Obama Best Fighter, '04 Lack of Words Defines Edwards

[Khaotic]

I've been living in Davenport, Iowa, since February 2000, and while I wasn't born into the caucus experience, this Show-Me State Native realizes how important the process is, and I've decided Sen. Barack Obama is the best candidate for the Democratic nomination.

Picking a candidate is more than attempting to choose the guy who has the best stump speech, it's selecting the individual who will best represent the people, the one who will give us government for, of, and by the people.

While both Edwards and Obama are great candidates, I don't believe Edwards would survive to the general election.

Why?

When it comes down to it I can NOT get over the image of Edwards from election night 2004. My mind continues to roll over the image of Edwards as he resolutely walked out from behind a curtain to inform us that every vote would be counted in Ohio. We had been told that there were tribes of lawyers on the ground in Ohio ... it wasn't going to be like 2000; heads were going to roll!

The next morning Kerry gave up, Edwards faded away, and neither politician gave us a piece of their mind about the event.

I'm still waiting John Edwards.

You might wonder just what I'm waiting for. I'm waiting for his thoughts, his opinion, his rant ... whatever.

I'm sick of political correctness and a ringing of hands as to whether people will think he has sour grapes.

I don't know about stories of Edwards on the ground in Ohio bringing the election 'evildoers' to light who were responsible for scaling back the number of election machines. Those who were responsible for telling people to vote on the wrong day. Those who were behind locking doors and making ballot boxes dissapear.

On election night I thought Edwards was a fighter. It was about the people ... the thugs in the GOP had pulled the strings again and I thought Edwards was going to tell us that he didn't care if Kerry was going to disappear quietly into the night, he wasn't!

But he did.

I do NOT believe Barack Obama will quietly sit and let himself be destroyed and swiftboated. He will fight. He won't scream, he won't freak, but he won't back down and he will go infront of the media and tell his side because the truth needs to be told.

I believe he's on a mission, he cares about this country and it's not about him. It's not about his reputation, it's about getting to the starting line.

That's right, the starting line ... election day. I believe our beloved progressive minded Edwards will get steam rolled just as Kerry did and I don't believe he has the ability to fight back effectively enough to have the definite support to win the general election.

If the general election were held the day after winning the Democratic nomiation then Edwards would have a shot, but that's not reality.

In the end in '04, the GOP definately feared Dean because they knew he was a fighter. It was beyond having grassroots support, it's about being effective against your opponent in the fight.

Iowa was too wrapped up in having a candidate who would bring the base together, someone who was mainstream who had military experience, no mud slinging, be nice, etc., etc.

I was there, I caucused for Kerry for many of those reasons. Dean and Gephardt destoyed each other and Iowans wanted a united Democratic Party, not one at odds with itself. If you wanted to fight then you were to be sent to the corner. That is effectely what Iowans did to Dean and Gephardt in '04.

Today we MUST think not only about the general election, but the long hard slog through the certain muck that will be the trail to the general election.

The discussion shouldn't be about how deep the muck will be. How dark it will be, or what it will be made out of. It will be there regardless of who the nominee is.

The discussion should be about who can survive the muck. Who can effectively wade through it and get to the general election looking just as good as when they finished the acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention.

Bill Clinton did it, Al Gore didn't, Kerry didn't, and I think a gut search will tell you who can (and can not) do it this time.

Out of every Democrat running for the nomination, Obama is the candidate who can do it.

I don't want to repeat 2004. I'm going to caucus for Barack Obama for President of the United States.

Davenport Iowan

[The River]

1. I'll Guarantee A Loss in 08

if Obama is nominated. Same for Hillary.
They are both being set up as a cover story
for election theft by the GOP.

[aquart]

4. Thank you for your concern.

Spreading despair and hopelessness is always the right thing to do.

[The River]

10. No, It's a Guarantee

It's right there in the Title G U A R A N T E E
If you feel hopeless, find a better candidate.

*hits ignore button*

[cali]

20. bookmarked to taunt you with at a later date. n/t

[TwilightZone]

5. Oh, please.

If the Republicans are going to steal the election, what difference does it make who our candidate is?

[Kansas Wyatt]

12. Republicans wouldn't have to cheat to win against Obama & Hillary

Edwards is the only one they cannot beat, and they will be blown out.

[cali]

19. I'm so sick of this nonsense from Edwards supporters about

how only he can win. It's bullshit that's repeated ad nauseum. And it discounts the imploding of the pukes, the fact that repuke party has been bleeding support for a couple of years, and the ability of both Obama and Clinton to run effective campaigns. Not to mention that Edwards with his spending limits would have virtually no money for months- and 527s can't run candidate ads or coordinate with the campaign itself. Get over the the "only Edwards can win line". It's not supportable.

[Hoof Hearted]

32. Thank you! Not to mention the implicit message that a woman or a black man can't win.

Edwards has plenty of problems of his own.

[mmonk]

2. Loads of conjecture there.

[theoldman]

3. The Republicans I know fear Obama much more than they

fear Clinton or Edwards. Obama will be hard to swift boat.

[EFerrari]

8. How do you figure that a party founded on racism fears Obama?

I'd like to know how that works.

[EFerrari]

6. If anything, Edwards was the fighter in 2004.

Against his position, the DLC, the DNC AND Kerry's silence.

Sorry, no sale.

[AndyA]

7. Wouldn't the decision to stick with it and fight or give up have been Kerry's?

I was always under the impression that John Kerry, not Edwards, was the one who threw in the towel. I know how you feel, I felt betrayed as well because he didn't seem to fight at all for those votes.

But I don't hold that against Edwards. Ultimately, I think Kerry's feelings were the ones that influenced the events that night.

Obama is not the man to bring about the changes we need in this country. I'm still waiting for his apology to all gay people for promoting a "cure" for being gay. If Barack doesn't understand that this was bigotry, no one possibly could.

[Khaotic]

13. Edwards Came Out That Night

... Kerry didn't.

Edwards set the tone and then didn't follow up.

Don't tell me it was solely up to Kerry. If that's the case then why did Edwards (not Kerry) address us on election night?????

I believe Kerry didn't have it in him and Edwards couldn't take it and spoke out. Edwards thought he should have been the nominee the whole time and when it came down to crunch time the guy who beat him sulked off into the night leaving him to address their supporters.

He did just that, but something happened after that. I don't know what, but I don't want to read into it. I want to hear it from him.

I haven't heard jack from him since election night '04 on the subject.

Silence isn't golden in politics.

[EFerrari]

16. Edwards was sent out that night by the campaign.

And for you to tar him with the huge mistakes they made is ridiculous.

[Ignis]

28. Edwards wanted to fight, Kerry decided to concede.

It was Kerry's call, as it was Kerry's campaign. It's not up to the Veep candidate to decide whether to concede or not.

Your anger at Edwards here is misplaced. No one blamed Lieberman for Gore's concession in 2000.

[dysfunctional press]

9. no thanks. i will not support a corporatist. i'm sticking with edwards.

but then, i never realized that a candidate has to have YOUR support to make it through to the general election...:shrug:

[Khaotic]

14. Obama a Corporatist?

News to me.

... and I never said anyone had to have my support.

They do need to have enough support to have a ice cube's chance in hell of winning the election.

I'm sharing my opinion, that's it.

Don't go pulling a Fox News and putting words in my mouth.

[dysfunctional press]

31. then you really need to do some more research on obama.

and perhaps the dlc.

[Kansas Wyatt]

11. Obama & Hillary have been bought and paid for by Corporate America.

John Edwards has not, and will represent 'We The People.'

Obama & Hillary are indebted to their Corporate Masters.


Anyone want to put the graph up again to show who is in Corporate America's pocket?

[Khaotic]

15. Obama isn't taking $$$ from PACs

[Kansas Wyatt]

17. I contribute to a labor union PAC each week.

Obama just goes right to the Corporate Gravy Train.

[EFerrari]

18. Before you wedge your foot in your mouth any further, here's a link:

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.asp?id=N00009638&cycle=2008

[Kansas Wyatt]

24. I was referring to the graph that was posted earlier in the week.

The one that placed the candidates side by side, to show who they were going to represent.

[EFerrari]

34. In fairness to you AND to all our candidates, how do you have

a national campaign without corporate money? It's a pox on our elections.

[cali]

22. oh please. If you think you're winning any support for

Edwards that way you're mistaken. And his little hedge fund frolics don't inspire confidence in me.

[Kansas Wyatt]

25. Those who work for a living know exactly who each candidate will represent.

Hillary and Obama = More of the same for Working Americans.

[The Traveler]

21. I cannot agree

While I hold Obama in middlin' high regard, I do not regard him as a candidate of change. I think Krugman has already summed up those arguments quite well and will not repeat them here.

We can argue all you want over policy, but when you want to blame Edwards ... a VP candidate ... for the cowardly retreat of the Democratic Party leadership structure I cannot give credence to your argument. Edwards' response to the 2004 debacle appears to have been to take the rubber baby buggy bumpers off and expose all the hard edges of his original thesis ... that two Americas were being formed, and that most of us were being relegated to the impoverished one. He has redoubled his assault in the only way he practically can.

Were Obama to sincerely and passionate take up that cause without caution and restraint as Edwards and Kucinich have, then I could more seriously consider him. He has obvious leadership qualities. I consider him a man of great character. But his vision seems devoid of real substantive direction for change ... and right now, America needs a serious course correction.

I do not believe either Clinton or Obama would make those corrections. I think they would redress some of the more extreme corruption and mismanagement of government we have witnessed in recent years, and that is to the good, but I doubt either will significantly challenge the fundamental imbalance of power.

As I find these considerations compelling, I must stand with Edwards, and confess your argument puzzles me.

[DefenseLawyer]

23. That's fine that you are an Obama supporter

but you should just say you like Obama, rather than to try to rationalize with some lame reason why you just don't trust Edwards. That makes your post just a hit piece on another candidate, not a show of support for yours. But, if you must go that route, at least come up with a better one than that. Edwards was the VP candidate for crying out loud. He had neither the authority or the support or the money to launch some kind of breakaway battle to count all the votes for vice-president. Do I think KERRY should have contested the obviously fraudulent results in Ohio? Yes. But remember he was being advised by keep your-powder-dry, go-along-to-get-along, stay-in-the-middle, always-lose Bob Shrum and his band of morons, and much like with the Swift Boat attacks, their advice was unsound. You can't lay that on Edwards though. It is silly to try.

[cooolandrew]

26. EXACTLY. No matter what Edwards says there is no living down 04 and his vote for Iraq....

...Obama has put all his cards on the table and admitted his flaws stright out the door. Obama has fight new energy and in a debate could easily obliterate republican oppostion.

Obama 08

[cooolandrew]

27. ....

...

[cooolandrew]

29. Superb post. I said this months ago Barack can fight and fight is on the way.

[cooolandrew]

30. Superb post. I said this months ago Barack can fight and fight is on the way....

Forget the racism thing barack is liked left and right all either side needs is convicing and I believe he would.

[LaPera]

33. Edwards is a fighter! Just watching him overcome the two media darlings

the two top money raisers we hear over & over, daily ramming poll after poll of the two as if there's no one else able to touch Obama & Hillary....rarely do we see Edwards even mentioned, until now...because Edwards will win Iowa and come in at least second in NH....Fox and the rest make it seem as if there's only two Dem candidates to vote for, it's incredible....As the republicans and their media continue to pretend it's only a two candidate race....Obama & Hillary....Republicans like that and do NOT want Edwards to be the nominee.....because they know, as all polls show Edwards will win!

If anything, John Edwards is a fighter!!

[EFerrari]

35. Yes, he is. And my respect for the man grows every day. n/t

[Inspired]

36. Here it comes. Going negative on Edwards.

[Pastiche423]

37. Re-write history much?

Al Gore did not fight? Were you asleep when he took it to the Supreme Court? How much higher could he have taken it?

But I agree w/you about johnnyboy. It appears as though many DUers can't wait to have a former DLCer, a Bildeberger, a warmongerer that co-sponsored, voted for the IWR and voted to fund it (has he ever been to a war protest?), a person that worked at a hedge fund to learn about poverty??? AND a person that built a humongous house, clear cutting thousands of trees while we are in Climate Change.

It disgusts me that so many DUers want a proven corporate candidate, because they believe his words, not his actions when he had a chance to fucking do something while in the senate.

Meet the new boos, same as the old boss.