I woke up today to find 4 of 5 top Greatest Threads to be about John Edwards

[Seabiscuit]

The other was about "American Lawyers Defending the Constitution" which I wholeheartedly support.

It seems other DUers are coming to the same conclusion that I am: John Edwards has found his voice and it is resonating throughout Iowa and right here on DU. His message is loud and clear and right on target, and it is getting through to more and more people.

The MSM is in for a big shock come January 3. Nothing against the other fine candidates, but the MSM thoroughly misjudged John Edwards as they tried to write him off all year.

If Elizabeth Edwards were all the campaign really had to offer I'd still vote for John Edwards just because of her. But together, they make an amazing team, and it would be a delight to see them and their kids in the White House.

[MADem]

1. Well, the clowns on ABC are predicting Obama v. McCain.

I do think McCain has the momentum. Dunno about the Democratic Party's choice, yet. Anything could happen...

[Amerigo Vespucci]

7. McCain has two advantages:

1). He's not involved in the "holy war" between Romney and Huckabee

2). The NYC Police Department didn't escort his mistress on taypayer-funded vacations

It's the same reason why Edwards is finding renewed standing.

Romney-Huckabee-Giuliani sucked all of the air out of the room.

Hillary and Obama sucked all of the air out of the room.

Anything could happen, but my audacity of hope lies in a Democratic President in 2008 with experience as well as a slogan.

[MADem]

12. Meat The Potatohead is having Huckabuck and Obama on together on MTP, as though they're the

anointed.

I think people are sick of the religious right--even the religious right themselves....

[Stump]

2. I hope you're right...

and the MSM is so wrong. It's clear who the overwhelming choice is here on DU I just hope that translates into national appeal. We'll see very soon...

[creeksneakers2]

3. There are too many Edwards threads

They are crowding out everything else.

[Snotcicles]

8. Brought to you by popular demand. nt

[Seabiscuit]

14. This might explain it:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3880163&mesg_id=3880163

[Stardust]

15. Wait til the Left Coasters wake up and chime in. Then it's DK all the way,

[Seabiscuit]

22. I hate to tell you this but I am a Left Coaster.

And while I was a "DK all the way" leftie 2 months ago, as crunch time looms in Iowa, my money's now on Edwards.

[Stardust]

48. Well I'll be damned! When did THAT happen? Oh well, my *money* might

be on Edwards but my heart is still on Dennis. I'm trying to avoid posts regarding the primaries but sometimes my curiosity gets the better of me.

[Kucinich4America]

50. This Left Coaster is sticking with Dennis

But I'd take Edwards over Hillary without a moment's hesitation.

[Seabiscuit]

56. If by the time it's your turn to vote in the primaries,

would you still vote for DK no matter what, or would you vote for Edwards if he was the one with the best chance by then of beating Hillary?

That is the primary reason I've moved from DK to Edwards in the past 2 months. The Ron Paul thing kind of got to me, too.

[Mark_Pogue]

66. And

so is this Midwesterner!!!

Kucinich....the REAL grassroots Dem!!!!!!!!!:toast:

[NJCher]

4. I've been saying since Day One that Edwards would be the nominee

Cher

[Olney Blue]

5. It's a real horse, I mean, donkey race!

We are fortunate to have Edwards in our party and I love Elizabeth too.

Can't wait to see what happens!

[cali]

6. There won't be in another 6 weeks

He'll be done after Super Tuesday. And I don't trust him at all. I'd much prefer Obama. Hopefully when Edwards drops out, his supporters will go to Obama. And if he loses in Iowa and does poorly in NH, SC and NV, he should drop out then.

[gmudem]

16. You posted the exact same thing in another thread.

You are now ignored.

[Clark2008]

55. You ignore people who disagree with you?

If that's the case, you shouldn't participate in discussion boards.

[gmudem]

61. No. I ignore people who bring nothing to the discussion.

Every single post I've seen by that poster say about the same thing. The poster contributes nothing to discussions other than an attitude of condescension towards any poster who dare disagree with a single word of the post. If the poster had anything original or worthwhile to say I wouldn't have him or her on ignore.

[Diane R]

33. I agree with you. I trust Obama and Michelle more than I trust John and Elizabeth.

[Mr_King]

37. How are you going to trust....

somebody you don't personally know?

[cascadiance]

35. If you trust Obama on his position on liquified coal...

And that is what you WANT, then we'll never get our global warming problems solved!

And these are Obama's PRESENT stances, not his stances from the past.

[silverojo]

45. Two words: You wish. n/t

[Seabiscuit]

9. You know John Edwards has gained momentum when

a simple observation about a Greatest Threads phenomenon attracts two of my favorite posters, both of whom go by the same handle: "Ig...ed".

[ThomWV]

10. I do not support John Edwards for the Presidency, as much as I like him

He is simply the wrong person for the Presidency. He doesn't have a bit more international experience than either Obama or Clinton (both of whom are miserably lacking themselves) and makes little pretense at having any sort of international agenda at all. He gives few specifics on his domestic programs and those that he does give fly in the face of conventional economic wisdom.

That said he clearly has a passion for the major domestic problems that face the country and he should have a strong role in addressing those concerns in the next Democratic Administration. He is just the wrong guy for the top job. I will say this though, he is no less experienced than his immediate competition - sad as that is.

[Seabiscuit]

11. So who DO you support, and why are you posting in this thread?

[mmonk]

13. Elizabeth IS popular with the voters.

[Diane R]

34. Not with me; I read her book and it changed my positive opinion of her.

[WillyT]

17. The Folks At KOS Sure Seem To Like Him !!!

Poll

Who is currently your favorite 2008 candidate?

Joe Biden
2% 398 votes

Chris Dodd
11% 1971 votes

John Edwards
42% 7448 votes

Hillary Clinton
7% 1249 votes

Bill Richardson
1% 238 votes

Dennis Kucinich
6% 1008 votes

Barack Obama
27% 4850 votes

Mike Gravel
1% 96 votes

Other
1% 251 votes

No Freakin' Clue
2% 415 votes

17924 votes

Link: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/12/19/132420/04

He's won every one of their straw polls for the last several weeks, and their polls have much larger numbers than ours do.

:shrug:

[XOKCowboy]

18. Same thing with Thom Harttman's Straw Polls....

Edwards has won every Straw Poll. Every one. Makes you wonder who's being "polled" by the MSM

[lisainmilo]

32. wondering the same thing

:shrug:

[live love laugh]

19. The Edwards trashing crew can't be very far behind then. They should

be along any minute now.

:sarcasm:

[Seabiscuit]

27. Yo, Nostradamus

How prescient of you:

check out #23.

[lpbk2713]

20. It's true Edwards could do well running on his own merits.

But I think Elizabeth would make a terrific First Lady. The likes of which we haven't seen in a long time.

She's a major plus for John's campaign AFAIC.

[Seabiscuit]

24. "The likes of which we haven't seen in a long time."

An Edwards family in the White House would be a First Family the likes of which we haven't seen since JFK died.

And we haven't seen a woman like Elizabeth in the White House since Tipper Gore.

[Joe Fields]

46. You've got to be kidding, right?

I WAS conscious during his one term as senator, and at best his merit was suspect.

[Triana]

21. I'd be delighted to see that too...

...let's hope that's exactly what happens - the Edwards family ends up in the White House.

[frazzled]

23. And 4 out of 5 Americans watch American Idol

Does that make it a good show?

As a corollary: 9 out of 10 DUers supported Howard Dean in 2004. If you think the numbers here translate into the real world, you're more naive than I thought .... oh wait, I already consider Edwards supporters naive.

[Seabiscuit]

25. This thread isn't being freeped, it's being DLC'd.

Which brings to mind the nostrum: a distinction without a difference.

[frazzled]

28. The only DLC member here I know of is Edwards ...

He was a founding member of the Senate arm of the DLC, and touted his membership for many years ... until he found out, after the 2004 elections, that the netroots, his only hope for a constiuency, didn't like it.

I, myself, have always been an opponent of the DLC, since the early 1990s.

[Seabiscuit]

29. According to the body of your post, Edwards is not a DLC member.

And I carefully followed the 2003-2004 Presidential race, and I don't recall Edwards ever making any mention of any connection to the DLC during that race.

[frazzled]

31. His name was on the official list

I don't know why you folks can't seem to deal with realities, much less read accurately.

[Seabiscuit]

36. Edwards was a member of the Senate New Democrats for 4 of his 6 years in the Senate

where he served from 1998 - 2004, when he retired from his seat. He joined the SND in 2000, with other Senate Democrats. SND was a group of Senators associated with the DLC, but it is not THE DLC per se.

I haven't found any evidence that Edwards was ever member of the DLC per se, and certainly hasn't had any association with them at all since he retired from the Senate in 2004.

You know, I can deal with realities just fine, thank you very much, and I can read just fine, thank you very much, and I don't see Edwards' name anywhere on this list:http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ka.cfm?kaid=137

So when you say in your original post that "The only member of the DLC I know of here *is* Edwards" I have to wonder about you talking out of your ass.

As in: "(Edwards) touted his membership for many years". He was with the SND for 4 years. If that's "many years" then Barack Obama has been a Senator for "many years", long enough to attract criticism for being "inexperienced". And I seriously don't recall Edwards *ever* "touting" that membership during his 2003-2004 campaign. So maybe the "touting", if it occurred at all, only lasted from 2000-2002. "Many years". Yeah. Right.

[struggle4progress]

38. No: the DLC was founded a decade before Edwards entered the Senate. Nice try, though

[frazzled]

40. No, he was a founder of the Senate arm of the DLC (Senate New Dems)

Maybe you should look something up before you embarrass yourself?

[struggle4progress]

44. Oooh! No cigar! According to the DLC, Edwards founded neither DLC nor New Democrat Coalition nor

Senate New Democrat Coalition:

DLC | Overview | February 1, 2005
About the House New Democrat Coalition

The New Democrat Coalition was formed in 1997 by Congressmen Cal Dooley (D-CA), Jim Moran (D-VA), and Tim Roemer (D-IN) to establish an ideological home in the U.S. House of Representatives for the New Democratic movement started by the Democratic Leadership Council in the late 1980's ... http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=3869&kaid=103&subid=110

DLC | Overview | December 1, 2001
About the Senate New Democrat Coalition

Senators Evan Bayh (IN), Bob Graham (FL), Mary Landrieu (LA), Joe Lieberman (CT) and Blanche Lincoln (AR) founded the Senate New Democrat Coalition (SNDC) in the spring of 2000 ... http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=250061&kaid=103&subid=111

[fascisthunter]

58. Ouch

you frazzled the frazzled

[Seabiscuit]

65. LOL!

Took the "razz" out of "frazzled", who "f....led".

[Viva_La_Revolution]

39. huh? The DLC was formed in 1985

Edwards didn't even run for a Senate seat until 1998.

[sendero]

42. Renouncing the DLC..

.. better late than never.

[karlrschneider]

41. That's extremely humorous.

ha fucking ha

[Seabiscuit]

47. Ya think...

this guy might actually think that nominating a Presidential candidate for the Democratic Party is in any way analogous to some mindless and virtually talentless pop-drivel show on Fox called "American Idol"???

[helderheid]

26. Edwards has my vote.

[bonito]

30. I'm with Edwards now, not that it matters. FL. n/t

[sendero]

43. I've warmed up to Edwards..

.. and I think he's easily the best choice for the Dem nomination, with the best chance of winning.

The time is right for his economic message, which he's been using since the 2004 campaign, to resonate with a lot of Americans.

[BigBearJohn]

49. I wondered how Edwards voted on the bankruptcy bill. I found this:

Questioning his opponent’s political allegiances, Dodd noted how Edwards sided with Republicans in favoring the 2001 bankruptcy bill. Dodd said that Edwards even aligned with the Republican caucus in rejecting an amendment to the bill by Senator Paul Wellstone of Minnesota. That amendment would have given an exemption to debtors who were forced into bankruptcy because of medical expenses. Naturally, Dodd was one of 34 Democrats to vote in favor of this amendment.

http://www.totalbankruptcy.com/bankruptcy_articles_john_edwards.htm

[readmoreoften]

52. I like Dodd, too. I hope Edwards has changed. If he's elected and he hasn't changed...

then he's going to really piss off those who voted for him. I like DK and Dodd a lot. I support DKs candidacy but I don't think he has much of a shot this time around. I think he might have a strong shot in 2012 if Mitt or Huck win, especially if they win by fraud. Of the top three, Edwards is the only one who has a clear platform and a clear message. Whether or not he believes in it is irrelevant to me in the same way that it's irrelevant whether Bush is really a Christian. As long as he fights for those who elected him and/or we hold a fire under his feet to live up to his campaign message, I think he'll work for us.

I'm not sure what the message of the other top two candidates are. Obama's is trying to unite America. I have no interest in America being united under corporate exploitation, bigotry, and war. Furthermore, the right wing has no interest in being united with the democratic wing of the democratic party. Hopefully Edwards as reinvented himself. Even Al Gore had some anti-environment votes in his past. However, I do believe he is now a crusader for the environment.

If Edwards is elected and he doesn't fight the fight he has promised us (or at least give it all he's got) then I'll do everything I can to hold him accountable.

[mirrera]

53. I hope too.

I feel as you do. He better live up to what he says. I am hoping he has had an epiphany, which it sure looks like to my eyes. Then again Bush ran on "no nation building" and that hasn't worked too good.

Edwards is talking the talk that NEEDs to be talked if we have any hope at all for alternative energy and a resurgence of American genius and not a Ruthless American Empire. In the end I have to vote for the talk because it is the only way to make my desires known. If he wins with this platform, the corporations will KNOW that we know, and that is power for us. This is an epic battle and if we think he is going to save us we are fools. He is a first step. He opens the door a crack so that we can see more and do more and widen the crack until we are finally part of the process again.

We are what we have been waiting for, and all that.

[Snotcicles]

59. He didn't vote on the POS 2005 bill that screwed everybody. nt

[symbolman]

51. anyone who runs straight up as

an Anti Corporation candidate has got my vote, and he's saying Publicly that our govt has been taken over by Corporations. I got to meet the man last time while I was travelling on the campaign trail, and to me he's the Real Deal.

I don't make these statements lightly, but Edwards looks like the guy for Me.

He had a Distinct Kennedyesque feel to him, and I'm over 50 now, and am ready for another "Camelot" if its possible at all.

Its Now or Never when it comes to breaking some Corporate Grip, and that includes a Traitorous Corporate Media. :)

[Seabiscuit]

57. What's the difference between Evander Holyfield and John Edwards?

One's a boxer, the other's a fighter.

But both are "The Real Deal".

Camelot, here we come.

[Snotcicles]

60. Man your going to have Clark supporters squirting all over themselves with that one. nt

[symbolman]

62. Lol

I love that, nice stuff, has Edwards used that before in a Campaign, or are you going to let them use it? :)

I want to see him come from behind, though it appears he may not even BE so far behind. When I saw him speak about Two Americas when running the last time, it was the right message THEN, now he's building on it..

He'll tear them apart, He's got pieces of those Republican candidates floating in his Toilet, baby! :)

[Seabiscuit]

63. Edwards is going to shock the MSM by taking Iowa in a Landslide,

and then burying HillBarack in the snows of New Hampshire.

Edwards is the only one who handily beats all the Repuke candidates.

I would let Edwards use "that" but I'd prefer that he didn't. :)

[Clark2008]

54. I'm glad I haven't been here, then.

And, no, not all DUers think he's the end-all, be-all. Some of us have actually looked at his record.

[Seabiscuit]

64. Merry Christmas!