Cold, Hard Reality Check: The Most Electable Candidate We Have is John Edwards.

[David Zephyr]

Regardless of your passion for any of our superb candidates, the undeniable fact demonstrated now in poll after poll consistently for almost the entire year is that John Edwards from North Carolina is the Democrat who can and would defeat every Republican candidate in the 2008 Election. The American people just like John Edwards. After over a solid year of campaigning by all the Democrats and Republicans, after thousands of hours of television pundits and millions of gallons of ink in news stories, it's still John Edwards that tops every scenario. That's not something to sneeze at folks.

Listen, I haven't made up my mind, even though these days I lean toward Joe Biden, but here it is just weeks away from the real deal beginning and we have one candidate that whips the living fire out of every single Republican candidate. Edwards even eats up the newest candidate d'jour, Mike Huckabee, by an astounding 25%. Twenty-five percent.

There's something that Americans juist like about, and trust about him. An entire year of 2007 hardball politics has not changed that.

So I will be taking John's electablility into consideration when I finally vote in my primary here in California and it should be, at least, one factor in your personal deliberations, too.

Winning is important.

[rwheeler31]

1. true

[karynnj]

2. Edwards has really not been attacked to the degree that HRC or Obama has

because he has yet to be the front runner.

[dsc]

3. My vote doesn't really count

so I just am thinking vote for Jim Neal in my Senate primary and hope for the best in regards to the Presidential one.

[1corona4u]

4. Bullshit.

[David Zephyr]

5. Not bullshit. It's reality.

I know you are a big Biden supporter and you are one of his bests advocates here, and I'm hoping he can cross the 15% threshold in Iowa which would do him well in Iowa, but it is not bullshit to report that Edwards consistently beats the GOP candidates and has done so all year long.

We can root for Joe Biden without having to tear down John Edwards.

[1corona4u]

7. I'm just letting you know, I will not vote for Edwards.

I'll sit it out.

I don't want any part of him. At all.

PS. It's your reality, not mine, and not a lot of others either. I'm pretty confident though, that he will place well in Iowa, but he won't get my vote in the GE.

[depakid]

9. Fair enough. Though one suspects you'd come around

Provided that you care about progressive issues.

[1corona4u]

12. No, I won't...

I'm an Ind. turned dem for this election ONLY. I am slightly left of center. In any event, I will return to an Ind. after this election. There are far too many things that bother me about "progressive democrats".

[Steely_Dan]

6. LOLOLOLOLOL

Geeze...are you okay?

-P

[FrenchieCat]

8. John Edwards has pretty much stayed out of the fray in reference to

hardball politics. He has not gotten much coverage, so to date, not much other than his haircuts have been thrown at him....however, I don't believe that once his warts are revealed, that he will be as viable as you currently think.

Look at what happened to Guliani in a matter of weeks. He went from frontrunner to barely a blip...and is sinking as we speak. Ditto with McCain. The media talks them up, and then the media tears them down. The media has not yet focused on John Edwards....although I know that they made him disappear while he was VP candidate in 2004.

The first place that the GOP will hit Edwards is exactly on that "trust" factor you afford him. Edwards actually is shaky on the question as to whether folks trust him. After the GOP are done tearing him apart on what he said then vs. what he is saying now, trust will not be a quality that many voters will believe Edwards possesses.

John Edwards does have quite a few "gotcha" possibilities, and I believe that he will not wear as well as you believe. He may be able to overcome them, but John Edwards is not without significant handicaps. and Don't think that the media won't "play".

[BootinUp]

11. I agreed

just below. :)

[BootinUp]

10. Any seeming advantage he has

is mostly from flying under the radar. That is he hasn't been the focus of attention. jmho.

[Armstead]

32. He was right up there on the radar in 04

As a primary candidate and vp candidate in 04, he has already been subjected to the oppo research, the "rich trial lawyer" stuff, etc.

In all honesty he did lose back then. However, I believe if he were the Democratic nominee with his current message and the backing of the Democratic Party and in the current climate, he could well win the general election.

[Triana]

13. K & R

[MercutioATC]

14. The most "electable" candidate we had in 2004 was Kerry.....

...that worked well, didn't it?

:eyes:

[Awsi Dooger]

30. How was a bland New England senator ever considered most electable?

I asked that on DU at the time, and will never understand it. Particularly against an incumbent. A resume never beats an incumbent. You need special personal qualities, like Clinton and Reagan, the only challengers to win in the TV era. For all of Kerry's strengths, he was one of the worst imaginable choices to run against an incumbent. Kerry would have fit much better this year in an open race but he blew his one chance.

As an Edwards supporter, this aspect has frustrated me for years: It's obvious electability will be downplayed in '08, because it was wrongly applied to Kerry in '04.

[rateyes]

34. No, it wasn't. nt

[NCarolinawoman]

15. The local political reporter from the Raleigh News and Observer thinks differently.

There was a meeting not too long ago in Cary, North Carolina where Ron Christensen spoke. He had just returned from Iowa. He was asked about Edwards's electability. Christensen said Edwards would eventually run into a lot of trouble because he has gone so far to the left (to court the net-roots) that it would make it hard for him to get back to the middle from where he has to run to win a general election. Right now Edards is perceived by the general population as being a moderate. because of geography and the Southern accent. But the Republicans haven't gone to work on him yet.

I've done a little paraphrasing on what Christensen said but that is the jist of it

There was also a question from the audience, "Do the people in Iowa know how unpopular John Edwards is in his own state?" The answer from Christensen was vey blunt, "No they don't."

A question came up about Biden not getting enough attention. Christensen said that if the choice of nominee was made behind close doors, as it was in the old days, the choice would be either Biden or Dodd and "either one would probably win in a 50 state blow-out".

I quibble with this a bit because I think Dodd could be depicted as the"dreaded" NE liberal. That would be a lot harder to do with Joe, despite his fairly progressive voting record.

[liskddksil]

17. Disagree with changing strategy for general election

I think that Democrats would do better if they stick with the positions that they had in the primary and not try to change their message to appeal to moderates. I believe if the candidate says what he means with conviction, it will attract people to our side. Just look at the Republican woman from Nevada after the CNN debate, in which she said I like John Edwards, even though i disagree with him on some things, because at least he is saying something.

[Zorra]

16. Aaaargh. I'm a Kucinich supporter, but common sense forces me

to agree with you.

Meanie.
:spank:

[Gregorian]

18. Well that's about what I was going to post.

I tend to agree with the original post on this.

So what do we do? I guess we have a little time. I so want to vote my heart this time.

But I know Edwards has a lot to offer, and is seen as an acceptable candidate by even the more conservative voters. It's an image oriented thing, which I don't value. But that's how the typical mentality works. At least that's what I think.

[peacetheonlyway]

19. Predict this Line up after it's all over

Edwards for president
BIden for Sec. of State
Kucinich for VP..
Ron Paul for Treasurer..

that would be the dream VP ticket.

you include the southerners (edwards), the grey haired old men and moderate dems who like biden,
you swipe the progressive and moderate/centrist vote that is heading for ron paul and kucinich in fell swoop.

[pamela]

20. Excellent post, David.

Edwards wouldn't just win, he would win BIG. Even the Diebold machines won't save the pubs if Edwards is our nominee.

[asdjrocky]

21. K&R nt

[maximusveritas]

22. Electability is the least important factor for me

And it's really debatable over who is the most electable. You can talk about current polls, but the fact is that most people are uninformed about the candidates and they will change.
I tend to look at Iowa as a barometer. All the candidates have been campaigning hard there. While Obama has consistently improved his standing the more they see him, Edwards has lost support. I think a similar thing will happen across the nation.

[red2blue]

23. Edwards /Obama

I want Dennis for AG. Anyone else think he would be go after these criminal that currently occupy the people's house?

[BenDavid]

24. I got a laugh out of the cnn poll....edwards third in every poll

out there but somehow he scores higher then HRC or obama.What's up with that?

[ClarkUSA]

25. Two weeks ago, the one candidate who beat all GOP candidates by a wide margin was Obama.

Then two weeks before that, it was Clinton. Now it's Edwards. Two weeks from now, who will it be? :shrug:

Besides, ask yourself how electable will Edwards be in the GE on public financing?

[David Zephyr]

26. Edwards made a tactical error on public financing. On that we agree.

Still, that said and back to my OP, John Edwards clearly has the component of electability in his corner. Are there other components? Of course. One of them is the public financing limitations that he accepted, but that also is only one component.

But as to electability, Edwards is hands down the best. He's held his lead over the GOP almost the entire year. Don't discount that.

[ClarkUSA]

27. That fateful decision made him unelectable in the GE, imo

No amount of hypothetical head-to-head match up polling now makes a difference... public financing will be a noose around his neck if he is our nominee.

[cali]

28. that's according to polls now

the fact is they're all electable. And Edwards hasn't been under the press or RNC heat yet. If he's the nominee, he'll get it the way Obama and Hillary have now for months. The electability argument is not a good one. So yeah, it's something to sneeze at.

[weeve]

29. YES

When three of the "liberal" Supreme Court Justices have indicated they may retire in the next term, then YES, electablity should be #1 on everyones mind. Unless of course, you welcome the thought of 8-1 conservative Supreme Court decisions for decades to come, should a Republican take the White House. The fact that Edwards is the most progressive of the top three certainly doesn't hurt either. Nor his coattails which would strengthen our Congressional majorities.

YES, for me JOHN EDWARDS is the one.

[dmallind]

31. Where are the state by state EV corroborations

Since when did national polls matter?

[Adelante]

33. John Edwards is no more electable than anyone

His record contradicts his current platform in too many ways, as does his primary image. He could easily be ripped to shreds on that alone. "Which John Edwards can you believe?" would be the theme. But they will find something, some way to go at any Democratic candidate. It's what they do. Edwards has had a quiet year, media speaking, he's mostly been left alone. Going into Iowa in 2004 he had 100% positive media. If they feel like giving it to him again this time, he can win Iowa. But his performance except for South Carolina in the rest of the states wasn't nearly as good in 2004 and this time he is doing very badly even there and that's his native state. He's not solid enough, though white and male, to get past the contradictions he's set himself up for. If people are remembering the sunny Johnny moderate from 2004, yeah, they might think he can do it and that will show in polls. Once they are repeatedly treated to the 2007 version side by side with the 2004 version, which is EXACTLY what the hits will illustrate, he is in no better position than any of our Democratic candidates.