Blog for Democracy

We will lose.

icon_money.gifThere I said it.

If John Edwards gets the nomination, we will lose. As far as I’m concerned, he disqualified himself by accepting public financing. I know, all y’all Edwards folks will jump all over me accusing me of carrying water for Senators Clinton or Obama. But, you’re wrong. I want a Democrat to win in November 2008 – that is my focus. I evaluate the candidates constantly to determine who will be in the best position to beat whoever the GOP may pick.

Here’s the problem. The general consensus is that by February 5 the Democrats will have a prevailing candidate. At that point the GOP machine will engage and their attack on our frontrunner will begin. From mid-February until after the Conventions they will use every bit of ammunition they can find (or make up) to marginalize the Democratic nominee. General Election public financing doesn’t kick in until after the conventions and public financing limits for the primary will leave Senator Edwards flat broke. We will need every bit of money we can raise from every source, in order to fight back against that very sophisticated machine. John Edwards will be sitting duck. We will lose.

Should it be this way? I don’t think so. But, we don’t get to change the rules in the middle of the game. If you don’t like it – elect representatives who will work to change the campaign finance laws. But, please, let’s not squander this opportunity to elect a Democratic President.

Posted

in

by

Bernita

Tags:

Comments

109 responses to “We will lose.”

  1. innerredneckexposed Avatar
    innerredneckexposed

    I just saw that Bill Richardson was leading Iowa in a recent poll.

    Of course it was a poll of my family and who they thought should win Iowa, but hey, its worth mentioning.

    PS: Commie traffic is the worst. Not cause you are surrounded by the commies but because it is actually the worst in the world. Took me two hours to go 20 miles. Just for reference, when my father was in Iraq in 2003 it took 2 hours to go 20 miles.

  2. Jen B. Avatar
    Jen B.

    I’m still dating, but am close to giving a promise ring to one candidate.

  3. Jen B. Avatar
    Jen B.

    I’m still dating, but am close to giving a promise ring to one candidate.

  4. RuralDem Avatar
    RuralDem

    “Oh, RuralDem, bless your heart. A great populist Democrat? The guy basically uses the fact that we are but tenants in God’s divine creation to justify calling environmentalists “wackos” (yes, actual word he used) and ignoring the destruction of the planet because don’t worry, Jesus will save us. Well maybe not us but at least him. Like the guy all you want but fer chrissakes don’t call him any kind of good Democrat.”

    Shelby, reading is fundamental. I said on FISCAL issues Huckabee would be a great populist Democrat, except for, of course, the fairtax.

    So he bases many of his stances on his religious beliefs, I see nothing wrong with that. It’s refreshing to see a candidate speak of their religion instead of running away for fear off upsetting someone.

    You do not think Huckabee would be very representative of a populist Democrat, that’s fine, but I’ll stick to my belief that he would.

    K.

  5. RuralDem Avatar
    RuralDem

    “Oh, RuralDem, bless your heart. A great populist Democrat? The guy basically uses the fact that we are but tenants in God’s divine creation to justify calling environmentalists “wackos” (yes, actual word he used) and ignoring the destruction of the planet because don’t worry, Jesus will save us. Well maybe not us but at least him. Like the guy all you want but fer chrissakes don’t call him any kind of good Democrat.”

    Shelby, reading is fundamental. I said on FISCAL issues Huckabee would be a great populist Democrat, except for, of course, the fairtax.

    So he bases many of his stances on his religious beliefs, I see nothing wrong with that. It’s refreshing to see a candidate speak of their religion instead of running away for fear off upsetting someone.

    You do not think Huckabee would be very representative of a populist Democrat, that’s fine, but I’ll stick to my belief that he would.

    K.

  6. odinseye2k Avatar
    odinseye2k

    To save us all some time, I figured I’d let the pros have at each other for a while:

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5680219772266908036&q=joe+trippi+hardball&total=2&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

    Trippi, Penn, and Axelrod all going to town on one another.

    Again, the walkaways:

    Edwards: Fight the power with the tenacity of a crusade.

    Hillary: Strength and experience with the system.

    Obama: Rise above it all.

  7. MelGX Avatar
    MelGX

    I’ll guess Stefan is supporting Edwards, but don’t know for sure.

  8. PaulaG Avatar
    PaulaG

    Once more, for the record, this is where the front page posters of this blog officially come down on the primary candidates (as of my latest intelligence gathering – please correct me if I’m wrong):

    UNAFFILIATED: Catherine, Tim, Juliana, Paula, Page, Jen

    BIDEN: Shelby

    CLINTON: Bernita, Benson, Angela, Mel

    GORE: Peter

    UNKNOWN: Stefan

  9. MelGX Avatar
    MelGX

    For the record, I will be ready, willing and able to support the ultimate nominee, as always.

    And for once, I’ll be happy about it. Unlike the last presidential election.

  10. MelGX Avatar
    MelGX

    For the record, I will be ready, willing and able to support the ultimate nominee, as always.

    And for once, I’ll be happy about it. Unlike the last presidential election.

  11. MelGX Avatar
    MelGX

    Bezerko, you forgot to mention Andy Young’s comments. If you’re trying to find a pattern, you shouldn’t cherry pick.

  12. MelGX Avatar
    MelGX

    Bezerko, you forgot to mention Andy Young’s comments. If you’re trying to find a pattern, you shouldn’t cherry pick.

  13. sndeak Avatar
    sndeak

    I have a hard time believing that this is not an orchastrated smear campaign by the Clinton machine. Penn is a little weasel.

    Did anyone else see Joe Trippe hammer him on Hardball the other night.

  14. sndeak Avatar
    sndeak

    I have a hard time believing that this is not an orchastrated smear campaign by the Clinton machine. Penn is a little weasel.

    Did anyone else see Joe Trippe hammer him on Hardball the other night.

  15. Jules Avatar
    Jules

    Good thing I like Gov. Richardson, the only smears he seems to do are to himself, oops I said that “out loud”…

  16. Jules Avatar
    Jules

    Good thing I like Gov. Richardson, the only smears he seems to do are to himself, oops I said that “out loud”…

  17. BEZERKO Avatar
    BEZERKO

    Hillary’s campaign, IMO, are feeding on ethnic stereotypes. “Roll the dice.” http://www.charlierose.com/shows/2007/12/14/1/an-hour-with-former-president-bill-clinton (33:25 into the interview) Black people playing craps on a city street corner. Could be unintentional, I think it was intentional.

    Also Bob Kerry’s comments: http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/70971/ killing him with “praise”

    Looks like a coordinated smear using the type of tactic rove used against mccain in s.c.

  18. BEZERKO Avatar
    BEZERKO

    Hillary’s campaign, IMO, are feeding on ethnic stereotypes. “Roll the dice.” http://www.charlierose.com/shows/2007/12/14/1/an-hour-with-former-president-bill-clinton (33:25 into the interview) Black people playing craps on a city street corner. Could be unintentional, I think it was intentional.

    Also Bob Kerry’s comments: http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/70971/ killing him with “praise”

    Looks like a coordinated smear using the type of tactic rove used against mccain in s.c.

  19. odinseye2k Avatar
    odinseye2k

    I think he’s saying “Don’t hate me cuz I don’t like Hillary.”

  20. odinseye2k Avatar
    odinseye2k

    I think he’s saying “Don’t hate me cuz I don’t like Hillary.”

  21. CatherineAtlanta Avatar
    CatherineAtlanta

    I just don’t get how these remarks (no matter who made them) has anything to do with “you guys” (meaning me and others who post on this blog).

  22. CatherineAtlanta Avatar
    CatherineAtlanta

    I just don’t get how these remarks (no matter who made them) has anything to do with “you guys” (meaning me and others who post on this blog).

  23. MelGX Avatar
    MelGX

    He’s talking about Bob Kerrey who announced he’s backing Hillary, then said some really idiotic things about Obama. Ergo, the whole thing was somehow orchestrated by the Clinton campaign.

    My guess is the Clinton campaign is mortified by Kerrey’s remarks.

    It’s a good example of why these endorsements often do more harm than good. Asshats.

  24. MelGX Avatar
    MelGX

    He’s talking about Bob Kerrey who announced he’s backing Hillary, then said some really idiotic things about Obama. Ergo, the whole thing was somehow orchestrated by the Clinton campaign.

    My guess is the Clinton campaign is mortified by Kerrey’s remarks.

    It’s a good example of why these endorsements often do more harm than good. Asshats.

  25. CatherineAtlanta Avatar
    CatherineAtlanta

    “I love you guys, but I can’t support someone who’s that ruthless.”

    WTF?

  26. CatherineAtlanta Avatar
    CatherineAtlanta

    “I love you guys, but I can’t support someone who’s that ruthless.”

    WTF?

  27. BEZERKO Avatar
    BEZERKO

    Man, the sharks are feeding on Obama aren’t they? I guess he got to be too much of a threat. A muslim “manchurian candidate?” “rolling the dice?” What images was the Big Dog trying to bring to mind with that curious metaphor? I think it was a little more than a risky game of dice. I love you guys, but I can’t support someone who’s that ruthless.

  28. BEZERKO Avatar
    BEZERKO

    Man, the sharks are feeding on Obama aren’t they? I guess he got to be too much of a threat. A muslim “manchurian candidate?” “rolling the dice?” What images was the Big Dog trying to bring to mind with that curious metaphor? I think it was a little more than a risky game of dice. I love you guys, but I can’t support someone who’s that ruthless.

  29. Jules Avatar
    Jules

    Odin. in regard to VP Gore and climate change, I doubt many people who knew more than “it was a slide show before it was a movie” would doubt his decades long commitment to educating folks about the dangers of climate change.

    I’m certainly for anything that gets the word out, make a academy award winning movie; rent a blimp; have a die in; march in a parade; ruin a fur coat(oops maybe not that, but hell it worked)instead get hot models to pose naked; show up in committee hearing in hot pink… you get the idea.

  30. Jules Avatar
    Jules

    Odin. in regard to VP Gore and climate change, I doubt many people who knew more than “it was a slide show before it was a movie” would doubt his decades long commitment to educating folks about the dangers of climate change.

    I’m certainly for anything that gets the word out, make a academy award winning movie; rent a blimp; have a die in; march in a parade; ruin a fur coat(oops maybe not that, but hell it worked)instead get hot models to pose naked; show up in committee hearing in hot pink… you get the idea.

  31. Trackboy1 Avatar
    Trackboy1

    Wow, 43 comments, most in a long time. Some good conversation.

  32. Trackboy1 Avatar
    Trackboy1

    Wow, 43 comments, most in a long time. Some good conversation.

  33. odinseye2k Avatar
    odinseye2k

    Are these the same kind of arguments that could have come out against Gore if he ran? His whole “Inconvenient Truth” thing did get him a crapload of attention even as he was fighting for a cause.

    Then again, it would be cool if Presidential candidates start to see that making movies on complex, international issues or hosting policy think tanks is the new version of the vanity press biography book.

  34. odinseye2k Avatar
    odinseye2k

    Are these the same kind of arguments that could have come out against Gore if he ran? His whole “Inconvenient Truth” thing did get him a crapload of attention even as he was fighting for a cause.

    Then again, it would be cool if Presidential candidates start to see that making movies on complex, international issues or hosting policy think tanks is the new version of the vanity press biography book.

  35. Jules Avatar
    Jules

    Oh and JE and the poor, call me pathetic all you wish, but I think it’s pretty pathetic to use them as back drop when you made a pretty penny off a company that forecloses on their houses (Fortress Investments) when you vote for the bankruptcy bill in the Senate and the Wellstone ammendment, which has directly impacted the poor, rails on about the evil Walmart yet correct me if I’m wrong when you live in rural america you don’t get lots of choices, Oh and that “poverty center” that spent 70% of the money it raised on a speaking tour for Edwards and on salaries for staffers who then joined the campaign.

    Ya know the sad part is he had me at the two american’s speech, that is still true and it resonates a whole lot more than the “one” campaign.

    Poverty is a serious issue, and there should be a major campaign to end it, today as it was in the 30’s.

    I get him on the minimium wage, healthcare and supporting unions, I’m sure he does care, well now anyway.

  36. Jules Avatar
    Jules

    Oh and JE and the poor, call me pathetic all you wish, but I think it’s pretty pathetic to use them as back drop when you made a pretty penny off a company that forecloses on their houses (Fortress Investments) when you vote for the bankruptcy bill in the Senate and the Wellstone ammendment, which has directly impacted the poor, rails on about the evil Walmart yet correct me if I’m wrong when you live in rural america you don’t get lots of choices, Oh and that “poverty center” that spent 70% of the money it raised on a speaking tour for Edwards and on salaries for staffers who then joined the campaign.

    Ya know the sad part is he had me at the two american’s speech, that is still true and it resonates a whole lot more than the “one” campaign.

    Poverty is a serious issue, and there should be a major campaign to end it, today as it was in the 30’s.

    I get him on the minimium wage, healthcare and supporting unions, I’m sure he does care, well now anyway.

  37. odinseye2k Avatar
    odinseye2k

    Oh, one nice FYI for folks running the blog. I very much like pollster.com at the moment because it is running trends in addition to straight poll numbers. The trends lag a bit time-wise, but they are very helpful in getting a feel for where the candidates are relative to each other.

  38. odinseye2k Avatar
    odinseye2k

    Oh, one nice FYI for folks running the blog. I very much like pollster.com at the moment because it is running trends in addition to straight poll numbers. The trends lag a bit time-wise, but they are very helpful in getting a feel for where the candidates are relative to each other.

  39. plange Avatar
    plange

    Speaking of the environment, I got to be at the small forum featuring Bill Clinton who spoke very passionately about Green energy and creating green-collar workers. He wants to see all public housing converted to green buildings using local labor, plus other green initiatives to create jobs in cities, towns and farms. I overheard him say that that is what he asked Hillary to give him as a role if she got elected… I’ll post a main blog topic tonight when I get home about last nite’s mtg…

  40. odinseye2k Avatar
    odinseye2k

    Also, about the Register’s endorsement:

    “Edwards was our pick for the 2004 nomination. But this is a different race, with different candidates. We too seldom saw the ‚Äúpositive, optimistic‚Äù campaign we found appealing in 2004. His harsh anti-corporate rhetoric would make it difficult to work with the business community to forge change.”

    Again, we have the difference in vision. Clinton (the endorsee here) and Obama believe the system can be worked within to see useful change. The Edwards view is that the powers that be will make small concessions at best unless they are given no other choice but to move along with us.

    If we are to move forward on fossil fuels and health, the backs of at least two major industries will need to be broken so that they can no longer deny space to their superior successors.

  41. odinseye2k Avatar
    odinseye2k

    Also, about the Register’s endorsement:

    “Edwards was our pick for the 2004 nomination. But this is a different race, with different candidates. We too seldom saw the ‚Äúpositive, optimistic‚Äù campaign we found appealing in 2004. His harsh anti-corporate rhetoric would make it difficult to work with the business community to forge change.”

    Again, we have the difference in vision. Clinton (the endorsee here) and Obama believe the system can be worked within to see useful change. The Edwards view is that the powers that be will make small concessions at best unless they are given no other choice but to move along with us.

    If we are to move forward on fossil fuels and health, the backs of at least two major industries will need to be broken so that they can no longer deny space to their superior successors.

  42. plange Avatar
    plange

    Great points Odin! I think another motivator to keep in mind is what I feel is the fundamental difference between our camp and theirs: the role of government. The bottom line for Dems are the people government serves, whereas they see it as something that should be dismantled or at least run like a business (where the bottom line is the dollar not the people it serves)…

  43. plange Avatar
    plange

    Great points Odin! I think another motivator to keep in mind is what I feel is the fundamental difference between our camp and theirs: the role of government. The bottom line for Dems are the people government serves, whereas they see it as something that should be dismantled or at least run like a business (where the bottom line is the dollar not the people it serves)…

  44. CatherineAtlanta Avatar
    CatherineAtlanta

    I think I would have to take a few more steps down the path of moving to FRANCE 😉

  45. CatherineAtlanta Avatar
    CatherineAtlanta

    I think I would have to take a few more steps down the path of moving to FRANCE 😉

  46. JerryT Avatar
    JerryT

    I’m with you on that one odin. That is a massive amount of science you have to deny to be Mike Huckabee. For most of us, it might not matter much in our day to day lives, but the POTUS? In a way I hope he gets their nom, because if we can’t beat him, I will have to take a couple more steps down the path of cynicism and wtf-edness.

  47. JerryT Avatar
    JerryT

    I’m with you on that one odin. That is a massive amount of science you have to deny to be Mike Huckabee. For most of us, it might not matter much in our day to day lives, but the POTUS? In a way I hope he gets their nom, because if we can’t beat him, I will have to take a couple more steps down the path of cynicism and wtf-edness.

  48. Jules Avatar
    Jules

    Well, I sure hope there is actual money in that account to give to these candidates.. cause ya know, right now, not so much in that account.

  49. Jules Avatar
    Jules

    Well, I sure hope there is actual money in that account to give to these candidates.. cause ya know, right now, not so much in that account.

  50. shelby Avatar
    shelby

    Oh, RuralDem, bless your heart. A great populist Democrat? The guy basically uses the fact that we are but tenants in God’s divine creation to justify calling environmentalists “wackos” (yes, actual word he used) and ignoring the destruction of the planet because don’t worry, Jesus will save us. Well maybe not us but at least him. Like the guy all you want but fer chrissakes don’t call him any kind of good Democrat.

    I just thought I’d pop in and share this video about campaign financing. Maybe if Hillary and Obama didn’t get the nomination, they could use some of their obscene fundraising machinery to support through PACs a nominee that relied on public financing. You know, because they’re in this for the good of the country.

  51. shelby Avatar
    shelby

    Oh, RuralDem, bless your heart. A great populist Democrat? The guy basically uses the fact that we are but tenants in God’s divine creation to justify calling environmentalists “wackos” (yes, actual word he used) and ignoring the destruction of the planet because don’t worry, Jesus will save us. Well maybe not us but at least him. Like the guy all you want but fer chrissakes don’t call him any kind of good Democrat.

    I just thought I’d pop in and share this video about campaign financing. Maybe if Hillary and Obama didn’t get the nomination, they could use some of their obscene fundraising machinery to support through PACs a nominee that relied on public financing. You know, because they’re in this for the good of the country.

  52. odinseye2k Avatar
    odinseye2k

    “Huckabee, minus the fairtax, would be a great populist Democrat. He is much more in line with us fiscally than his party.”

    Well, I’d go with the difference between Presidents and Congressionals on this one as well I guess. A random Senator who is a little behind the times socially and scientifically speaking can’t wreck us too badly.

    However, the President (at least in Republican unitary exec theory) is in charge of the federal research apparatus. We are now in the 21st century – we need the scientists at their A game now more than ever. Biotech, alternative fuel, global warming solutions and so on. Sorry, but a guy that can’t wrap his head around even the core tenet of biology (and isn’t willing in his ignorance to hand the ball off to those of us who know the score) is very scary to me at the moment.

    So, when I need a bit of motivation to go out for Hillary (if she wins), that’s going to be my place.

  53. odinseye2k Avatar
    odinseye2k

    “Huckabee, minus the fairtax, would be a great populist Democrat. He is much more in line with us fiscally than his party.”

    Well, I’d go with the difference between Presidents and Congressionals on this one as well I guess. A random Senator who is a little behind the times socially and scientifically speaking can’t wreck us too badly.

    However, the President (at least in Republican unitary exec theory) is in charge of the federal research apparatus. We are now in the 21st century – we need the scientists at their A game now more than ever. Biotech, alternative fuel, global warming solutions and so on. Sorry, but a guy that can’t wrap his head around even the core tenet of biology (and isn’t willing in his ignorance to hand the ball off to those of us who know the score) is very scary to me at the moment.

    So, when I need a bit of motivation to go out for Hillary (if she wins), that’s going to be my place.

  54. plange Avatar
    plange

    It does come down to trust for me– I definitely trust any of our Dem nominees to be LEAGUES better then any potential Republican nominee…

  55. plange Avatar
    plange

    It does come down to trust for me– I definitely trust any of our Dem nominees to be LEAGUES better then any potential Republican nominee…

  56. JerryT Avatar
    JerryT

    Maybe it’s about trust for many people. Do we trust Hillary to not be so hawkish once she gets the keys to the briefcase? Do we trust JE to be able to come up with a plan to be competitive? Do we trust Obama to surround himself with experienced and effective people and listen to them? Etc.

  57. plange Avatar
    plange

    I knew the second line was being sarcastic, which I took to mean you didn’t think sndeak’s comment was relevant, so I thought I’d just talk about Presidential then…

  58. plange Avatar
    plange

    I knew the second line was being sarcastic, which I took to mean you didn’t think sndeak’s comment was relevant, so I thought I’d just talk about Presidential then…

  59. RuralDem Avatar
    RuralDem

    Angela,

    I was being a smartass!

    Anyway, I’ll elaborate on my short answr and say that the only Republican I would even consider voting for (note: I am not going door to door or doing any organizing) is Huckabee, and that is only if it is Huckabee and Obama in the general. I will support Edwards, and I guess Hillary 100% over the GOP candidate.

    Huckabee, minus the fairtax, would be a great populist Democrat. He is much more in line with us fiscally than his party.

  60. RuralDem Avatar
    RuralDem

    Angela,

    I was being a smartass!

    Anyway, I’ll elaborate on my short answr and say that the only Republican I would even consider voting for (note: I am not going door to door or doing any organizing) is Huckabee, and that is only if it is Huckabee and Obama in the general. I will support Edwards, and I guess Hillary 100% over the GOP candidate.

    Huckabee, minus the fairtax, would be a great populist Democrat. He is much more in line with us fiscally than his party.

  61. plange Avatar
    plange

    “Short answer: No.”

    “Yeah, because in a Presidential race and a Congressional race the same things are at stake.”

    If we take just the Presidential race and your stance, I’m really at a loss. The divide between ANY Dem candidate and the Republicans is so wide, not supporting our nominee allows the Republican agenda to be carried. Do you seriously want that??

  62. plange Avatar
    plange

    “Short answer: No.”

    “Yeah, because in a Presidential race and a Congressional race the same things are at stake.”

    If we take just the Presidential race and your stance, I’m really at a loss. The divide between ANY Dem candidate and the Republicans is so wide, not supporting our nominee allows the Republican agenda to be carried. Do you seriously want that??

  63. CatherineAtlanta Avatar
    CatherineAtlanta

    I was not mocking you at all.

  64. CatherineAtlanta Avatar
    CatherineAtlanta

    I was not mocking you at all.

  65. RuralDem Avatar
    RuralDem

    Yeah, because in a Presidential race and a Congressional race the same things are at stake.

    I guess with that logic I need to campaign heavily for any Democrat in a city council or school board race as well?

    Well, I guess in the spring when a Democrat runs for SGA President against a known Republican then I’ll have to campaign for the Democrat no matter what.

    Sometimes you’ve got to put the people ahead of the party. Jim Marshall is a prime example of that and he represents his district well. A “progressive” will never be elected there, the people of that district do not want a liberal representing them.

  66. JerryT Avatar
    JerryT

    Five candidates have signed on for primary matching funds: Biden, Dodd, Edwards, Tancredo, and McCain.

    http://www.fec.gov/general/whatsnew.shtml

  67. sndeak Avatar
    sndeak

    “Short answer: No.”

    Remember that the next time you whine about Democrats not supporting Jim Marshall. It’s a two way street.

  68. RuralDem Avatar
    RuralDem

    I’m not sure if you’re mocking me or not, but with McCain’s recent surge, that is a possibility. The only reason I brought it up is because they are both using public financing.

  69. RuralDem Avatar
    RuralDem

    I’m not sure if you’re mocking me or not, but with McCain’s recent surge, that is a possibility. The only reason I brought it up is because they are both using public financing.

  70. CatherineAtlanta Avatar
    CatherineAtlanta

    My my, Rural Dem. That would be *very* interesting. Edwards v McCain – WOW. That would be something.

  71. CatherineAtlanta Avatar
    CatherineAtlanta

    My my, Rural Dem. That would be *very* interesting. Edwards v McCain – WOW. That would be something.

  72. RuralDem Avatar
    RuralDem

    Edwards is running a much more “progressive” campaign than he did in 2004 which is unfortunate. However, one thing cannot be denied, and that is his fight to end poverty, something he has touted throughout both campaigns. To insinuate that he is “pimping poor people” is, well, pathetic.

    Maybe if he was focusing on some of the more divisive social issues then some would view him more favorably.

  73. RuralDem Avatar
    RuralDem

    Edwards is running a much more “progressive” campaign than he did in 2004 which is unfortunate. However, one thing cannot be denied, and that is his fight to end poverty, something he has touted throughout both campaigns. To insinuate that he is “pimping poor people” is, well, pathetic.

    Maybe if he was focusing on some of the more divisive social issues then some would view him more favorably.

  74. odinseye2k Avatar
    odinseye2k

    I agree that his “evolution” may not be 100% true. However, he’s rolled the dice and played this game multiple other ways and lost each time. So, if he (and hopefully, many calculating pols after him) sees that going with the progressives is how he finally wins, I see that as an important lesson. We then become his base rather than some random nuisance. Of course, you’d have though Pelosi et. al would have learned the same thing, so who knows.

    But, he has a lot of things in his background that make me think he’ll be a good progressive president. I empathize with that mill workers’ son thing, having had to work from a completely podunk town up through the local state school and on to a national powerhouse like Tech. I understand going to the professions via something a little less glamorous like textile engineering. Further, the trial lawyer experience gives him a little bit of the killer instinct and the ability to make those entrenched interests look bad even as he twists the knife around.

    But I do agree that the Democratic victor is the one to fight for. I just don’t like being scare-mongered about impending failure any more than the Hillary supporters like suggestions that other candidate supporters will stay home if she wins.

    And yes, ability to engage is an important one. I’m excited by the guy that at least promises a fight. I haven’t seen that willingness to even *talk* about challenging entrenched interests from the other two.

  75. odinseye2k Avatar
    odinseye2k

    I agree that his “evolution” may not be 100% true. However, he’s rolled the dice and played this game multiple other ways and lost each time. So, if he (and hopefully, many calculating pols after him) sees that going with the progressives is how he finally wins, I see that as an important lesson. We then become his base rather than some random nuisance. Of course, you’d have though Pelosi et. al would have learned the same thing, so who knows.

    But, he has a lot of things in his background that make me think he’ll be a good progressive president. I empathize with that mill workers’ son thing, having had to work from a completely podunk town up through the local state school and on to a national powerhouse like Tech. I understand going to the professions via something a little less glamorous like textile engineering. Further, the trial lawyer experience gives him a little bit of the killer instinct and the ability to make those entrenched interests look bad even as he twists the knife around.

    But I do agree that the Democratic victor is the one to fight for. I just don’t like being scare-mongered about impending failure any more than the Hillary supporters like suggestions that other candidate supporters will stay home if she wins.

    And yes, ability to engage is an important one. I’m excited by the guy that at least promises a fight. I haven’t seen that willingness to even *talk* about challenging entrenched interests from the other two.

  76. odinseye2k Avatar
    odinseye2k

    I agree that his “evolution” may not be 100% true. However, he’s rolled the dice and played this game multiple other ways and lost each time. So, if he (and hopefully, many calculating pols after him) sees that going with the progressives is how he finally wins, I see that as an important lesson. We then become his base rather than some random nuisance. Of course, you’d have though Pelosi et. al would have learned the same thing, so who knows.

    But, he has a lot of things in his background that make me think he’ll be a good progressive president. I empathize with that mill workers’ son thing, having had to work from a completely podunk town up through the local state school and on to a national powerhouse like Tech. I understand going to the professions via something a little less glamorous like textile engineering. Further, the trial lawyer experience gives him a little bit of the killer instinct and the ability to make those entrenched interests look bad even as he twists the knife around.

    But I do agree that the Democratic victor is the one to fight for. I just don’t like being scare-mongered about impending failure any more than the Hillary supporters like suggestions that other candidate supporters will stay home if she wins.

    And yes, ability to engage is an important one. I’m excited by the guy that at least promises a fight. I haven’t seen that willingness to even *talk* about challenging entrenched interests from the other two.

  77. odinseye2k Avatar
    odinseye2k

    I agree that his “evolution” may not be 100% true. However, he’s rolled the dice and played this game multiple other ways and lost each time. So, if he (and hopefully, many calculating pols after him) sees that going with the progressives is how he finally wins, I see that as an important lesson. We then become his base rather than some random nuisance. Of course, you’d have though Pelosi et. al would have learned the same thing, so who knows.

    But, he has a lot of things in his background that make me think he’ll be a good progressive president. I empathize with that mill workers’ son thing, having had to work from a completely podunk town up through the local state school and on to a national powerhouse like Tech. I understand going to the professions via something a little less glamorous like textile engineering. Further, the trial lawyer experience gives him a little bit of the killer instinct and the ability to make those entrenched interests look bad even as he twists the knife around.

    But I do agree that the Democratic victor is the one to fight for. I just don’t like being scare-mongered about impending failure any more than the Hillary supporters like suggestions that other candidate supporters will stay home if she wins.

    And yes, ability to engage is an important one. I’m excited by the guy that at least promises a fight. I haven’t seen that willingness to even *talk* about challenging entrenched interests from the other two.

  78. RuralDem Avatar
    RuralDem

    “My understanding is that they cannot coordinate with the campaign. But, remember we have Senate and Congressional races across the country for the DNC to spend money on. Plus, the State parties need help organizing on the ground too.”

    Thanks, Catherine for the answer. See, that’s where I disagree with you. The DCCC and DSCC are doing very well in the fundraising department so I really see no worries there.

    Also, I could be way off on this but McCain is using public financing as well. If it somehow turns out that McCain and Edwards were the respective nominees, then that would be interesting.

  79. RuralDem Avatar
    RuralDem

    “My understanding is that they cannot coordinate with the campaign. But, remember we have Senate and Congressional races across the country for the DNC to spend money on. Plus, the State parties need help organizing on the ground too.”

    Thanks, Catherine for the answer. See, that’s where I disagree with you. The DCCC and DSCC are doing very well in the fundraising department so I really see no worries there.

    Also, I could be way off on this but McCain is using public financing as well. If it somehow turns out that McCain and Edwards were the respective nominees, then that would be interesting.

  80. RuralDem Avatar
    RuralDem

    “Will you support the Democratic Nominee, regardless of who ends up winning the nomination? Yes or No”

    Short answer: No.

  81. RuralDem Avatar
    RuralDem

    “Will you support the Democratic Nominee, regardless of who ends up winning the nomination? Yes or No”

    Short answer: No.

  82. odinseye2k Avatar
    odinseye2k

    I agree that his “evolution” may not be 100% true. However, he’s rolled the dice and played this game multiple other ways and lost each time. So, if he (and hopefully, many calculating pols after him) sees that going with the progressives is how he finally wins, I see that as an important lesson. We then become his base rather than some random nuisance. Of course, you’d have though Pelosi et. al would have learned the same thing, so who knows.

    But, he has a lot of things in his background that make me think he’ll be a good progressive president. I empathize with that mill workers’ son thing, having had to work from a completely podunk town up through the local state school and on to a national powerhouse like Tech. I understand going to the professions via something a little less glamorous like textile engineering. Further, the trial lawyer experience gives him a little bit of the killer instinct and the ability to make those entrenched interests look bad even as he twists the knife around.

    But I do agree that the Democratic victor is the one to fight for. I just don’t like being scare-mongered about impending failure any more than the Hillary supporters like suggestions that other candidate supporters will stay home if she wins.

    And yes, ability to engage is an important one. I’m excited by the guy that at least promises a fight. I haven’t seen that willingness to even *talk* about challenging entrenched interests from the other two.

  83. odinseye2k Avatar
    odinseye2k

    I agree that his “evolution” may not be 100% true. However, he’s rolled the dice and played this game multiple other ways and lost each time. So, if he (and hopefully, many calculating pols after him) sees that going with the progressives is how he finally wins, I see that as an important lesson. We then become his base rather than some random nuisance. Of course, you’d have though Pelosi et. al would have learned the same thing, so who knows.

    But, he has a lot of things in his background that make me think he’ll be a good progressive president. I empathize with that mill workers’ son thing, having had to work from a completely podunk town up through the local state school and on to a national powerhouse like Tech. I understand going to the professions via something a little less glamorous like textile engineering. Further, the trial lawyer experience gives him a little bit of the killer instinct and the ability to make those entrenched interests look bad even as he twists the knife around.

    But I do agree that the Democratic victor is the one to fight for. I just don’t like being scare-mongered about impending failure any more than the Hillary supporters like suggestions that other candidate supporters will stay home if she wins.

    And yes, ability to engage is an important one. I’m excited by the guy that at least promises a fight. I haven’t seen that willingness to even *talk* about challenging entrenched interests from the other two.

  84. CatherineAtlanta Avatar
    CatherineAtlanta

    OK. I’ll accept the idea that revealing the game plan may be risky. I have spoken to several Edwards supporters in Georgia and I’ve heard more than once that we will be counting on the PACs, 527s, and DNC to pick up the slack. I’m afraid that won’t be enough, but I’ll do my best to help, should he get the nod. Unfortunately, I’m not sure that bodes so well for the down-ballot candidates who may need some of that support as well.

    I can’t help but think of my die-hard Democrat mother and others like her being less willing to contribute to MoveOn and other non-affiliated groups than directly to a campaign.

    Like I said in my original post, I wish it were not this way. But, it is.

    I never said I would take my toys and go home. Frankly, it’s quite offensive to me that anyone would suggest that about me. I have supported Democratic candidates all my life, many times candidates with whom I differed on core issues because I found them to be better choices than their opponents.

    As far as trashing candidates, if this post was perceived as that, I truly apologize. I have been very concerned about this issue and felt that it was being ignored. I was very careful while composing it to stick to my specific concerns related to campaign finance. Senator Edwards stance on issues is quite close to mine in many ways.

  85. CatherineAtlanta Avatar
    CatherineAtlanta

    OK. I’ll accept the idea that revealing the game plan may be risky. I have spoken to several Edwards supporters in Georgia and I’ve heard more than once that we will be counting on the PACs, 527s, and DNC to pick up the slack. I’m afraid that won’t be enough, but I’ll do my best to help, should he get the nod. Unfortunately, I’m not sure that bodes so well for the down-ballot candidates who may need some of that support as well.

    I can’t help but think of my die-hard Democrat mother and others like her being less willing to contribute to MoveOn and other non-affiliated groups than directly to a campaign.

    Like I said in my original post, I wish it were not this way. But, it is.

    I never said I would take my toys and go home. Frankly, it’s quite offensive to me that anyone would suggest that about me. I have supported Democratic candidates all my life, many times candidates with whom I differed on core issues because I found them to be better choices than their opponents.

    As far as trashing candidates, if this post was perceived as that, I truly apologize. I have been very concerned about this issue and felt that it was being ignored. I was very careful while composing it to stick to my specific concerns related to campaign finance. Senator Edwards stance on issues is quite close to mine in many ways.

  86. Jules Avatar
    Jules

    Um.. as far as not taking PAC money, Obama’s doing ok without it.

    I really don’t think we’re addressing the real problem which for me is, I just can’t get engaged in this candidate.

    I have big problems with his “evolution”. Perhaps I would not have these same issues if he’d held elected office for more than 6 years total. I could see an evolution in a long political life, I don’t see one all in the same decade sorry.

    Oh and being out spent, now we’re hating on folks who do have money, good grief.

    Oh and just so we’re all clear, I’ll help him after he wins the nomination. Just like I help all the “D’s on the ticket. I haven’t any “toys” to take, so I stayed.. um since Nov 2004.

  87. Jules Avatar
    Jules

    Um.. as far as not taking PAC money, Obama’s doing ok without it.

    I really don’t think we’re addressing the real problem which for me is, I just can’t get engaged in this candidate.

    I have big problems with his “evolution”. Perhaps I would not have these same issues if he’d held elected office for more than 6 years total. I could see an evolution in a long political life, I don’t see one all in the same decade sorry.

    Oh and being out spent, now we’re hating on folks who do have money, good grief.

    Oh and just so we’re all clear, I’ll help him after he wins the nomination. Just like I help all the “D’s on the ticket. I haven’t any “toys” to take, so I stayed.. um since Nov 2004.

  88. odinseye2k Avatar
    odinseye2k

    Yeah, the guy has weaknesses. There are large segments of the New Democratic fundraising community he can’t get money from. In large part because he intends to ruin their world when he becomes president. The Democratic money base isn’t all labor unions and fuzzy non-profits.

    The fact that he has held a close third throughout this primary in Iowa while being outspent at least 5:1 by Obama and more like 10:1 by Hillary is the sign of a rather strong ground game as opposed to a weak one.

    Only in this particular primary is $30 Million “no money.” Sure, it ain’t the $80-100 million that the two tops are pulling, but it isn’t like the man is impoverished.

    Although isn’t this whole discussion starting from someone that once upon a time called on us all to stop trashing candidates?

    And now we aren’t even trashing a candidate on his own merits but rather the vagaries of his campaign? Has “inevitability” given way to “electability?”

  89. odinseye2k Avatar
    odinseye2k

    Yeah, the guy has weaknesses. There are large segments of the New Democratic fundraising community he can’t get money from. In large part because he intends to ruin their world when he becomes president. The Democratic money base isn’t all labor unions and fuzzy non-profits.

    The fact that he has held a close third throughout this primary in Iowa while being outspent at least 5:1 by Obama and more like 10:1 by Hillary is the sign of a rather strong ground game as opposed to a weak one.

    Only in this particular primary is $30 Million “no money.” Sure, it ain’t the $80-100 million that the two tops are pulling, but it isn’t like the man is impoverished.

    Although isn’t this whole discussion starting from someone that once upon a time called on us all to stop trashing candidates?

    And now we aren’t even trashing a candidate on his own merits but rather the vagaries of his campaign? Has “inevitability” given way to “electability?”

  90. georgianbychoice Avatar
    georgianbychoice

    Damn.

    Really thought this thread was going to be different than most of the “I’ll take mine and go home” mentality of a lot of the posts on here. I thought I provided a critique of Catherine’s post that was in good taste and form. No name calling or attacks of any kind from me or any other poster on this thread. I find it very hard to read my “opposing team” comment in any way but for it to mean the republicans, but you took it that way (thanks odinseye for clearing that up). And Jules, where in the world do you get the “Is that Catherines fault too?” line. No one on here said anything directly about laying blame for anything on anyone’s doorstep.

    Thought this was a discourse on a subject that I think a lot of us are concerned about. I know I have been, but just saw it differently than Catherine.

    As for the meat of the posts, I really don’t think failure to share every campaign secret or strategy is a sign of anything but a smart campaign. As was pointed out, everyone under the sun gets those emails. To me, what the campaign does, not what it tells, is more important.

    Yes, non-coordinated campaigns suck ass, but if they can work. We all have learned from the election in 04, like we have done in every election throughout time.

    It is going to be a bumpy road and some bad stuff is sure to happen, but I argue that is true for every candidate. Each of them have baggage, some even have a freaking warehouse :), and each will have to overcome that baggage. I just disagree that this particular baggage of Edwards’ is a killer. Hey, I am going to support and work for whomever is nominated and when the time comes deal with their issues.

  91. Jules Avatar
    Jules

    “fraid” I gotta agree with my friend Catherine. This is a bad situation all around. If he can’t raise his own money and has been running since Nov 2004 I’m just not sure what that says about his campaign other than it’s got some bad mojo. Also, given the camp out in Iowa, what’s up with not getting the Registers endorsement? HUH? Is that Catherines fault too? Does you guy have no weaknesses? I’m really puzzled.

    While showing up in rural GA might be necessary in the general it’s not all that for the primary. While it makes for a warm and fuzzy from random donors ~ or was it to pimp the poor people message again I forget.

    You all need to see the movie about 2004 in Ohio and the results and effect not being able to run a coordinated campaign and what it looked like. I will spare you the suspense. It was a freaking train wreak. I for one don’t wish to see a repeat of all that.

  92. Jules Avatar
    Jules

    “fraid” I gotta agree with my friend Catherine. This is a bad situation all around. If he can’t raise his own money and has been running since Nov 2004 I’m just not sure what that says about his campaign other than it’s got some bad mojo. Also, given the camp out in Iowa, what’s up with not getting the Registers endorsement? HUH? Is that Catherines fault too? Does you guy have no weaknesses? I’m really puzzled.

    While showing up in rural GA might be necessary in the general it’s not all that for the primary. While it makes for a warm and fuzzy from random donors ~ or was it to pimp the poor people message again I forget.

    You all need to see the movie about 2004 in Ohio and the results and effect not being able to run a coordinated campaign and what it looked like. I will spare you the suspense. It was a freaking train wreak. I for one don’t wish to see a repeat of all that.

  93. odinseye2k Avatar
    odinseye2k

    Um, I think he means the Republicans (hopefully so). I’m assuming they’ve signed up for every email list, just as we’ve signed up for theirs and their mailings.

    Although if the Edwards campaign folks think this “he can’t win” narrative has any legs, I hope they do find something to say about why being on public finance limits aren’t the end of the world.

    I’m also skeptical that “going dark” in the summer months is really all that painful. Bush did it in 2000 (or was that 2004?) by saving his cash until the last minute for big blitzing.

    Of course, it wasn’t TV ads that painted Kerry as a flip-flopper and all that. That was “neutral” media. I think that battle is going to be far more important than running TV market ads, and those operations don’t count against the state-by-state limits. I believe, anyways.

  94. odinseye2k Avatar
    odinseye2k

    Um, I think he means the Republicans (hopefully so). I’m assuming they’ve signed up for every email list, just as we’ve signed up for theirs and their mailings.

    Although if the Edwards campaign folks think this “he can’t win” narrative has any legs, I hope they do find something to say about why being on public finance limits aren’t the end of the world.

    I’m also skeptical that “going dark” in the summer months is really all that painful. Bush did it in 2000 (or was that 2004?) by saving his cash until the last minute for big blitzing.

    Of course, it wasn’t TV ads that painted Kerry as a flip-flopper and all that. That was “neutral” media. I think that battle is going to be far more important than running TV market ads, and those operations don’t count against the state-by-state limits. I believe, anyways.

  95. CatherineAtlanta Avatar
    CatherineAtlanta

    Oh, so it’s OK to beg me for money now, but not explain to me the plan to win the general? Okey dokey. And I’m “opposing team”? Again, okey dokey.

  96. CatherineAtlanta Avatar
    CatherineAtlanta

    Oh, so it’s OK to beg me for money now, but not explain to me the plan to win the general? Okey dokey. And I’m “opposing team”? Again, okey dokey.

  97. georgianbychoice Avatar
    georgianbychoice

    That is like giving the opposing team the playbook the night before the big game. I trust Any campaign to be ready for pitfalls like this.

    Maybe I just have more faith than some others. I simply cannot imagine any serious presidential candidate would not have those kinds of plans in place (for any number of scenarios), or that the DNC would’t already be working on it. I know we are the party that nominated Dukakis, but I think we have gotten much smarter since then.

  98. georgianbychoice Avatar
    georgianbychoice

    That is like giving the opposing team the playbook the night before the big game. I trust Any campaign to be ready for pitfalls like this.

    Maybe I just have more faith than some others. I simply cannot imagine any serious presidential candidate would not have those kinds of plans in place (for any number of scenarios), or that the DNC would’t already be working on it. I know we are the party that nominated Dukakis, but I think we have gotten much smarter since then.

  99. odinseye2k Avatar
    odinseye2k

    “We will need every bit of money we can raise from every source, in order to fight back against that very sophisticated machine. John Edwards will be sitting duck. We will lose.”

    Fear the Republicans, fear the Republicans…

    The Senate and House committees can hold their own. The Republican version of the Senate committee for example is literally broke – debts are now greater than cash on hand.

    It is interesting that we heard the same dire prediction for Clinton just a couple of threads ago. Sure, we on the far left will support her on the campaign. But, will the enthusiasm be as fully there? Maybe there’s a local House race with a more compelling candidate. Maybe some of those rural folks here that have expressed interest in Edwards will decide that their families and homes are more important than a candidate that won’t even set foot in their home towns as repayment.

    There’s more to life in this game than money. Guliani and Romney have blown craploads of it and are in danger of being upset by a broke-ass Bible thumper from Arkansas.

    But all that arguing aside, again I say “Screw electability.” Why such a radical statement? Because “electability” has been determined by the same media pundits and “briliant” consultants that have failed to deliver us more than one Democratic President in the last twenty plus years. These Golden Boys couldn’t even knock out a guy that is challenged by pretzel eating for God’s sake!

    Read the tea lives of these dolts and you get so many conflicting requirements, they all but nullify:

    -They must have lots of money to fight off that nasty GOP machine

    -They’ve got to be Southern and rural to stroke that fragile identity, regardless of the fact that the Northwest has *never* had a Presidential candidate to cheer for (you want ignored, live in rural Washington – although Bill Clinton did come to us once to stump for our governor)

    -They’ve got to be “strong” on national security, meaning as hawkish as possible (okay, Iraq makes for an interesting exception, but maybe the lesson we learn is just to bomb and walk away before any of our boys get hurt)

    -They’ve got to beef up their outward faithfulness, because there are people too dumb in this world to read more than one book

    But you know what, maybe all the above is just filthy skepticism. The kind of educated elite stuff I catch myself thinking way too often. The idea that you and your fellow smarties are the only ones with real volition and everyone else is shaped by historical forces.

    The sell is really two simple things: 1) Does this candidate intend to improve my life (whether by letting me see a doctor or getting those filthy darkies out of my neighborhood)? and 2) Will this candidate actually listen to what I want or am I just better off rolling over for four years?

    Finally, I hate to say it, but the most effective part of the Republican attack machine is *not* based on campaign contributions. It’s that “objective” mainstream media that will rain fire and brimstone upon our very pretty former Senator from North Carolina. I almost hope they do go after him with everything – because imagine an FCC under the control of someone who has already shifted populist but also recognizes his power is limited by that very media.

    So, to close, I want to share a short definition of the candidates I saw recently:

    Clinton: The system sucks, but I’m so experienced I can play it like a fiddle.

    Obama: The system sucks, but I’m so lovable that it will melt away before me.

    Edwards: The system sucks, and thus I will spend my Presidency dismantling it.

    There’s anger in this country right now. I think the ability to tap that is a well far more productive than any corporate gold mine from either New York or Chicago.

  100. odinseye2k Avatar
    odinseye2k

    “We will need every bit of money we can raise from every source, in order to fight back against that very sophisticated machine. John Edwards will be sitting duck. We will lose.”

    Fear the Republicans, fear the Republicans…

    The Senate and House committees can hold their own. The Republican version of the Senate committee for example is literally broke – debts are now greater than cash on hand.

    It is interesting that we heard the same dire prediction for Clinton just a couple of threads ago. Sure, we on the far left will support her on the campaign. But, will the enthusiasm be as fully there? Maybe there’s a local House race with a more compelling candidate. Maybe some of those rural folks here that have expressed interest in Edwards will decide that their families and homes are more important than a candidate that won’t even set foot in their home towns as repayment.

    There’s more to life in this game than money. Guliani and Romney have blown craploads of it and are in danger of being upset by a broke-ass Bible thumper from Arkansas.

    But all that arguing aside, again I say “Screw electability.” Why such a radical statement? Because “electability” has been determined by the same media pundits and “briliant” consultants that have failed to deliver us more than one Democratic President in the last twenty plus years. These Golden Boys couldn’t even knock out a guy that is challenged by pretzel eating for God’s sake!

    Read the tea lives of these dolts and you get so many conflicting requirements, they all but nullify:

    -They must have lots of money to fight off that nasty GOP machine

    -They’ve got to be Southern and rural to stroke that fragile identity, regardless of the fact that the Northwest has *never* had a Presidential candidate to cheer for (you want ignored, live in rural Washington – although Bill Clinton did come to us once to stump for our governor)

    -They’ve got to be “strong” on national security, meaning as hawkish as possible (okay, Iraq makes for an interesting exception, but maybe the lesson we learn is just to bomb and walk away before any of our boys get hurt)

    -They’ve got to beef up their outward faithfulness, because there are people too dumb in this world to read more than one book

    But you know what, maybe all the above is just filthy skepticism. The kind of educated elite stuff I catch myself thinking way too often. The idea that you and your fellow smarties are the only ones with real volition and everyone else is shaped by historical forces.

    The sell is really two simple things: 1) Does this candidate intend to improve my life (whether by letting me see a doctor or getting those filthy darkies out of my neighborhood)? and 2) Will this candidate actually listen to what I want or am I just better off rolling over for four years?

    Finally, I hate to say it, but the most effective part of the Republican attack machine is *not* based on campaign contributions. It’s that “objective” mainstream media that will rain fire and brimstone upon our very pretty former Senator from North Carolina. I almost hope they do go after him with everything – because imagine an FCC under the control of someone who has already shifted populist but also recognizes his power is limited by that very media.

    So, to close, I want to share a short definition of the candidates I saw recently:

    Clinton: The system sucks, but I’m so experienced I can play it like a fiddle.

    Obama: The system sucks, but I’m so lovable that it will melt away before me.

    Edwards: The system sucks, and thus I will spend my Presidency dismantling it.

    There’s anger in this country right now. I think the ability to tap that is a well far more productive than any corporate gold mine from either New York or Chicago.

  101. CatherineAtlanta Avatar
    CatherineAtlanta

    GBC,

    You bring up an excellent point. If the Edwards campaign has a plan to “ameliorate those financing issues” I wish they would tell us what it is. I’m on Senator Edwards email list – all I get is pleads for money. If they do have a plan, I’d love to hear what it is.

  102. CatherineAtlanta Avatar
    CatherineAtlanta

    GBC,

    You bring up an excellent point. If the Edwards campaign has a plan to “ameliorate those financing issues” I wish they would tell us what it is. I’m on Senator Edwards email list – all I get is pleads for money. If they do have a plan, I’d love to hear what it is.

  103. georgianbychoice Avatar
    georgianbychoice

    Saying that Edwards will lose if he gets the nomination is quite a statement. Especially considering a presidential electoral history so full of outrageous and unexpected outcomes.

    Nostradamus would be proud.

    Things change so much as a campaign goes on no one knows what is going to happen and any attempt at telling the future is nothing more than a guess (though, not uneducated or incorrect, but a guess none-the-less). I bet you could find a reason, just as compelling and based upon just as sound reasoning and experience, to make the exact same statement about each and every one of the candidates.

    Now, while I share your concern about the public financing arena, I don’t think it is the harbinger of doom that you portend. You are right that the campaign cannot communicate with the outside groups, but I would bet a ton of money that the campaign figures out a way to ameliorate those financing issues.

  104. Jen B. Avatar
    Jen B.

    Catherine, you crack me up.

  105. Jen B. Avatar
    Jen B.

    Catherine, you crack me up.

  106. sndeak Avatar
    sndeak

    Rural – I’ve just got one question for you…

    Will you support the Democratic Nominee, regardless of who ends up winning the nomination? Yes or No

  107. CatherineAtlanta Avatar
    CatherineAtlanta

    My understanding is that they cannot coordinate with the campaign. But, remember we have Senate and Congressional races across the country for the DNC to spend money on. Plus, the State parties need help organizing on the ground too.

  108. CatherineAtlanta Avatar
    CatherineAtlanta

    My understanding is that they cannot coordinate with the campaign. But, remember we have Senate and Congressional races across the country for the DNC to spend money on. Plus, the State parties need help organizing on the ground too.

  109. RuralDem Avatar
    RuralDem

    Before I go any further can you clarify something for me?

    Just because Edwards cannot do anything, does that also mean the Democratic Party itself and other groups cannot run ads and stuff on his behalf?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *