Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Edwards won the debate, but does he still have a chance?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
calmblueocean Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 11:19 PM
Original message
Edwards won the debate, but does he still have a chance?
He's polling a distant third in NH, and the same in SC. I don't really understand why, but I wonder how long he can go on placing third. It seems to me that Hillary voters are going to have to drop her and switch to Edwards if he's going to have a chance to beat Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Colobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 11:20 PM
Response to Original message
1. He might get in 2nd in NH.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sarah Ibarruri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 11:20 PM
Response to Original message
2. I think he does, and he's far more presidential than Obama.
Obama is too gentle. Repukes will eat him alive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kittycat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. Eat him alive with what?
More of what they talked about tonight? More insistent that there is nothing wrong with the oil industry, nothing wrong with us staying in Iraq, nothing wrong with the economy - what? really - the republicans aren't even an issue when it comes to Obama or Edwards. Hilary is the one that they will eat alive, and the true independents (not the ones here at DU) will run screaming away from.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sarah Ibarruri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 11:26 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. In any way. Repukes are not a debate with H. Clinton.....
Repukes are filthy, scummy creatures who will sink to any level.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RichGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. No kidding....
Especially if he has to debate smooth talking Mit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadBadger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 11:20 PM
Response to Original message
3. No he doesnt because of his strategy
His Strategy of attacking Hillary has and will always help Obama. Until he goes after Obama, he doesnt have a prayer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 11:21 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. He likes Obama, and he knows his supporters also like Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calmblueocean Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. How do you figure?
It seems to me that Obama is the media's anointed one this time around. He won in Iowa, and his support is solidifying and growing. There's not room for two challengers long term. So if Edwards is going to win, he's gotta get votes from Hillary supporters. I just don't see Obama supporters moving away from him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThePhilosopher04 Donating Member (435 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 11:26 PM
Response to Reply #3
13. Not true...
Once he gets into a one on one with Obama, Edwards' message will resonate. Hillary has to attack Obama which will eventually pull him back and Edwards can navigate the middle until she falls by the wayside which will be soon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ananda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 11:21 PM
Response to Original message
4. Edwards doesn't have much money.
I like his unwillingness to get in hock
to corporations and big money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HeraldSquare212 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 11:25 PM
Response to Reply #4
10. But in hock to the heirs of robber barons is OK? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooky3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #10
16. are you referring to Mellon? She did NOT contribute to Edwards.
She contributed to a 527 that by law he cannot control.

And, oh, all of the other candidates have also benefited from 527s.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigwillq Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 11:22 PM
Response to Original message
6. I think so
He needs a solid second place showing in NH and for Clinton to fade big time (I think that's starting to happen).

He still has a lot of work to do but anything is possible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RichGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 11:26 PM
Response to Original message
11. Edwards was good...
Passionate and intelligent. But I didn't care for the dramatics, the dead girl thing...too much like the closing argument in a trial. Also...enough already about the working parents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThePhilosopher04 Donating Member (435 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 11:28 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. The "dead girl thing" happens to be...
one of the prime issues of our time and Edwards deserves a standing ovation for bringing it up every chance he has to breathe!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClericJohnPreston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 11:29 PM
Response to Reply #11
15. HOW IRONIC
SOMEONE USING THE NAME, "RICHGIRL", WOULD BEGRUDGE THE REALITY OF EDWARD'S BONA FIDES TO THE MANTLE OF WORKING CLASS KID WHO MADE GOOD.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 03:07 AM
Response to Reply #11
21. "The dead girl thing"
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cynical Idealist Donating Member (7 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 11:31 PM
Response to Original message
17. Edwards chances
I certainly hope Edwards can break out and get his message to the people. A major reason why Edwards hasn't made more traction (in polls and with money) is because the mass media - print, TV and cable - have largely avoided him while hyping Hillary and Obama. Goes to show how the corporate elite affect what we get to know, how we're supposed to feel about it and which choices we're "allowed" to make.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calmblueocean Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 11:35 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. I think you're dead right. (And welcome to DU!)
Edited on Sat Jan-05-08 11:36 PM by calmblueocean
The media have been so obsessed with Hillabama that they've just ignored Edwards, even though he was polling competitively with both of them the whole time. I just hope the New Hampshireites show some wisdom when they go to the polls and give Edwards the vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cynical Idealist Donating Member (7 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 02:29 AM
Response to Reply #18
19. Here's hoping NH on Tuesday shows Edwards' surge
Tuesday will tell us. It'll be interesting if Sunday AM talk shows alter their Hillabama (I like it) obsession - but I doubt it.
Thanks for the welcome.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
2hip Donating Member (350 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 03:02 AM
Response to Reply #17
20. Chin up - There's a propitious opening in the media black-out
Edwards will be on This Week with George Stephanopoulos Tomorrow
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2602561#2608135

This is phenomenal timing! He'll get to solidify the points he made at the debates while it's still fresh on everyone's mind.



  Edwards '08 tees!


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Milo_Bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #17
22. This is completely untrue, as proven by recent history.
Howard Dean made news headlines in 2003 not with mass media support, but because large numbers of people believed in his message and gave to his campaign, so that he broke records.

In 2007 Ron Paul has made headlines, not with mass media support, but again, because large numbers of people believed in the message and gave to the campaign so that he broke records.


The problem with Edwards isn't the message, it is the messenger and the complete lack of sincenrity in the message. The man is running against his own record in the senate and, because of that, is unable to get large numbers of people to believe in him, they way they believed in Howard Dean or even Ron Paul.


The "corporate media" conspiracy stuff is getting a bit silly, ESPECIALLY since it has been proven wrong by a previous candidates on the democratic side and now one on the republican side, or do you think Howard Dean had huge corporate support and Ron Paul has huge corporate donors?

If people believe in the message AND the messenger, they will give money and if they give enough money, the media will take notice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cynical Idealist Donating Member (7 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 01:38 AM
Response to Reply #22
24. I respectfully Disagree
Your response supports actually supports my view about what's wrong with the political culture we find ourselves in. Unfortunately, we have become adherents to the 30 second sound-bite, superficial head-line laden campaigns that works so well for Madison Ave. Your comments about Howard Dean and Ron Paul are 2 cases in point. To what do you refer when you say "...broke records"? That's not the object here.

My problem with the political process today is exactly that -- that we rely on the empty shell of unspecific phrases and code words that sound like they mean something - but don't. To compare Howard Dean's and Ron Paul's both "breaking records" belies the fact that these men disagree on almost everything. Frankly, if I didn't know more about Ron Paul and how dangerous his views really are, I might have been swayed by some of his comments at the NH debate. The devil is ALWAYS in the details, and these are precisely what the pundits, mainstream media and TV/cable pundits deny us.

You don't support your argument that the "corporate media conspiracy stuff" is "silly". Consider that for the first time ever, oil has reached $100 a barrel, that we have been at war in Iraq, supposedly to secure our interests in oil, AND that the private companies running this war are not being held accountable for how they've spent billions of dollars, massive numbers of missing equipment paid for by the American taxpayer and lack of accomplishing any goal given them. Consider the fact that Dick Cheney as the elected Vice-President held an energy summit at the beginning of the first Bush term - and that he has absolutely REFUSED to identify who was at the meeting(s), which corporations (and their own special interests) that they represent. Cheney, Bush, etc.etc. have made, and continue to make, BILLIONS of dollars PERSONALLY from the oil energy market.

Articles in just the last few weeks are beginning to explain about how the privatized health insurance companies that have targeted Medicare recipients have outright lied to senior citizens to get them to leave the Medicare program they are in and join their privatized company. Only later do these "victims" realize they don't have the same health care they had before.

I'm not anti-corporation or capitalism - and John Edwards also stated that many corporations do what's right. They are the basis of our economic society. HOWEVER, the ultimate bottom line of a corporation is to garner as much wealth as possible and reduce the number of competitors to their interests as possible, with no regard for anything or anyone but their bottom line and shareholders. That includes John Q. Public. Read your history. Robber Barons,(railroad, banks, etc.) in the early industrialization period of the late 1800's and early 1900's, who are now known as philanthropists in order to tax shelter their money, once cared only for how much they made at the expense of the people who worked for them. This is what caused the many previous recessions and depressions of the 1800s and 1900's. It is only governmental anti-trust and changes in the economic regulations which have kept another GREAT DEPRESSION - and allowed a middle class to arise to more prosperity. These constraints have been the target of the Bush-Cheney folk - and they have wiped many of them out.

Which candidates on either the Democratic or Republican side has "proven the corporate conspiracy stuff wrong" and how did they do this?

The media itself is a corporate entity. And the pundits that we see - who represent the corporate view - and who are paid big bucks to buy into the corporate mentality - aren't you and me. Charlie Gibson got his XXX handed to him by snidely putting down all of the Democratic candidates position of tax reform by citing "two (mythical) college professors making $100,000 each..." He was laughed into embarrassment by the candidates and the audience. How many families make $200,000 or more? I'm a professional and I make a decent living-- but I don't fall into that category. Do you?

Let's require specific explanations of candidates' plans on specific issues. Those details can REALLY keep the devil's fires roaring.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
surfermaw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 02:20 PM
Response to Original message
23. There might be a backlash for Edwards
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 16th 2024, 08:32 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC