Only John Edwards Can Beat McCain
I'll be 60 eight days before the election in November. This is a bad thing and a good thing. The bad thing is it ain't going to be a real long time before I'm dead. The good thing is I've traveled a few miles and have picked up something along the way, and that something is called "institutional memory".
As I watched news coverage of Monday night's debate, the ever-escalating "I know you are, but what am I?" fight between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton suddenly struck a memory from 28 years back. The feud between Teddy Kennedy and Jimmy Carter rushed into my mind like a horrible memory of an old girlfriend. My recollection of their self-destructive hostilities reminded me how their battles went a long ways toward giving this nation Ronald Reagan.
It was 1980, and the Democratic Party had two supposedly strong national candidates--one an incumbent president, the other a scion of America's national family. They were going up against a Republican Party that was searching for an identity and would go deep on the bench to nominate the host of "Death Valley Days".
I remember this as an election we shouldn't have lost. But as we have done so many times in the past, we Democrats figured out a way to step on our Johnson.
In that 1980 nominating battle, our two candidates went after each other like Sherman went after Georgia. The result? Unbelievably, half of Washington is now named after Ronald Reagan--though I'll still say I'm flying into National Airport until the day the Good Lord or the Devil calls me home.
Surely, I'm not the only one who can see this six-foot rabbit named Harvey. John McCain is going to be the Republican nominee. How do I know? Because "institutional memory" also reminds me that the Democratic Party I love can't count. And regardless of what you think of the Republicans, they can.
It should be clear to anybody with over a 50 IQ that my boy John Edwards, with his combination of red state electoral experience and toughness, is the only candidate who can beat John McCain. Whether you believe polls or not, polls from CNN to Rasmussen say just that.
And it should be equally as clear to anybody with over a 25 IQ that Obama and Clinton are going to render each other totally unelectable against any Republican, especially John McCain, by the time we get to the convention.
All the Republicans have to be loving this. Because the Democrat they don't want to face, John Edwards, is getting sandwiched between the coverage of this murderous cat fight between two so-called "historical" candidates who, when all is said and done, will be just that. HISTORY.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I am just adding my post so the total posting number shows a rather large group agreeing that Edwards is truly the only viable candidate to beat McCain. Maybe someone will notice and give him a bit of media attention. Don't people realize that Shillary is the most divisive woman in America and people will come out of the woodwork to vote against her? Dare anyone say this is not true? And if there is a picture of Obama in a turban anywhere on planet earth, even as a youth, it will be found. These two are simply not viable candidates.
Anyone who was for John Edwards "in the beginning," but who are considering Obama now, should seriously reconsider their position and go with who you believed in at the start. I am NOT voting for my second choice, no matter what. My first and only choice is John Edwards. I have followed his work for the past four years, and every time I hear him speak or read about a proposed policy of his, I am further convinced that he is the best choice for President. It is a shame that the media has focused on the possible "first" candidates (black or woman), and have overlooked the brilliance of John Edwards. I totally agree with Mr. Saunders that the Republicans are thrilled to see the Obama vs. Clinton slap-fest, and I'm sure they're doing all they can to keep the two of them in the headlines. Why not fool all the Republicans and campaign for Edwards. Turn this around and make him the front-runner, then watch the Republicans crumble. Stand up for your belief in Edwards instead of falling for the media hype. If you don't support Edwards now, you'll only have a loser in November.
After viewing the South Carolina Democratic Debates it is clear to me that the only candidate who can win in 2008 against any Republican candidate is John Edwards! He showed that he is above the juvenile, silly sqabbles and he has powerful, detailed plans for universal health, social security, immigration reform, resolving the Iraq debacle, bringing integrity and honesty and morality back to America. He is very sharp on his feet, compassionate, respectful and truly cares for the American people.
Hillary and Bill don't represent change but old Washington - lobbyists and bureacracy and BAGGAGE! Senator Obama is a breath of fresh air but it is apparent watching him in his debates that he doesn't have the experience and mettle to beat Senator McCain or Governor Romney.
Senator John Edwards can deliver the Democrats the presidency! It all boils down to Democrats and Independents being honest with themselves and recognizing the strengths between Hillary, Barack and John and drawing an INTELLIGENT decision.
The Corporate Media have already made up their minds WHO WE SHOULD VOTE FOR but they are concerned with who is best for the power elite and corporate power - NOT the American people.
If HILLARY or OBAMA become the Democratic nominee - we'll see a repeat of 2004 - a Republican White House.
IT IS REALLY SIMPLE - Go John Edwards!!! And bring Barack Obama on board as your Vice-President. He'll be ready in 2016 when he is 53 years old. You guys make a great team!!!
Although Edwards isn't my favorite candidate, I agree completely with this post.
I'll state it again: John McCain is going to beat the living shit out of Hillary Clinton.
I am glad to see so much positive commentary on here.
I too believe in John Edwards and will continue to support him as best I can until the end.
I started off this primary as a HUGE Edwards fan. I still think he's the best candidate for the job, but I swung into the Obama camp as the pragmatic choice. I do have some problems with his generalities, but I like what he says most of the time. I also believe that symbols DO matter in this world, and the idea of a black president by the name of Barack Hussein Obama will definitely send a message to the rest of the world that times have changed.
Unfortunately, I think the time has come for Democrats to seriously prepare for another Republican administration. The campaign tactics of the both Clintons are creating an irreparable divide in the party, and if she is the nominee the party is doomed. Heck, even if she's not, the divide is still there and I don't see her supporters falling in line, Just like the Obama and Edwards supporters are not very likely to fall in line behind her. I for one am so disgusting by the actions of the Clintons that I will not, under any circumstance vote for her. No way, no how.
Mudcat,
My question to you is this:
Edwards and Obama both have refused to take money from federal lobbyists and pacs. Hillary has not. This, in my opinion, is the most significant difference between the candidates. The candidates of change aren't beholden to the moneyed special interest lobbyists. The candidate of "keeping the status quo" takes most of her money from these groups who want to keep us from the change we all want so much.
So why did Edwards help the "anti-change" candidate at the debates by ganging up with her against another advocate for change? Surely a principled candidate for change would NEVER side with the Lobbyist candidate and ensure that both of the "change" candidates go down if he truly cared about his core principles. Right?
I originally was for Edwards and grew to admire Obama, and decided I would vote for whomever was a serious contender by the time they reached my state. Edwards apparently had a meeting with Hillary after the debate and I'm starting to believe he's a political whore.
Am I wrong?
The unions need to have a confab of all of them. They need to realize which candidate supports them and return the favor. Forget previous commitments. Then they need to go all out in educating their membership and work their tails off. The unions, en masse, need to approach all of the politicians who are super delegates and let them know that all of the unions will support them or oppose them based on their support (speak the language they understand). They also need to support down-ticket candidates who will support Edwards. It's a total package. Otherwise, the unions will continue to wither and die. Time is running out.
cognito ergo populistae
The man who didn't carry his home state as VP candidate in 2004 is going to beat a well oiled Republican machine which has the backing of Corporate America...
i just saw the part of Countdown talking about the vietnam vet who found dead under a bridge in Iowa.
he had just days before been turned away by Veteran Affairs and even from the jail.
he died from hypothermia.
and people say that John Edwards' fight for the poor and middle class is about vanity.
what person sees or hears of this kind of thing and doesn't want to dedicate their lives to ending it.
why aren't the other candidates as strong about this as John Edwards?
because nobody cares when it doesn't help you politically.
but, as MLK III says to John, it's the right thing to do, keep it up, his father would be proud.
this is why John Edwards supporters don't abandon John when he's losing.
because we share John's causes... and we respect him all the more when he keeps going in the face of losing.
because $200 million spent on winning by popularity while staying silent on economic injustic is a betrayal to the vet who died under the bridge.
and we won't choose a popular candidate.
we choose the candidate who choose to not be silent.
The boys vs. the girls thing and the race card being played by the Democrats has shown many people that Hillary and Obama are dividers - not unifiers - of the Democratic party.
The platform of issues being advanced by John Edwards fits with the deepening recession and the problems with free trade agreements that further erode the American manufacturing base and increase debt.
There are fundamental problems with our country that need to be addressed. As an astute observer of events since the middle of the last century, I see no chance of any real change with Hillary or Obama as people or in respect to the platform of issues upon which they are running. I have listened to every speech and debate of both parties. Obama and Hillary have increased their negatives, and do not have progressive or populist platforms.
Edwards is my choice. I sent him money and will vote for him. The day of the old politics with a hundred million dollar campaigns must forever end or our democracy will. Let's stop the politics of pandering and get to work reclaiming our heritage - the country that our parents left to us as our birthright, not to the Wall Street bankers and crooks in white collars.
I'm with Edwards this year, for sure. I'm not sure I agree that he's the only one who can beat John McCain, though the polling seems to show that.
I am certain, however, that John Edwards is by far -- by far! -- the greatest threat to the status quo, despite what Sen. Obama might say about bringing change, and as much as I might like the idea of electing a woman finally. Sen. Edwards threatens the big-money boys, which is precisely why he's being shut out by the media.
Watching CNN's Anderson "I got this job because I came from big NY money" Cooper last night after the Democratic forum in SC, he went on and on and on about the "fact" that Clinton or Obama was going to win the nomination, until his own panel started laughing nervously, and he had to add something to the effect of, "Oh, and John Edwards," It was so painfully clear that Edwards is the greatest threat to the powers that be.
This thing is far from over, folks, so if you're voting on Super Tuesday as I am, you DO have another choice. John Edwards trails the "frontrunners" by about a whole 10 delegates or so at this point, out of more than 2,000 needed for the nomination.
If you like him and want to stick it to The Man and stand up for regular people, vote for Edwards! -- as opposed to whom the MSM has decided you have a narrow choice between.
Mudcat,
I with you on this one. Excellent call on the repubs do not want to face John Edwards.
You know something is up when a sock puppet like hannity spews that hillary is the likely nominee.
The last debate is warning bell for democrats to wake up if we want our country back.
archerlane
Were it not for the MSM totally ignoring Edwards as a viable candidate, the polling numbers we are all talking about now would have been common knowledge a month ago. In any poll you want to look at, i.e. Zogby, Rasmussen et al, Edwards is the only candidate who beats any Repug they want to throw at us. This is make or break it time, folks. We can't afford another Repug in the White House to capitalize on all the signing statements and power mongering that Bush has overseen for almost 8 long years. We absolutely have to get a Democrat elected. Truth be known, all 3 are qualified, but only one is electable when pitted against the Repugs. Edwards has cut through all the BS and laid out a clear plan for restoring America to its rightful place in the world and has set the agenda for the rest of the candidates to follow. Why would we elect anyone who had to steal Edwards' agenda in order to compete? Will Hillary or Obama have to consult with Edwards from the White HOuse in order to know what to do? Edwards is forward thinking and not averse to taking risks. The other two, lacking substance, have to resort to the kind of personal attacks we witnessed last night and which might just give this election to the Repugs. If you feel Edwards is the man for the job and aren't inclined to vote for him because the MSM has told you he isn't going to win, then you are letting a corporation tell you who to vote for. Make up your own mind; and when you do that, open you wallet and send whatever you can to Edwards through his website; johnedward
On Lou Dobbs tonight, very interesting poll, in which I participated. Question: Who can best handle the economic mess? Answer, lst place Romney, close 2nd place Edwards, 3rd place, Clinton. Everyone else about 20 points lower, including MCCain and all other Dem and Rep candidates. Shows that a lot of folks think Edwards' economics is sound. Shows a lot of folks don't want McCain.
I think McCain will not win past the south because he is pro-war. But then Romney or someone of that ilk will come to the fore. Do we want Romney? He might be a good economic manager. Would have to be better than what we now have, I think. But for real support to the middle class, we need Edwards.
I join in this great blog of support for Edwards. Praying that he may best the dragons in the way of the prize.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
