Edwards got only 10% of the vote of folks looking for change

[jackson_dem]

53% cited that is the top quality they were looking for. Obama got 75%, Hillary 15%, and Edwards 10%. How many voters actually take the time to learn about that candidate's positions? Apparently not many.

[Parche]

1. Edwards

It looks like he got around 20%

He is still not out of it :hi:

[bdamomma]

3. not he's not out yet.

and not all of votes came in yet.

[jackson_dem]

5. That is because he won the vote of folks looking for a caring candidate

About a quarter of voters cited that as the top quality they were looking for and he got 42% of that vote.

[Critters2]

2. Not many at all.

This doesn't bode well for the future.

[robbedvoter]

4. Media creates perceptions. I still don't know what Clinton said that racial bait

Obama: 47% positive, 16% negative.
Clinton: 27% positive, 38% negative.
McCain: 12% positive, 48% negative
Giuliani: 28% positive, 37% negative
JDNE

Net numbers

Obama +31
Giuliani -9
Clinton -11
McCain -36

[LiberalHeart]

6. It's crazy ... a total disconnect.

[Indenturedebtor]

7. Yes

Ask everyone you know to name the cast of Lost or somesuch crap... then ask them what the Patriot Act is... or hell how about "Name all of the primary candidates for both sides". No one cares.

[jackson_dem]

8. Most voters are stupid. Fuck them. THEY should STFu when they get raped by what THEY voted for

I hope Obama sends all their jobs overseas!!!!! WOOOO! DOPE AND CHANGE BABY!

[Occam Bandage]

14. See, now "fuck America" is not a mindset that leads to success.

[SammyWinstonJack]

31. He'll have win the GE first. Doubt that will happen. The jobs will be sent

overseas by another republican administration, continuing on in 2009.

[avaistheone1]

9. For some reason this reminds me of Gulf War 1....

When a University of Massachusetts study found that: The more the public listened to MSM newscasts about Gulf War 1, the less they actually knew about that war.

In this election year despite all the debates, and media hoopla - the public is not able to connect the change they want to the actual change candidate, John Edwards.

[2rth2pwr]

10. The people of South Carolina actually know John Edwards

he was born there, lived and raised in N Carolina, was a Senator for N Carolina. If I remember correctly he won this state in 2004.

And if I'm not mistaken, he was the Vice Presidential nominee for the Dem Party in 2004.

The more people know him, the less likely they are to vote for him.

[jackson_dem]

11. Yeah right

As if people pay attention to what neighboring state senators do. Edwards did the same (win) among white voters. Where he hemorrhaged was going from winning black voters to 1%. His record didn't change in four years, contrary to your theory.

[Occam Bandage]

13. They voted for him in 2004. Did they not learn then?

[2rth2pwr]

15. Bingo! His record didn't change in 4 years, his song and dance did.

People pick up on those sorts of things.

[Occam Bandage]

18. Which is the important thing in a campaign. Politicians cast thousands of votes;

people aren't going to look up every single one and try to form their own narratives. The candidate has to provide the narrative, and if they keep changing their narrative (even if it's always consistent with some of their votes) people are going to look away.

[jackson_dem]

22. If anything he should have improved if we accept the Big Lie about him

They didn't have a problem with his record then. They should like him more now if we accept the meme that Edwards radically changed in four years.

After cooling off a bit I have concluded his poor showing among blacks was not an anti-Edwards vote. It was a pro-Obama and pro (Bill) Clinton vote.

Edwards was wrong on the same HANDFUL of votes your candidate was btw. I wouldn't promote the Obamite Big Lie if I were a Hillarite.

[Egnever]

25. or maybe they liked him as he was

but found him unbelievable when he suddenly became something else.

[jackson_dem]

26. He won the white vote in SC in 2004. He won the white vote in SC in 2008

Yet among blacks he went from winning to 1%. I know you Obamites have swiftboated Edwards over the Big Lie for a year but it is absurd to honestly believe that explains his showing among blacks. To believe that you must believe blacks somehow have different criteria for judging such things.

The evidence of this? Edwards' favorablity ratings remained high in South Carolina. Blacks weren't anti-Edwards. They were pro-Obama and pro-Bill Clinton.

[Egnever]

27. whats your point?

that blacks voted for Obama? I dont see where you are trying to go here. The fact is he hasnt gotten above 20 percent anywhere but Iowa where he lived forever. SC didnt change that at all. He still lost to clinton who didnt get the black vote either.

And whats this big lie you keep repeating?

[jackson_dem]

28. The point is his record is not why he fared poorly tonight

20%. Clever. He got 17% in NH and 18% here. Obamites may make 20% the chosen threshold but the DNC long ago set it at 15%. Edwards has collected delegates in three of four states.

[Egnever]

29. really why did he do poorly ?

and why has he done equaly as poorly everywhere else but Iowa?

15% might get you a couple delegates here and there but it aint going to win you an election.

No go ahead and tell me how he competes going forward. Gone are the days where he can take his campaign to the people with anything other than cold hard cash and he has none. Hell his huge money bomb day got him what 300k? Obama is making that every hour tonight and then some.

You can put lipstick on this pig anyway you want to but it wont change the fact that he cant do better than 20% anywhere and I would be willing to bet it only gets worse from here.

[jackson_dem]

30. The media blackout

Let's see what happens on Super Tuesday. Only four states have voted. He has a good chance of winning a state or even states then.

The money meme is false on its face. Edwards has far more money now than in 2004 and he was able to run a national campaign all the way to March then. He also has more money than McCain or Huckabee could dream of and neither has conceded to Romney because he has unlimited funding. Edwards had about $20 million on hand at the start of this year. His fundraising pace has picked up this month and with matching funds he is at, and probably ahead of, the rate of income he had during his successful first quarter in 2007 when he raised $14 million.

The money day thing was not publicized. One person on the netroots came up with the idea and did so with only a few days before the set date. There was not even much time to spread the word. The overall picture is he has raised $3 million online in the first 25 days of 2008 and with matching funds that will become something like $5 million.

[Occam Bandage]

12. I think when voters say they want "change," they don't mean "a candidate who will

change their positions as the wind blows."

[avaistheone1]

16. Best advice then...is don't vote Obama.

He doesn't have the guts to vote. We would have to worry about more "Not Present"s.

[Occam Bandage]

17. Of the three, he's been the most consistent in his positions.

Sure, you can find the occasional nuance, or the occasional change in position, but overall he's the most consistent.

[avaistheone1]

19. When the going get tough Obama caves.

That is the problem. The so called "nuance votes" are the tough votes. Obama has too much of a habit of not present on them.

[Occam Bandage]

20. If you're referring to "present" votes, take it up with Planned Parenthood. Their strategy.

[avaistheone1]

21. I'm not talking just about the Planned Parenthood votes.

In 1999, Barack Obama was faced with a difficult vote in the Illinois legislature — to support a bill that would let some juveniles be tried as adults, a position that risked drawing fire from African-Americans, or to oppose it, possibly undermining his image as a tough-on-crime moderate.
So Obama chicked out and voted "Not Present".

To top it off despite all of Obama's posturing about his position on the Iraq war, Obama has repeated the same habit in the U.S. Senate and did Not show up to vote on the Kyle-Liberman bill.

[jackson_dem]

24. Obamites either know nothing about his record, block out negative info, or lie

Whenever his record of "present" votes is brought up they talk about PP but never all of his other such votes.

[Occam Bandage]

32. Or rather, we think it's stupid to flyspeck votes and remove context from parliamentary procedures.

[Radical Activist]

23. ding ding ding

correct answer.