

[FrenchieCat]

65. You so funny!

:rofl:

[lojasmo]

66. Any evidence that Hill "learned her lesson"? Kyl/Lieberfreak says no. EOM

[Bullet1987]

69. You think crossover appeal is BAD!!

You people must be some real geniuses to think crossover appeal is wrong. I'm sorry, but I'll never again vote for a candidate who can SQEAK out a win by 2 or 3 points like Clinton. I want someone who can win handily. All of those states with a large Indie population will vote Rethug like they always have with Clinton leading the ticket. She won't be unifying anything, since she has ZERO crossover appeal. Go to conservative websites and blogs...you'll see who they fear the most and it's Obama. You know what I think AntiImperialist...you've posted so much anti-Obama filth on this site, you don't want to look like you have to eat crow. You're trying to save face by going for someone other than Obama who by Edwards' own admission is another change candidate.

[SIMPLYB1980]

83. I think telling people that have been fighting for Democratic ideals,

for longer than Obama has been in politics, that they need to stop being "petty" is a BAD thing!! I also don't like the fact that he is willing to through "baby boomer's", like my parents, under the bus.

[Bullet1987]

88. It IS petty...

look how desperate the Clinton's were getting before she won New Hampshire.

[SIMPLYB1980]

89. So boomer's that fought for civil rights were being "petty".

The only desperation I saw was how desperate Obama's supporters wanted Obama to win NH so they could have their coronation without being asked hard questions.

And their desperation to explain his stunning loss. Maybe real Democrats don't like being thrown under the bus to gain a few votes.

[lojasmo]

100. I think you replied to the wrong post. EOM

[jasmine621]

71. In the GE, I doubt that she could be "swiftboated" and soft on terrorists.

Obama can.

[Darth_Kitten]

68. You jump from candidate to candidate?

What are your core values? :sarcasm:

[goldcanyonaz]

70. Antiimperalist, it's a pleasure to have you on board.

[antiimperialist]

73. thanks nt

[usregimechange]

72. Check out Obama's lifetime ACLU rating and compare and contrast

with Hillary. Conclusion: Obama is more progressive.

[DaLittle Kitty]

74. You Demonstrate Your Ideological BANKRUPTCY That is Beyond Dispute!

How can ANYONE gravitate from Kucinich all the way to Clinton? That is a path no person could possibly navigate if one is of sound mind! :crazy:

[krabigirl]

95. Come on, maybe OP actually likes Clinton?

[cyclezealot]

104. Its because winning is all that matters.

No philosophical base. The horse race is all that matters. That and appearances. the specifics of their healthcare positions. Too much information.

[LostinVA]

77. Hmmm.... you were just trashing her this week

Actually, spamming GDP.

Having some fun on here, maybe? This way, you get a chance to slam ALL the Dem candidates, and "get away" with it.

Suuuure.

[shayes51]

78. welcome

[William769]

79. Welcome aboard!

Glad to have you with us. :)

[youthere]

80. antiimperialist...

I hope you would reconsider..and back the candidate you feel best represents you. One of the four is going to get the nomination, and it may very well be one you don't like...so the way I see it, the primary season is our one chance to stand on principle. If you support John (or Dennis) I humbly ask you to reconsider pulling your support from them. They really DON'T stand a chance if you pull your support. I want, more than anything for all of them to stay in the race until the last ballot is cast and counted...and if John sees it through there is ALWAYS a chance.
And FWIW...I say this as someone who is not an Edwards or a Kucinich supporter (although I do like them). I like all of our candidates but my heart is with Biden.

[Renew Deal]

81. A track record of poor judgement.

:rofl:

[Dawgs]

82. Your post got stupid as soon as you said 'conservatives love Obama too much'.

I quit reading as soon as I got to that point.

[CarolNYC]

84. As others have said, welcome aboard...

No doubt, you'll get some shit for this, and people not believing you could have really been for Dennis and now are for Hillary (basically calling you a liar, I guess) but I totally understand. I started out long ago as a Dennis supporter (and I still am, as a matter of fact. I still get his campaign emails, etc) but am now wholeheartedly supporting Hillary for the nomination.

[Clarkansas]

86. Good luck with the Clinton/Bloomber/Nader/Repub election you desire

I wouldn't vote for Clinton in a million years.

[venable]

87. Edwards will be the nominee...

do not let the MSM narrative change your vote.

there is a very long way to go, and either HRC or BO stumbles in which case it is a two person race and the press would have to cover Edwards, and he would prevail,

or

noboby gets out and it's a brokered convention and they turn to the strongest GE candidate, Edwards.

Edwards WILL be the nominee.

[cyclezealot]

105. Story out today.

US Chamber of Commerce petrified of the new Edwards stick. You get our Kucinich out of the way, expect what the media did to hit on Kucinich, will soon be coming your way.

[last_texas_dem]

91. Only two states have voted, but you already know

that Edwards "definitely cannnot (sic) win the primaries", and thus you "must" switch again. Why, is it that important to you that you back someone you consider more likely to win? If that's the case, why were you ever behind DK in the first place? What's wrong with putting your support behind the candidate you believe in?

[Wisconsin for Hill]

92. no sense leaving one sinking ship for another- GOOD CHOICE

and welcome aboard.

[Thrill]

93. Come home Edwards and run for Governor

[Thrill]

94. Come home Edwards and run for Governor

[saracat]

102. Like you would vote for him if he did. Sheesh.Have you got nothing better to do /

And to think you accused me of spamming?

[fenriswolf]

96. how do conservatives love obama to much?

when hillary gets alot of money and air time from these same conservatives.

[redqueen]

97. "Edwards definitely cannot win the primaries"?

:eyes:

[begin_within]

99. So you abandon your principles?

[Horse with no Name]

101. Didn't I see you say you were voting for Obama last week?

You are a fair-weather voter.
No issues...just follow the herd.
I don't think you'll be missed from the Edwards camp, because as soon as the tide turns again, you'll change.:eyes:

[antiimperialist]

107. I explained how I care about the issues

In my original post I explained how in the issues, Hillary and Obama do not hold significant differences, IMO. In the foreign policy department, Hillary screwed up on Iraq, and I trust her not to do it again.

[Cha]

103. You jump all over the board..with

your pronouncements and it's no wonder where you finally lit.

[Generator]

109. My GOD it's Jack Handy

Those are some deep thoughts.