Edwards will go above Clinton tomorrow probably.

The right moment for Edwards appears to be 2012.

Out of curiosity, what about Edwards leaves him trailing in N.H.? I don't know much about the voters there, but I really think that Obama and Edwards have very similar appeal - they both advocate change from the working man's stand. I wonder what sets Obama so far ahead in this area...

He's also effectively pushed obama to be a CHANGE candidate instead of a HOPE candidate- in reality obama has very few progressive ideas and is basically a corporate democrat who doesn't ACT like one in his speeches, but does in his finances. if edwards leaves then he'll go back to being more about hope than progress. its similar to how ned lamont got the iraq war to be the #1 issue last year, except john has made the american people the #1 issue(what a novel concept). if edwards sticks around and loses then the democratic party will FINALLY become a progressive party again. if he leaves we'll continue to just get by.

Sounds like wishful thinking on Trippi's part.

If Edwards is to stay in the race for the nomination, then he has to stay visible and come in at least second in any primary or caucus that comes up.  He also has to hope that both Obama and Clinton beat each other up enough for him to make his move.  It can't be too late and much after the last primaries and caucuses.  There still need to be some left.  If it goes much beyond Febuary 5th with little chance of Obama slowing down, it might be the end of Edwards' campaign.  New Jersey is coming and I need to make up my mind.

It would take nothing short of Obama and another woman story to destroy him now.  Hillary gave it her best shot and it blew up in her face.  The best Edwards can hope for is to pass Hillary.

Face it Hillary lovers, your girl is finished.  I feel Nevada will be the line in the sand for Hillary Clinton.

Is he taken seriously as a candidate? If so, by who?

I have enjoyed having John Edwards in the campaign. His wife also.

It's too bad the corporate media had to put such a huge price on this election with advertising. We all needed to hear Dennis Kucinich's message. The whole country. It was an important one. But profits being profits ........... that's democracy for ya.

Dennis Kucinich  - Peacekeeper.

"Gov. Moonbeam"?  

Are you 6?
Is this 1991?
Can you guys write anything about Democrats without resorting to GOP framing?

$400.00 haircuts, but he's not the candidate of wealth, glamour, or glitz?  No wonder John and Hillary are trailing Obama.

The Power of Emotional Speeches

Does "Like Preaching" method of communication inspire people to a higher level?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1468

.

National Review and David Brooks support Obama!
and dumb Obama supporters can't see the scam!

After the 2004 election, Repub strategists admitted John Edwards was the one they feared most. And so - they targeted Kerry - knowing the Dems would rush to him in Iowa. It worked!

Now the RNC is manipulating Dems again.
Different strategy - same goal - to deliver a candidate that won't win the general.

The RNC wants to run against Hillary or Obama.
Dems are so easy!

John Edwards has had the CHANGE mantra since he announced his candidacy.
Obama copied that and other Edwards ideas!
Go Edwards!

You know - I might feel more comfortable with Obama if the media had scrutinized him at all.
But they haven't.
The media has given him a pass on everything!
God help us if he's the nominee! Dems will lose!

Democrats will eventually realize that John Edwards has the best chance of winning in November.

Edwards beats all Republicans in Ohio, outside the margin of error.  Clinton and Obama do not.

http://www.daytondailynews.com/n/content/oh/story/news/state/2008/01/05/ddn010608edwards.html

Edwards beats all Republicans in NC, outside the MOE, Clinton and Obama do not.

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2007/12/general-election-poll-president.html

John Edwards beats two Republicans in Oklahoma of all places, is within the MOE against Huckabee, while Clinton and Obama lose by 20-30 points against Republicans, there.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=071226_1_A1_hButC86400

John Edwards' goal is to get it down to him versus Obama.  At that time, the argument may be made that Edwards is the Democrats' best chance to win in November, because you have to win "states" (electoral college) in order to win a General Election.

Over the course of the year, Obama has been weak against Republicans on a "state-by-state" level.  Therefore, he would be a "weak" General Election candidate, and a drag on other Democrats, down the ballot.

John Edwards is a good man
I alternated between supporting him and Obama
They're both reformers and insurgents

Obama/Edwards would be our strongest ticket
Let's hope this comes about

If Obama wins New Hampshire by a greater margin than Iowa, it seems the time for Edwards to bow out

But, then that would seem to be the logical place for Hillary to bow out, too

Hopefully, after a NH victory the Democrats will coalesce around Obama

Edwards deserves a place on the ticket

I'd have a HEART ATTACK if Hillary weaseled her way on it !

Obama/Edwards '08

PS
anybody notice the new talking points from Team Clinton ?
Where's the beef ?
Give us specifics ?
Hopefully, they won't include muslim or cocaine in their campaign death throes

What ever happened to van, Merle, Susan, Miami and Psychic Mary ?

Bye, Bye !!

Kathryn - did you see the interview with an Obama supporter AFTER the Iowa caucus?  She didn't even know his positions - and through the reporter learned she did NOT support his positions.

Perhaps many Iowans voted for HOPE - not for Obama's positions which are downplayed with hype and platitudes.

Obama - just another empty suit the media prefers.

you will always find someone that has a reason to be negative.

edwards is in pretty good shape looks like to me, hillarys done, and anyone that has paid any attention to this campaign knows edwards was the change candidate from the beginning, obama has adopted the change slogan but what change does he stand for, obama is a little too cozy with the corporate crowd for me and in the beginning he didn't try to hide that fact like he is now, edwards is the only candidate that has stayed on target with his message and plans, I look for him to bring that up once the hillary gives up, this is far from over yet, edwards can win the general election obama can't

jerry/ [[Face it Hillary lovers, your girl is finished.  I feel Nevada will be the line in the sand for Hillary Clinton]]

Does the mob still run Vegas? If so, Hillary's got a good chance in NV.

This is an interesting play and I'm wondering if this is simply a way for Obama and Edwards to keep the tandem god cop bad cop attack on HRC throughout the primary. I hope so because the worst thing that could happen to the Democrats would be nominating HRC. Nominating HRC GUARANTEES a GOP victory - put the money in the bank right now.

On the subject of Edwards, I find the media's absolute refusal to include him the conversation really disheartening. He gets no coverage and no respect. The MEDIA has chosen to make this a 2 horse race. Point in case, Edwards received the fewest questions and time to speak during the recent debate.  Russert and his roundtable (Andrea, David, and Chuck) never mentioned JRE during the 30 minutes I watched the show Sunday. And MSNBC's Chris Matthews fawns over Obama like a smitten school girl. Sadly, MSNBC is not alone in this lack of coverage - its the same on CNN and FNC (to the extent they even cover Dems). It's really unfortunate because the more people hear JRE and come to understand his message and passion the more they like him.

Richard,
I didn't catch that. I think it is interesting, though. I am a huge supporter of change - and hope and all of the great things that each of these candidates seems to be advocating. However, I think it takes more than just a man with a vision. Unlike Hillary, I do think the power of words is awesome. As another blogger pointed out earlier, doesn't she remember the "I have a dream" speech? I am from Birmingham, Alabama. I KNOW the power of words and what change they bring about. I also believe that Obama is a great idealist. However, I think we need to examine more closely his actions. I would like to know more about him - the meat of the man. I would also like to know more about all of the candidates.

It is definately one thing to sit back and talk, or to have the desire for change and the hope of a better tomorrow. And it is one thing to talk change and walk the way of the beaten path.

fabooj wrote, ""Gov. Moonbeam"?  
Are you 6?
Is this 1991?
Can you guys write anything about Democrats without resorting to GOP framing?"

You have to remember fabooj that Domenico is to reporting what Fox News is to the news.

What ever happened to van, Merle, Susan, Miami and Psychic Mary ?

Bye, Bye !!

Sierra, SF (Sent Monday, January 07, 2008 3:23 PM)


If I was a Clinton supporter....
And I saw that pout at the debate Saturday night....
I wouldn't be on here today either.....

I'm sure our pollster will be back shortly.....

Edwards is the most viable democratic candidate we have. I like Obama as well but I just don't see him standing up to McCain or the other strong Republican candidates and that scares me. I agree with framecop, Edwards is just trying to wait out Hilary, if he can be succesful in that quest I think more people will realize the ticket should be Edwards/Obama and not the other way around. I just hope Hilary realizes she needs to drop out sooner than later. Here's hoping!

How about Edwards/Obama?

Looks like Obama will run the board.  Hopefully, HRC will bow out after Nevada and leave John and Barack to debate the finer points of change and progressivism.

Too bad it's all about who shows up best on TV.  Obama is a GREAT speaker.  He does not, however, have the passion for change behind his speaking ability that Edwards has.  And we are dying (literally) for change.

If Obama wins, rather than Edwards, then John should either be VP or AG.  He absolutely must be an important part of the next administration -- best as Pres, 2nd best as VP or AG.

Do we Really want a President with a Terrorist's NAME?  Or a Woman, who I do not believe can stand up to All the Other Men in other Countries.  I wouldn't want the other countries to think we were WEAK.

Just because some Republicans may be supporting Obama because they think Edwards is more electable doesn't mean they're right.  The conventional wisdom is imploding .  

If all those white indies in Iowa and New Hampshire really ARE willing to vote for a black guy named Obama then maybe that particular piece of common wisdom has expired. As for a supposed lack of media scrutiny, the Clintons have done their best to find and push dirt and they couldn't get anything to stick.  Besides, there IS no candidate the other side can't try to swiftboat. So that's a given with anybody.

And most important, how accurate has the smirking, superior pundit approved common wisdom proved to be lately.  MSNBC,CNN and everyone else had it Clinton Giuliani, wake me for the general. Fox is so stunned by the death of the inevitability of Clinton against Giuliani, they don't know WHAT talking points to parrot anymore.  These media folks ( with a few exceptions) simply don't know what they're talking about anymore.  They are like a bunch of old generals fighting the last war. Ignore them.

So far this process has shown me that the media is a big part of the momentum for Barack. Barack sounds good but there is no substance in his speeches and yet people who are tauted as having insight and intelligence are being swept into a frenzy over a buzz word.  The media has just about locked Edwards out of the conversation and this disappoints me.

Edwards / Obama 08!!!!!! Edwards has the plans, the passion , and the patriotism for the job. Obama has copied Edward's plans so he might as well be on the ticket with him. Come on NH and all other Dems support John Edwards as he is the ONLY one that can beat the Republicans and most important of all he can lead this country. Edwards is FOR THE PEOPLE!!

Obamarama, the messiah candidate.  Don't tell me liberals can't be religious.  The Kumbayah Democrats are going to thow another election to the Rebublicans.

Edwards' Impassioned Plea

Who's more likely to benefit from John Edwards' vote, if he were to exit the Presidential Race?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1467

.

One of the places Edwards is going is Washington State, which is the biggest prize in the weekend after Super Tuesday.  His organization here is strong and growing.
And yes, despite what your Political Calendar says, all of Washington's Democratic delegates and half of the Republican delegates will be chosen in caucuses on Saturday, February 9.  The Feb. 19 "primary" is just a beauty contest on the Democratic side.

I am an Edwards' supporter and I think that he is most likely to win, but it appears that the Democratic voters are again stupid and refuse to consider him.

However, I like the idea of him staying in the race.  He can push Obama and make him a stronger candidate.

If, somehow, Edwards can get 2nd in New Hampshire tomorrow (some polls have him only 6 points down from Clinton), things could get interesting.  Clinton would be effectively done.  And suddenly, we would need to know where Clinton's support would go---Obama or Edwards.

A lot of this is pretty unrealistic, but a person can dream.  I do know that I will continue to financially support Edwards while he is in the race.  Obama will see none of my money.

The media is making the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries much more important than they really are. Neither state is really representative of the national population. The real test of the candidates comes on Super Tuesday. All the rest is preliminary, regardless of what the "pundits" say in the newspaper and on TV. The media has a self-serving reason for exaggerating the importance of the earliest primaries. It inflates their audience.

We know why Hillary shouldn't be the candidate. But why Edwards rather than Obama?

- Prior to this presidential run, Obama accepted over $1 mil in contributions from PACs, lobbyists & corporations, including healthcare providers and oil companies. His personal PAC, HopeFund, received thousands from defense contractors and the insurance industries. (Uhm, hope for who?) He's been endorsed by 16 lobbyists.

John Edwards has *never* accepted money from lobbyists or PACs and no lobbyist has endorsed him. Obama agreed to no lobbyist and PAC *after* Edwards threw down that gauntlet.

Is Obama really "bringing people together" as he keeps saying? Sure. Problem: They're not people most of us *want* brought together. As Glenn Hurowitz writing in the Huffington Post points out, he's brought together corporate execs and rightwing republicans and he ended up supporting an expanded NAFTA (so much for being pro-union), liquid coal (which doubles the rate of global warming) and the Shrub's 2005 energy bill which included billions of dollars worth of subsidies to oil, coal and nuclear companies. He also voted in support of credit-card companies, letting them raise their interest rates above 30 percent.

John Edwards, on the other hand, opposed the expansion of NAFTA and opposes liquification of coal. He won the endorsement of Friends of the Earth (who are anti-coal) and the United Mine Workers (who like coal). Now that's my idea of bringing people together.

He has a health care plan and is sure that people will sign on if not mandated. Maybe, maybe not. I suppose it would depend on if they could afford it. But then why did he fail to support raising the minimum wage until John Edwards publically challenged him on it?

It wouldn't take much to just keep going on like this. John Edwards *is* the best candidate. He not only envisions the change, but he has the courage and determination to lead our fight to make the vision of a better America for us and our kids/grandkids a reality.

Where should he be taken seriously? Every where, starting with New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada.

Out of curiosity, what about Edwards leaves him trailing in N.H.? I don't know much about the voters there, but I really think that Obama and Edwards have very similar appeal - they both advocate change from the working man's stand. I wonder what sets Obama so far ahead in this area...
Kathryn in Bham (Sent Monday, January 07, 2008 2:56 PM)

Media coverage!

~ Edwards/Obama or Obama/Edwards ~

Personally, I don't think John Edwards is suffering too much at the moment from the lack of media attention.  The media has never really "gotten" Edwards, so it's to his advantage to stay off their radar for as long as he can.  Meanwhile, his message continues to grow amongst its grassroots base.  By the time he finally receives the attention he deserves, it will (hopefully) be too late for them to tarnish him with more bullsh*t "he's so vain" or "trial lawyer" labeling.

@Bruce, NV:  In response to your question, "Is he taken seriously as a candidate," it would seem the answer is yes.  :-)  I know that I was a bit skeptical when he first announced his candidacy in '04, but mostly because I didn't want to lose a solid democratic Senator in NC - not something we've had enough of, unfortunately.  I think it bears noting that Edwards' Senatorial career began by beating Lauch Faircloth, making him the Junior Senator to Jesse Helms.  If you don't think this guy can appeal to a broad audience, you're not paying attention.

What IS important about New Hampshire and Iowa is all those lily white indies.  The next presidential election will be determined by indies and if all those white indies are willing to go for Obama, that particular argument, not ready for a black guy, is off the table.  We can all stop debating woman vs black guy vs white guy and worry about stuff that matters.  The overwhelming majority of Republicans  isn't going for any Dem anyway so we don't need really to sweat the red neck racist vote.

The media is attempting to manipulate the elections yet again. Just as when they provided coverage for Bush in both elections, and then helped him push us into Iraq.

John Edwards has lead this presidential campaign, Obama and Clinton have both stolen ideas from his platform, neither cared enough about the issues to actually put forward solutions of their own. Both of them, Obama and Clinton have taken more from the health insurance lobbies than even the republican candidates, more than two million apiece. Obama, the so called activist, voted for a bill that denied citizens the right to sue corporations whose products, food, medicine, etc.. were poisonous, contaminated, sickened, maimed or killed loved ones. Obama is Bush, so is Clinton. I'll never vote for either of them.

I'm voting Edwards, he's the only candidate who cares to save our nation.

John Edwards does not have the copyright on the idea of change.

Take a look at Barack Obama's announcement speech for his candidacy on his website,... he must've drummed home the word change about a dozen times.

If the best Edwards supporters can do is basically say "...but John said it first!"... and not even be right about that, well, they're certainly not going to go anywhere in the polls that way.

No news here, quit wasting time with nonsense!

if you guys really belivie any republican can beat obama ,its time for you to go back to those mettings

for you people that say you need to know more about obama or he needs to be vetted more , where have you been the last year . I know more about this guys views and background than my own mother . For godness sake is that all you haters have left . if so just go home and chill out cause its over

Several months ago I thought that Obama and Hillary would tear each other to pieces and Edwards would step through the melee. I no longer think so. Even Edwards and his campaign team seem awed by the inspirational power of Obama. Edwards is doing the smart thing - getting Hillary out of the way and ensuring himself the Vice Presidency.

Super Tuesday will not save Hillary Clinton and neither will her husband. It's over ( See tears of frustration today ). Edwards made a brilliant tactical move in attacking her in the debate, he can sense her demise. Look forward to Obama and Edwards going mano a mano. NO to Clinton / Bush Dynasty !!

If Obama is the nominee, I fear we will have a Republican president.

How is Obama going to solve the world problems?   Hope them to death...
I hope for a somewhat sane Republican like Bloomberg.

To Margie in Salinas California-
I can't believe some people are still harping on Obama's middle name! No one can help what they are named. That's like not voting for someone because they have the same name as a person you don't like! Support or contend the candidate on their stances on the issues, not on their middle name!
Good Grief Girl! Get it together!

An 'O' to wish... An 'O' to hope...

It is an old saying that you can wish/hope in one hand and @#%? in the other.  That sticks with me over the results in Iowa and now leading into the NH primaries.

The week before the Iowa caucuses 3 different polls had 3 different results for leaders in Iowa. First Edwards leads in the Lee Poll, then Hillary in the ABC/WP poll, and then Obama in the DMR poll just prior to the caucus.  Now in NH we are seeing the polls leveling out in the race for first but it is up a horse race for second place.  EDWARDS HAS TO TAKE SECOND FOR ANY HOPE OF CHANGE IN GOVERNMENT FOR THIS COUNTRY.  What is sad is the networks and the cable talking heads are all setting up the general election for us.

I have to say it, is interesting that Tim Russert and NBC’s "MEET THE PRESS" gave Obama a very nice 30 minute Campaign Commercial taped directly at the NBC affiliates studio in DM just the Sunday before the caucus (HUCK got the other 30 minutes). The reason I call it a commercial is because Mr. Russert stood 45 feet away lobbing softballs in for Obama to hit over the fence so they could set up Thursdays results.  Now this weekend he Russert had McCain on for 30 minutes (he was impressive), but then they went to the print media’s talking heads.  I was kinda’ hoping for 30 minutes with EDWARDS, or even 30 minutes with HRC so I could have yelled at the TV on Sunday morning, but instead we got to hear about the independent spirit of the NH voters.  The way that Russert and Matthews are in love with Obama makes me want to see what their valentine cards to him say, my guess would be steamy.

Here’s the thing, the political advertising dollars in this race scares me, actually the political advertising dollars in politics scare me. I think the Obama victory gives credence to that. The Media in this country wants the candidate with the 125 million dollar war chest because it comes back to them in advertising. In Iowa alone Obama spent nearly 9.5 million in TV advertising, Clinton spent 7.5 Million, Edwards only 3 Million. This is not to mention what was spent in phone bank, mailings, flyers, newsprint, radio ... With the conglomeration ownership of our US media it is in their best interest to have the party candidate with the most dollars to spent in the race no matter what they represent as long as they won't mess with campaign finance reform. That is the strange thing Edwards is the only candidate talking about how the entire campaign finance system is still corrupt and how it is not about message it is about dollars.  

Someone will now post what about "HUCK", he will be down for the count by Super Tuesday and the Republican Machine will fund whoever their candidate is regardless.  That is where they truly stick together.  All though I don’t think “HUCK” cannot get the independent vote.  That is where McCain scares me in NH and SC even though he still supports Iraq he has the “EARNED” respect of many likely voters (he has my respect).

If you look at who went out and voted for Obama you have to realize that those numbers will not translate in a national race. As much as I would like to see 53% of voters under the age of 30 (MSNBC numbers) it is never going to happen nationally I don't care who you put on the ticket. The upper Midwest has extremely high voter turnout nationally (2004 - MN 1st 77.2%, WI 2nd 76.2%, IA 7th 69.7%) and I wish the rest of the country was like that but it isn't (2004 - NH 4th 71.1%, ME 3rd 73.4%). http://www.nonprofitvote.org/resources/todata/?gclid=CKL3-Nvo3JACFQYBkgod40riOQ   None of those states are going to decide a national election by themselves based on their electoral college value of each individual state because their high turnout gets the same value in relation to electoral college votes as states that have voter turnout below 55% (2004 – SC 50th 52.8%, TX 49th 53.1%, WV 48th 54.1%, AR 47th 54.1%, MS 46th 54.9%, NV 45th 55.0%).  I want a ticket that did what Regan did in 1984 a clear and decisive victory.  I also had 2 neighborhood kids home from college from Iowa on winter break that went back early just to caucus for Obama.  I wonder how many college students from WI, IL, and MN flocked back to the state and help make up that 53% of voters under 30 that MSNBC reported and will we have that during the election or are they absentee back to their home state.

Edwards has the best populist message that resonates to electorates across the country and reminds us of T-REX, FDR, JFK, Bobby Kennedy, and Jimmy Carter. He can win states in the south, and he can bring trade workers back to the party that left for Regan’s economic message and never came back.  

Make no mistake about it; there are real differences with the change candidate.  Edwards health care plan covers every American and leaves no DOUGHNUT hole ( http://obamatruth.org/ ), he is against the trade deals that our congress has recently passed while Obama voted for hurting our US Agriculture and Manufacturing.  John Edwards has also spoke out against the re-birth of nuclear power in America, while both Clinton and Obama are all for re-issuing agreement to prolong the life and waste storage at our countries aging nuclear power plants (it floors me that Kucinich pushed his voters to Obama because of this issue).  Edwards has the most comprehensive environmental and energy policy that truly creates high tech jobs in America.  Not to mention Obama has skirted key votes in the Senate while campaigning, like the Iranian Guard vote.  He basically said it was a mistake and he was busy running for president.  Where does that leave us as Americans in the future if Iran becomes an issue and the war drums beat again?  If he is President in January of 2009 he can say he never voted for or against it so now we can go in and it is business as usual – no voting record behind him on that issue so where does that leave us.  

Obama’s message of hope scares me; I also hope to win the lottery, and that is just hope.  Does that put it into perspective?  I think he may be the best public speaker running for office (has trouble in debates), he reminds me of the big tent revival evangelicals of old or of any of the Sunday morning sky pilots who have the direct link to the almighty himself only rather than GOD he preaches of hope and unity.  It reminds me of GWB in 2000 who ran on compassion and unity; the really scares me.  When he speaks of hope it is his version of hope with no substance of what makes up his vision, just as GWB spoke of compassion, but his version of compassion ended up being far different than the general public’s.  All I am saying is the rhetoric must have substance and answers behind it, not just words that are put to a focus group and make us feel good but are nothing but empty words.  As Ben “COOTER” Jones said, “Hillary is the ‘past candidate’, Obama very well maybe the ‘future candidate’ of the Democratic Party but I do not think he is the ‘present candidate’ that currently is John Edwards.

Edwards is the candidate that can get out there and bring in the most diverse cross-section of the electorate, protect current House and Senate seats and probably gain margins there as well.

Edwards beats every republican candidate in the CNN general election poll in mid December that weighted the front runners against each other. He wins every general election poll (all posted) against all republican candidates listed on real clear politics by the widest margin. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/national.html  

But most important he wins individual states against the majority of the republican field with McCain being his “Achilles Heel” in some but still fairs better than HRC or OBAMA in those situations.  To the Democratic Party faith full these numbers don’t matter but to independents they do, and the numbers are telling us on a state by state basis that Edwards can win the most decisively and the most effectively but the media and the party powers that be are never going to allow it.

Edwards is the choice for America's working class.

Think about this – “Edwards/Obama 2008” – That ticket could do for the Democratic Party and Independent voters what Regan/Bush did for the Republican Party in 80, 84, and Bush/Quayle in 88.  They could get this country in an unbelievable place over the next 16 years.  That ticket could truly “CHANGE” the world.  

An 'O' to wish... An 'O' to hope...

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):