Who would be the LEAST electable of these two candidates?

[mtnsnake]

Poll question: Who would be the LEAST electable of these two candidates?

[robinlynne]

1. I assume you mean least electable in the general election?

in other words, most likely to take republican votes.

[mtnsnake]

4. Yes, the general. nt

[SaveElmer]

2. I think either would have a difficult time...

But the populist schtick Edwards has going has never worked...

[yourout]

3. I am not so sure about that......these are different times and the average Joe is looking for.....

someone like Edwards.

Or at least someone that is not completely owned by big corporations.

[SaveElmer]

9. I hear the same thing every four years...

Along with the great myth of the unengaged voters rising up to elect an underdog...

Fact is, most people do not have the same view of corporations as Edwards rhetoric would suggest...sure it is good politics to do a little corporate bashing...particularly when there is fraud and corruption...but most people do not have the sme visceral hatred of them...

Many people you know...work for these corporations...and attacks on them are often viewd as attacks on their livelihood. ANd everyone has brand and product loyalties that just are not going to be swayed by campaign rhetoric.

It didn't work during the depression...it won't work now...

[robinlynne]

19. I'm gonna take a wild guess and say you are a hillary supporter....

[robinlynne]

5. Actually I think edwards will take a general election by storm.

As someone was describing him today: he is a blue senator who took a red state.

[SaveElmer]

10. In a Democratic sweep year against a very unpopular incumbent...

And polls clearly show he would have had a very difficult reelection...

[IndianaGreen]

6. Edwards and Obama are both electable!

It would be great to have them both on the same ticket, for they complement each other very nicely.

[mtnsnake]

7. Many people do not seem to agree with you on that. nt

[yourout]

8. And many do agree.

[donilo]

17. edwards/obama

I like Edwards/Obama as well. They would make a wonderful team. Another way to look at this is to ask, “What republican would be electable?”

The main ones:

Giuliani? Self-destructing (thank God!)

Romney? Religion, in the end, will keep him out (thank God again – maybe moreso? :-))

Thompson? Only his TV life is maintaining him – and perhaps older voters. Not nearly enough.

Huckabee? His veneer is thin, and once people start looking beneath the “nice and quiet” exterior they’ll think again.

McCain? He’s possibly the one with the best chance – due to war record (Viet Nam, not Iraq – lol) and torture. However, his flopping around in every direction for the past years will come back to haunt him. Also age could be an issue (though remember, they did get Reagan in).

Paul? The maverick republican. “Get us out of Iraq” will possibly even help get some disenchanted democrats, but again when people start taking a closer look at his other positions they may think again. Also, his percentages are so low that it would take a miracle.

Let’s not consider the others.

So in summary, McCain seems to stand the best chance. Here’s where Iraq comes in big time. That alone could be enough to push the election to Edwards/Obama. Actually just about any democratic combination stands a very good chance to win. My preference, though, is Edwards/Obama. On the bottom of my democratic list are Clinton (BURIED in corporate interests) and Biden (credit card bankruptcy vote - he's deep into that industry's pockets).

[cali]

11. Although both are electable, Edwards is easier for the repukes

to frame, and I'm pretty sure I know how they'd do it. They'd simultaneously point him as a phony and as out of the mainstream. These two contradict one another, but that's never been a problem for the repukes.

Expect to hear lots about Fortress and Edwards lifestyle if he gets the nomination.

[MADem]

12. Well, they'd frame Edwards HEAD ON. He's a LAWYER. Obama, though, they'd frame sneakily

Pssssssssssst....he's a NEGRO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! One of those COLORED people!!!!!!!!!!! And his name is Osama and he went to school in a madrasa...oh, and he's a MUSLIM!! You know that MUSLIM stuff is inherited through the 'deddy' not the momma!!!

Up against the "Ambulance Chasing, Greedy Trial Lawyer Costing YOU (YEW) Money" Theme, the "OOPS he's BLACK! Osama-Obama" themes are a tougher assault in a general.

And let's not forget our old friends, voter suppression and voter caging!!

Some Greatest Hits:

The POLICE will be checking ID's at the polling places, now!!

Don't forget to vote on WEDNESDAY!!

Your polling place has been changed!!!!

Actually, it's almost a wash which one they'd pound hardest. They'll pound, though, make no mistake, no matter who gets it. We just have to be prepared, I guess.

[adnelson60087]

14. And while they frame him as an attorney,

he pulls out the PEOPLE he actually won cases for and blow the GOP's weak-minded defenses away.

[cali]

20. I never said they'd frame him as an attny.

though that will surely be part of it. They'll frame him as a flip flopper and a hypocrite. They'll use his house, his pay off from a Hedge fund, etc, and contrast it with Edwards asking Americans to make sacrifices.

[adnelson60087]

25. Sorry i mis-read your post

but those attacks don't mean crap when folks are losing their homes, kids can't afford college, gas prices keep rising, etc. He's a guy living the example of sacrifice by paying more himself and not seeking a slimy GOP way out. I think he will be fine.

[Adelante]

41. Those attacks certainly do mean something ..

when the candidate made big money on subprime foreclosures and only rid himself of those investments once there was a collapse, one, and once they were discovered, two. If you think the Repukes are going to say what a nice guy Edwards is for giving a few thousand to victims in New Orleans, when there are foreclosure victims from the hedge fund he worked for, and has half his fortune tied up in, and was one of his biggest contributers to his campaign, foreclosures all over the country, well, seriously, he won't be fine.

"those attacks don't mean crap when folks are losing their homes"

[denem]

32. Cali what I expect is the endless clips of Edwards

speaking very passionately: "This is John Edwards in 2003, and this in John Edwards today. What would he say if he go in into the White House?"

[adnelson60087]

13. I fully expect that the Dems ticket in '08 will be Edwards/Obama.

Hillary has far too many negatives to carry the day in Iowa and NH will change on a dime. I suspect her support is overall pretty soft, though she has plenty of big-dollar donors. Time will tell, I guess.

[cali]

28. time will tell.

The odds against Edwards are enormous. If anyone pulls off the upset it will be Obama. And I think he may do it. But no way does he pick Edwards as running mate. He needs someone with foreign policy experience. And if Edwards does pull off an unlikely miracle, he needs someone with foreign policy experience too.

[Auntie Bush]

33. Looks like Edwards and Obama both need Clark...but I don't see

Edwards asking him or him accepting...too much bad blood.

Biden would be a good VP for Obama or Edwards.

Clark would be a good VP for both Hillary and Obama if he wanted to be VP.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BeyondGeography]

18. Scary, man

Scary.

[JohnLocke]

21. Amen, brother.

Go Obama. :)

[sufrommich]

26. Oh.my.god. That pic is straight from Free Republic

and you know it.

[Cameron27]

30. That's bad,

I'm surprised you'd post that shit here.

[zulchzulu]

16. Other...

Both Edwards and Obama certainly would be a hell of a lot more electable than the Goldwater Girl.

[Tellurian]

22. Edwards and Obama would be crucified in the General..

Neither one stands a chance against the Republicans.

They can barely hold their own against Hillary and she's hardly lifted a finger against them.

Obama and Edwards are both amateurs competing in a world of seasoned professionals.

[Quixote1818]

23. Hillary is the one who had a 50 point lead handed to her and has completely blown it

Edwards and Obama seem to be doing pretty good against your so called "seasoned professional".

[Tellurian]

40. Handed to her...when did that happen.?.

Do yourself a favor and try living in a reality based world.

[gmudem]

31. What world do you live in?

Any Democrat is going to be slimed as much as possible by the Republicans. But do you really think they won't do it to Clinton? Republicans are going to have a great time sliming Clinton, I mean you must realize she's about the most hated figure in the country by the Greedy Old Perverts don't you?

[Tellurian]

39. Not in the world of 61 posts..

Welcome and enjoy your stay..

[Lilith Velkor]

24. It's LESS, not LEAST.

Just sayin'.

[mtnsnake]

29. Thank you, Teacher!

:evilgrin:

:hi:

[CyberPieHole]

27. There is absolutely no way Obama could win in the General Election...

He is probably the weakest of ALL of our candidates. And that includes Gravel.

[MadBadger]

34. And why is that?

[ChiciB1]

35. Once Again... Polls Taken Here, While They Don't Depict The General

public, we see a trend of Edwards supporters and yet he get so little attention that Clinton and Obama get on a DAILY basis.

There's a certain unfairness on the part of MSM, and for me if given half a chance, Edwards CAN win in the GE!! We just need to pummel MSM and question THEIR motives, although I think many of us already have the answer!

[hayu_lol]

36. I am a Hillary supporter...

didn't make my decision until about two weeks ago.

Between Obama and Edwards, I believe Obama has the leading edge and will show this if he is chosen.

No facts, just conjecture on my part. Personally, I would prefer Obama to Edwards.

[ChiciB1]

43. And To This I Say... To Each His Own It's Only "Normal" & Group Think

doesn't make sense! I support Edwards, I just think he's getting short changed and panned by MSM.. Other candidates are as well, but given the fact that Edwards is said to be among the TOP THREE Democratic candidates, it would "seems" he would be given justifiable coverage!

All I'm saying is give him a chance, but I KNOW some reasons why he's left out and those reasons aren't very Democratic! Of course, this country was founded as a Republic so why would Democracy matter??

She says with a tinge of :sarcasm: presented!

[rufus dog]

37. why would you put up a poll to start slams against two candidates

Very interesting, seeing it is a three way race currently why, if you wanted to have a free for all brawl, would you not include all three?

[mtnsnake]

38. I hope you're not serious. It's important to find which one of these two is least likely to move on

and if Hillary was in this poll, that would have been impossible.

Very interesting, seeing it is a three way race currently why, if you wanted to have a free for all brawl, would you not include all three?

I'm not interested in having a "free for all brawl". Aren't you sick of all the flames yet? Have you only been here for a day or something? If not, have you ever seen a poll with Hilllary involved that results in an honest answer or that doesn't have flames? I don't think so. Heck, even in a poll without her there are mindless posts about her, one including a picture of her taken right from the Free Republic (deleted by the mods). So the only way to get results that might even be close to relevant are to do a poll like this without her in it. And please don't tell me that you haven't seen polls with just Hillary and one other person in it, so this is no different, only one of the people isn't Hillary.

If Hillary was in this poll, we never would have seen that Barack Obama is more than twice as likely to LOSE in the General Election than John Edwards. The results actually surprised me. I didn't think John Edwards was so much more electable than Obama, but I guess I was wrong.

[rucky]

42. Toss-up.

Obama: I think any increased turnout from racists will be negated by increased turnout from Af-Ams.

Edwards: We may lose some minority votes, turnout-wise, but it won't be a motivation for the wingnuts to show up at the polls to vote him down, either.

[Carrieyazel]

44. Edwards more electable than Obama. But not by much. And both have problems.

Both have never served in executive office. Number of legislators with no executive experience who have made it to the Presidency in the modern political era:

ONE: JFK

or TWO, if you count Warren Harding, (who was only lieutenant governor); some see that as a ceremonial post that doesn't count.

That's not a good track record. Governors are the ones who get in, like it or not. Which makes Huckabee very dangerous.

[Perry Logan]

45. Either of them would win by a landslide.

[Carrieyazel]

46. Both are not very good general election candidates. Senators always have a rough time.

Their voting records can be ripped apart, and the Senate is seen as this stuffy elite club.