Free advice to Edwards: If you believe K-E won in 2004 then start ACTING LIKE IT

Stop telling internet folks that you wanted to fight Ohio because the results would be different -

AND - at the same time tell mainstream media that Kerry's campaign was so lousy throughout that he blew that election and only you had all the answers to winning.


Guess what, John. That doesn't pass the bottom line test.

Either Kerry did something that the Dem party and its infrastructure were not prepared for - he ran a campaign that did well enough to defeat a sitting president being protected by corpmedia and the Kerry-Edwards ticket DEFEATED Bush-Cheney and RNC had to steal that election for Bush....

or...

Kerry lost that election because the campaign was so awful as media and you claim, but, you USE circumstances in Ohio to further glorify yourself as part of a winning ticket that was cheated.

My suggestion is that you start ACTING LIKE KERRY-EDWARDS WON, John, and embrace it all the way - say the two of you were RIGHT then and still right today.

This strategy of yours to play both scenarios is wearing thin for those of us who actually paid attention to every aspect of the last 5 years. Some of us WANT to get behind you at some point, but you seem to not want that to happen.

I just won a poker tournament






on my son's playstation. :evilgrin:

I have just about had it up to here with the Kerry bashing. WTF? The election was stolen. He ran a campaign good enough to win if they hadn't stolen the votes. End of Story.

That's getting close to landslide figures.

I also get tired of all the pundits arriving at at the most esoteric conclusions based on the supposed results of the election, i.e., the number of evangelicals in the country, the power of the minority vote, etc. etc. etc. etc.

Why don't these people study the exit polls and the hundred books that analyze the ACTUAL results of the election?

And, John Edwards is my current candidate, at least he's in the lead "today."

Why isn't Edwards #1 issue about what happened in Ohio and how he would make sure it doesn't happen again?


It seems like he acts like 2004 never happened.

he would be called a sore loser. He's got enough problems with a haircut, let's not put whiner on him too. He has called for paper ballots though, from what I've read here on DU.

zalinda

much in reference to securing our votes besides the recent blurb that comes 3 years too late. Saying "paper ballots" 3 years after the election is not exactly making an "issue" out of something that one would think should be so important to him based on his experience. :shrug:

John Edwards: Deposited by the Grace of God into the Great State of Iowa on February the First, Two Thousand and Five.

Most likely the results would have been different if Ohio had been fought for. Kerry's campaign was also lousy. He should have CRUSHED bush. But he let it get close enough to steal, and that's all the repubs need.

as 5 million were.

Would the DNC have suddenly become diligent about securing any more votes?

Would the press corps have suddenly NOT had a vested interest in protecting Bush?

Kerry beat Bush in every matchup. DNC failed to do the same against the RNC.

If Kerry ran as bad a campaign as the spinners claim, the RNC wouldn't have HAD to steal it.

It's always "too little, too late" for Kerry, but it's never "too little, too late" for anyone else.

You are asserting these things, and the burden of proof is your responsibility. Thank you.

What else is he going to say?

"Yeah, I suck at campaigning. I got my ass kicked in 2004 by a retarded monkey (with a chilly economy and a shitty war hanging around his neck) and a cold-blooded cyborg. Hell, they might even have cheated, and if they did I knew about it, and I didn't fight it one bit. Yep. I just kinda smiled and talked about hope and assumed that people would elect us. Guess that doesn't work. So, ah, vote for me, because I'm not very good at winning elections."

His choices are to either blame Kerry for '04, or to accept partial responsibility for losing '04. The first is dishonest backstabbing. The second, taken with his apologies for virtually every vote he cast in his brief Senate career, makes him look like a joke.

and your attack is directed at both Kerry and Edwards BECAUSE you are protecting the deceit and complicity of Terry McAuliffe's DNC for the four years he oversaw the collapse of party infrastructure in so many swing and red states and let the RNC gain control of every level of the election process where the votes are allowed, cast and counted.

Kerry and Edwards DID their jobs and my thread is to advise Edwards to recognize it and start affirming their positive efforts.

The Clinton-Lieberman-Schumer-McAuliffe-Carville wing of the party can go eff off.

and second, Terry McAuliffe is a complete and total failure who should have been run out of the party (preferably tied to a log and thrown over a waterfall) after '02. I don't know where you'd get the notion that I would defend him.

Quit quoting the NYT which obviously is trying to shut down Edwards with more dustups that are not necessary.

Otherwise, just support Clinton and Obama if you feel strongly the NYT is the main source of information about our candidates. Last time I checked, the blogs were better, but if that is your main source, then just support those two and keep it to yourself about spreading more venom the NYT and other MSM chooses to do on Edwards. They are totally afraid of him and what he might do about corporate welfare that they still crave at the trough.

I might add that if Obama and Clinton are your candidates, that's fine too. I'm just saying Edwards gets the shaft and I'm tired of the MSM bringing up about Kerry and Edwards. It doesn't do Kerry nor Edwards any justice.

is doing it and has been for quite some time whenever 2004 becomes the topic.We never hear him discuss the positives of winning that election or how well they did considering the odds stacked against them and a weak party infrastructure and the horrendous media lies.

The corpmedia did not just START lying about Dems - and they had bigger reasons to fear Kerry in 2004 than they did Edwards, as Kerry had already set his sights on them -

Evidently you all think Edwards is somehow the first to experience the targeted attacks - expect few of you show the integrity to be honest that it has happened BEFORE - and what pisses me off is that every time Edwards takes a shot at Kerry it is always in support of some CORPORATE MEDIA DISTORTION used to explain a LOSS in order to cover up for electin fraud.

Don't even TRY to lecture me about corporate media lies and how they target Dems - I'm not the one who just fell off the turnip truck. Lecture those who use RW talking points against Kerry to glorify themselves.


Kerry Seeks to Reverse FCC's "Wrongheaded Vote"

Commission Decision May Violate Laws Protecting Small Businesses; Kerry to File Resolution of Disapproval

Monday, June 2, 2003

WASHINGTON - Senator John Kerry today announced plans to file a "Resolution of Disapproval" as a means to overturn today's decision by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to raise media ownership caps and loosen various media cross-ownership rules.

Kerry will soon introduce the resolution seeking to reverse this action under the Congressional Review Act and Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act on the grounds that the decision may violate the laws intended to protect America's small businesses and allow them an opportunity to compete.

As Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, Kerry expressed concern that the FCC's decision will hurt localism, reduce diversity, and will allow media monopolies to flourish. This raises significant concerns about the potential negative impacts the decision will have on small businesses and their ability to compete in today's media marketplace.

In a statement released earlier today regarding the FCC's decision, Kerry said:

"Nothing is more important in a democracy than public access to debates and information, which lift up our discourse and give Americans an opportunity to make honest informed choices. Today's wrongheaded vote by the Republican members of the FCC to loosen media ownership rules shows a dangerous indifference to the consolidation of power in the hands of a few large entities rather than promoting diversity and independence at the local level. The FCC should do more than rubber stamp the business plans of narrow economic interests.

"Today's vote is a complete dereliction of duty. The Commissioners are well aware that these rules greatly influence the competitive structure of the industry and protect the public's access to multiple sources of information and media. It is the Commission's responsibility to ensure that the rules serve our national goals of diversity, competition, and localism in media. With today's vote, they shirked that responsibility and have dismissed any serious discussion about the impact of media consolidation on our own democracy."

Edwards decided this campaign to say NO to Fixed Noise when it came to debates. He has refused interviews with Fixed Noise in this campaign. Now they are all pissed at him.

I don't believe it for one minute Edwards is trying to give into the spinmaster machines. That's just my opinion.

of when to concede - an argument that Kerry SIDED with him over the Dem election team and waited till next day.

He points fingers at Kerry for BS like windsurfing as if that was the reason they lost when the two men HAD A WINNING CAMPAIGN. Something Edwards FORGETS to notice and has NOTHING positive to say.

IMO, he tries to have it both ways.

Does he believe HIS convention speech was the winner - and Kerry's the loser?

Does he think HIS debate was a decisive win and Kerry's debates were just competent?

Does he think Terry McAuliffe did a proper job overseeing and securing the election process?

I repeat - Edwards is running again, and Kerry is not, he should start ACTING like they won before, because they did.

Cuz they're up to their dirty tricks again.

http://nodirtytricks.com/index.php

and had to do with the Rethugs, I believe.

When I saw Edwards on The Tonight Show in early January of 2007, it was one of the first times I really started feeling disgusted about him. His true colors really shined through that night. John Kerry must've gone through the roof when he got wind of Edwards putting all the blame on him on Leno's show.

Edwards also told Leno that night that running as Vice President was not fun for him, and even went as far as hinting that he and Kerry weren't always on the same page. When asked about it, he made reference with Leno that mistakes were a problem.

I pointed this out in a thread I made on January 11th after watching Edwards poor egotistical display on Leno's show. That night was the beginning of the end for me as far as Edwards was concerned. I couldn't believe my eyes and ears the way he boldly made it clear that he could've done so much better if he was the candidate instead of Kerry. It's one thing when posters criticize a candidate, but when your own running mate turns on you, that's about as disloyal as it gets, considering Edwards was half the ticket and really did nothing to enhance the ticket anyway, IMO.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3050995

(edited to add: The actual date of the particular segment of The Tonight Show that I'm talking about was probably on January 10th, since I made the post at 12:14 AM January 11th.)