Actually, Edwards is making a awful lot of sense on many issues.

I'm honestly not sure why Edwards is still running. It's been looking like he's just wanted VP slot on Obama's ticket for a while now. It may be to both his and Obama's benefit if he just dropped out and gave big 'O' a free ride.

I don't vote Demo-commie, so in that sense I couldn't care less if Edwards stays in or not. However, he's accepting federal matching funds. In other words, he's running on OUR dime (well, half-way on our dime.) Not only is he wasting his money, he's wasting OUR money too.

Echoic: I'm honestly not sure why Edwards is still running. It's been looking like he's just wanted VP slot on Obama's ticket for a while now. It may be to both his and Obama's benefit if he just dropped out and gave big 'O' a free ride.

If neither Hillary or Obama wins enough delegates to get nominated, and Edwards wins the balance of them, you'll know why Edwards is still running.

colovion: I don't vote Demo-commie.

hey, did ya year - they're gonna make alaska and hawaii states! what happened to the great forty-eight??? man, i sure hope nixon beats kennedy! i'm still pissed about the dodgers moving to los angeles. bummer about pius xii, but i think john xxiii will be great. i just hope those rebels don't overthrow batista's government! i sure don't like that khrushchev guy over in russia. what about that bobby fischer, eh?

Larry Mahnken: Echoic: I'm honestly not sure why Edwards is still running. It's been looking like he's just wanted VP slot on Obama's ticket for a while now. It may be to both his and Obama's benefit if he just dropped out and gave big 'O' a free ride.

If neither Hillary or Obama wins enough delegates to get nominated, and Edwards wins the balance of them, you'll know why Edwards is still running.

This is true, but I doubt it's happening due to the accelerated schedule and the media promoting who's got "momentum" like a motherfarker. I doubt the voters won't get in line behind SOMEONE just because they've won 2 in a row eventually, you know? Thus, Edwards, drop out and give Obama all your delicious votes!

I think if Obama offered the VP spot in return for Edwards dropping out and giving support, Edwards would go for it. Surely Edwads must see it's a two person race, and neither Clinton or Obama are likely to have a Macacca moment.

But, maybe Obama doesn't want him as a VP and is trying to see if he can win it without him.


I'm sorry, I think Edwards is a billion times better than Clinton, but I still feel he is a rather weak candidate. He certainly did not do that well in 2004. Anyone who loses a debate to Cheney has issues.

Obama would be much stronger with a Biden type VP. Or, maybe even the AZ govenor who just endorsed him. But I think Obama/Edwards will be very vulnerable to the OMG they are inexperienced kids in an era of 9/11 attacks the republicans will throw.

Lawrence O'Donnell used to have a meltdown about twice a year. Now the frequency seems to be picking up. After his Mormon rant he was asked why he would not attack Islam with the same intensity. He said he would never do it because he feared for his life. What a brave man.

I was -sure- this was meant as a cat thread.

He's probably waiting until South Carolina. If he can't win his home state, he's farked.

I think Edwards problem is not so much what he is saying but how he's saying it. He sounds whiney and pissed. People want change but they want a candidate to make them feel better about the country and our future, hence why Obama is doing better as the Anti-Hillary.

Superjoe: He's probably waiting until South Carolina. If he can't win his home state, he's farked.

I wish this was true, but I doubt he'll realize it. Whether he's running for his ego, or to influence the debate, I don't see him dropping out anytime soon.

He's the best candidate, really. Clinton represents the Washington establishment, and Obama doesn't have quite enough experience in dealing with corrupt organizations. I'll be voting for Edwards just because he'll likely be more effective than the other democrats in dealing with health insurance companies, oil companies, and defense contractors.

El_Dan: Obama doesn't have quite enough experience in dealing with corrupt organizations.

Fark pre-Obama: we're sick of lifelong politicians, we want someone who isn't a political hack. Everyone in Washington is crooked because only crooked people can succeed there.



Fark post-Obama: this man doesn't have nearly enough experience. We need someone who has been in Washington their entire lives and have plenty of experience failing in our crooked system.

Repeat ad nauseum.

colovion: I don't vote Demo-commie, so in that sense I couldn't care less if Edwards stays in or not. However, he's accepting federal matching funds. In other words, he's running on OUR dime (well, half-way on our dime.) Not only is he wasting his money, he's wasting OUR money too.

I'm sure you're trolling. But the money you refer to is procured through people donating when they fill out their tax returns. Also, nobody is getting matching funds because the FEC is in gridlock.

NBC: STFU
You have no credibility. You're just trying to endorse the candidates with the most money so you'll get ad buys.

We, the people, know you're pretending to act in the public interest.

I wish I had to joke to round this out with but soldiers are still being killed in a war based on lies.

Weapons of Mass Destruction... where are they?

I'm a Democrat who prefers Edwards over Obama. I think the parties best three candidates have dropped out already.

Edwards has every right to run for president and O'Donnell should STFU. Christ, what a dick.

I_Lost_My_Other_Username

I'm a Democrat who prefers Edwards over Obama. I think the parties best three candidates have dropped out already.


That makes two of us.

Recall all Repuglikkkans: EwoksSuck: I think Edwards problem is not so much what he is saying but how he's saying it. He sounds whiney and pissed. People want change but they want a candidate to make them feel better about the country and our future, hence why Obama is doing better as the Anti-Hillary.

Honestly, a number of pundits have pointed out that his wife is speaking better than he is. She is the positive force in the campaign, and frankly is saying the things he should be saying.

Either way, he should be a good VP candidate again.

I'm not sure that's an option for him. It may be that for Edwards, it's either the presidential nomination or nothing. As a VP candidate, he already has fail-stink on him.

I_Lost_My_Other_Username: I'm a Democrat who prefers Edwards over Obama. I think the parties party's best three three best candidates have dropped out already.

/sorry

Nice to see the Democrats are the party of equality.

GET OUT OF THE WAY, CRACKER!

Musicology101: Actually, Edwards is making a awful lot of sense on many issues.

How does it feel to have fairly unique beliefs?

All kidding aside, I think that most people can't get past his native sliminess to listen to him. And when they do, all he can do is exploit a dead teenage girl or talk about how his dad was a total loser in a mill. Dude is shameless and needs new writers.

keytronic: I think if Obama offered the VP spot in return for Edwards dropping out and giving support, Edwards would go for it. Surely Edwads must see it's a two person race, and neither Clinton or Obama are likely to have a Macacca moment.

But, maybe Obama doesn't want him as a VP and is trying to see if he can win it without him.


I'm sorry, I think Edwards is a billion times better than Clinton, but I still feel he is a rather weak candidate. He certainly did not do that well in 2004. Anyone who loses a debate to Cheney has issues.

Obama would be much stronger with a Biden type VP. Or, maybe even the AZ govenor who just endorsed him. But I think Obama/Edwards will be very vulnerable to the OMG they are inexperienced kids in an era of 9/11 attacks the republicans will throw.

Edwards delivered exactly ZERO states for Kerry in the 2004 general election. Making him the VP nominee would be foolhardy.

Mr. Xhin: Edwards is the best Democratic candidate. That is why the Republican media and pundicracy must destroy him

Exactly!

And you care because: A.Journalism automatically equals truth. B.Our nation has been reduced to tabloid robots who are only stimulated to action when things get really weird, violent or cause controversy. or C.You still fall for the illusion that somehow your vote still counts for something, and the decision hasn't already been rendered behind the scenes, and this isn't all just mental masturbation to sustain that dream.

FlashHarry: colovion: I don't vote Demo-commie.

hey, did ya year - they're gonna make alaska and hawaii states! what happened to the great forty-eight??? man, i sure hope nixon beats kennedy! i'm still pissed about the dodgers moving to los angeles. bummer about pius xii, but i think john xxiii will be great. i just hope those rebels don't overthrow batista's government! i sure don't like that khrushchev guy over in russia. what about that bobby fischer, eh?

You are so right, commie is so 60's. The new term is progressive. Everythin gis relative, however.

generaltimmy Quote 2008-01-12 11:22:45 AM

You are so right, commie is so 60's. The new term is progressive. Everything is relative, however.

Fine, give back that social security money we 'commies' managed to gift you with, muthafugger.

I think Richardson even at 3-5% was foolish to drop out so early. No one really disliked him, he just didn't catch on. The deal with these elections is that you have one bad moment and you're toast. The piranhas in the media latch on and take you down. So far Hillary and Barack have been squeaky clean, and the worst mistakes they've made haven't been bad enough.

The pressure is on. A couple of verbal missteps / odd scandals and we could have an Edwards/Richardson ticket still.

After only a caucus and one primary, I would think it would be way to early to pull out of any election. WTF were you doing campaigning for a year? They place too much importance on these early states.

It looks to me that Edwards, Obama, and Hillary each have about 30% of support in their Party.

GodsTumor: Mr. Xhin: Edwards is the best Democratic candidate. That is why the Republican media and pundicracy must destroy him

Exactly!

Not so much. Edwards is collecting delegates in order to leverage a VP position at the convention.

Current committed delegates for each candidate stand at.
Obama: 25
Clinton: 24
Edwards: 18

One candidate needs 2025 to win, and at the current rate of delegates awarded per primary contest by the time the convention rolls around we should see something like.
Obama: 1510
Clinton: 1452
Edwards: 1087
And not enough for a single candidate to be nominated... unless Edwards rewards his delegates to another candidate. Now some may ask why doesn't he just offer up one of the candidates his support in exhcnage for a VP position, and direct his voters to vote for them. Because he doesn't have the delegates yet, and there is no guarantee that his supporters will show up in large enough numbers to make a difference for the candidate that he endorses. So the only currency he has to negotiate with for a VP spot are actual committed delegates.

It is possible that after Super Tuesday there will be enough committed delegates in play for Edwards to make his move. The question is, does he put his support behind Clinton or Obama? I think his first choice is going to be Obama, and Clinton is likely to turn him away on the belief that she can eliminate Edwards and get the rest of the delegates she needs.

So it looks like we will have Obama/Edwards 08 bumperstickers on the highways this fall.

rr. xhin...

Edwards is the best Democratic candidate. That is why the Republican media and pundicracy must destroy him.

-a million times, this.

excuse me...that's MR. xhin.

failed, i have.

into exile, i must go.

plus...there's laundry to do.

later farkers....

Yes, how DARE John Edwards try and use democracy to run for president, doesn't he know that the media has already selected Barack Obama and the people's vote DOES NOT MATTER at this point in the race? If we don't have a black president in 2008 then it's all that racist Edwards' fault for holding Obama back in the primary phase by running against everyone.

Wow the farking media can lick my asshole on this one, they do nothing but fellate obama every day now, I'm starting to see what the anti-Paul supporters meant several months ago when there was nothing but positive Ron Paul support.

/sorry guys
//will probably vote for Obama because Paul, Kucinich, and Gravel, have absolutely no real chance other than getting a particular message out there that most older people are outright ignoring
///also learned a lot about the main stream media in this election cycle, it appears that the situation is actually worse than I thought...not too far off from 'Ow! My Balls!' as the media selects our new overlords year after year.

I'm still not getting where Edwards's supporters are coming from. He made his money has a slimy trial lawyer, and was an unimpressive senator. All of his speeches are just populist rambling.

and that's impressive how?

/Obama 08
//Clinton and Edwards will get eaten alive in November.

I never thought I'd say this, and it's very myopic, but I hate all of these clowns.

I'm a liberal but I could never jump on the Obamania bandwagon. I don't like bandwagons. Am I the only person that feels this way? Hype turns me off.

The other day I finally heard someone in the media actually discuss how the candidates' policies differ on taxes. Very enlightening. But I haven't heard anything like it since.

No wonder people don't vote. It's too much sensory overload.

/I'll still vote.
//Wonder if I'll get my absentee ballot this time.

Longtime Lurker
I'm still not getting where Edwards's supporters are coming from. He made his money has a slimy trial lawyer, and was an unimpressive senator. All of his speeches are just populist rambling.

I see him as the candidate most likely to do something about the huge political influence held by corporations. If you look at the problems currently faced by the US - the mortgage meltdown, health care costs, and foreign occupations - most if not all are directly traceable to a given industry influencing the government to act against the interests of (non-shareholding) voters. The economy's woes are a result of poorly regulated lending practices, the health care crisis is a result of parasitic insurers driving up administrative costs, and the Iraq War is likely a result of the defense and oil industries.

The only real appealing thing about Edwards is his stance against corporations wielding political influence, but that's enough for me.

One candidate needs 2025 to win, and at the current rate of delegates awarded per primary contest by the time the convention rolls around we should see something like.
Obama: 1510
Clinton: 1452
Edwards: 1087

Except Edwards is not going to maintain that rate of gaining delegates; Iowa was his highwater mark. He bet everything there and still only tied for 2nd. He doesn't have the money to compete nationwide.

The ratio between Obama and Clinton will get a lot more lop-sided one way or the other. So while they may not have quite enough delegates after Feb 5 to clinch the nomination, they'll have produced a big enough bandwagon to clean up the rest of the states.

Superjoe: He's probably waiting until South Carolina. If he can't win his home state, he's farked.

His home state is North Carolina.

/Just sayin

Bessame: Superjoe: He's probably waiting until South Carolina. If he can't win his home state, he's farked.

His home state is North Carolina.

/Just sayin

He was born in SC... kinda like Romney's home state is michigan.

keytronic I'm sorry, I think Edwards is a billion times better than Clinton, but I still feel he is a rather weak candidate. He certainly did not do that well in 2004. Anyone who loses a debate to Cheney has issues.


Come on now. Everyone knows Cheney is a master debator.

Prediction: Edwards wins South Carolina.

On both sides, this primary season is looking like this past fall's weekly BCS standings

/just sayin'

Who thought it was a good idea for Edwards to run in the first place besides Edwards? The guy is a lying sack of shiat. It doesn't matter what he says in his platform because he'll say anything. I don't trust him one bit and really don't believe he has core beliefs on anything important.

Gotta look at the guy's history as best indicator of what he'd do going forward. And Edwards has done nothing.

I don't care if he keeps running or not. Kuchinich has better talking points and he'll be around for awhile too even though he's gotta know there's little point in it.

End of the day, Edwards as VP would actually make me not vote Obama, if Obama wins the nomination. That's how much I don't like this guy. Don't know why everyone in the Edwards camp is being bamboozled by this charlatan.

colovion: I don't vote Demo-commie, so in that sense I couldn't care less if Edwards stays in or not. However, he's accepting federal matching funds. In other words, he's running on OUR dime (well, half-way on our dime.) Not only is he wasting his money, he's wasting OUR money too.

Edwards fights for working people and wants mega corporations to have less control over out government. Just because he's anti-facism, doesn't make him a Communist. Do you like your politicians funded by defense/pharmeceutical/finance/foreign government lobbyists rather than financed by the people? You'd rather they're in debt with corporations than the American people? Public financing would cost a fraction of a fraction of the money that is wasted on corporate wellfare bailouts, corruption and no-bid contracts, wars for profit, etc.

Aldo the Wonder Dog: Who thought it was a good idea for Edwards to run in the first place besides Edwards? The guy is a lying sack of shiat. It doesn't matter what he says in his platform because he'll say anything. I don't trust him one bit and really don't believe he has core beliefs on anything important.

Gotta look at the guy's history as best indicator of what he'd do going forward. And Edwards has done nothing.

I don't care if he keeps running or not. Kuchinich has better talking points and he'll be around for awhile too even though he's gotta know there's little point in it.

End of the day, Edwards as VP would actually make me not vote Obama, if Obama wins the nomination. That's how much I don't like this guy. Don't know why everyone in the Edwards camp is being bamboozled by this charlatan.

Care to provide even a shred of evidence or are you just going on emotional appeals here?

You forgot "slimy lawyer" and "breck girl" and "socialist infiltrator".