It’s about ELECTABILITY, stupid!

[2hip]

The bottom-line to this Primary exercise is to nominate a candidate who will beat the GOP to regain the WH in 2009, if I’m not mistaken. Yet amidst the “Your candidate sucks” bickering, the question of who is most Electable remains mostly ignored.

In a previous life in a galaxy far, far away, I participated in a discussion board heavily populated by Repugs. Unless you’ve experienced it first hand, it’s difficult to understand the stone-cold, knee-jerk, deep-seated hatred the mere mention of the name “Clinton” evokes among their ranks. The thought of a female Clinton in the WH will certainly turn their pathetic misogynist hearts stone cold.

Likewise, the racist cult of the GOP will find much fault with Obama simply because he’s a “Negroid”, and an edumacated Negroid, at that! Surely, there can be no greater threat to their lily-white way of life.

Nominating Clinton or Obama as our candidate will coalesce and energize the GOP base even more than in 2000 and 2004. If regaining the WH is our ultimate goal, are these truly the candidates we want to put forward?

Food for thought.





              Edwards '08 tees!

[maddiejoan]

1. so basically your message is:

John Edwards.

He has a white penis.


:shrug:

[MadBadger]

8. Our warring sides can come together over your comment

Very true!

[goldcanyonaz]

11. But, is it a big white penis...

:evilgrin:

[maddiejoan]

16. Bigger than the Clenis??

[JohnnyLib2]

17. Watch out, that phrase could really catch on!

:evilgrin: :rofl:

[maddiejoan]

18. You owe me a monitor

:rofl:

[JohnnyLib2]

21. Please, take the phrase to the Lounge!

I can hardly wait. :toast:

[maddiejoan]

31. For you

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x7343041

[libbygurl]

34. LOL! nt

[indimuse]

83. .....

:spray:

[Barack_America]

2. Obama has thus far shown the ability to attract Independents and...

possibly, left-leaning and/or confused Republicans as well. IMO, he stands a chance.

[Snotcicles]

14. So they say. Edwards is doing a good job of that also but you will never hear about it. nt

[FlyingSquirrel]

3. KickedandR'd

[Taverner]

4. So we should never have a Black or Female President because it would upset the GOP?

:eyes:

[2hip]

29. It's not about "upsetting" the GOP

It's about beating the GOP. That's my point.




              Edwards '08 tees!

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Laurab]

28. I dislike the fact that she used the politics of fear.

I really thought only the repukes would stoop as low as that. In fact, that's what they're known for. The fact that she (and I believe her husband) are using that tactic makes me think far less of them.

[HeraldSquare212]

6. I like Edwards,

but it's tough to credit the electability argument on behalf of the only remaining candidate who hasn't won anything.

[Cha]

13. Oh well, lots psycho-babble

goin' on here.

[robbedvoter]

81. He won everything, silly. The corporate media keeps it secret from us. To prop

the "unelectable" candidates...:eyes:

[Andy823]

98. On the other hand

Do we go with the two that most likely will lose to the republicans? I don't go with the race or gender issue on voting, but many will. What I see are two candidates that are not going to win, no matter what color they are or what gender they are. Obama give a great speach, and has a following that any TV preacher would die for, but he won't win the general election, sorry, that's just how I feel. If he won the dem nomination, the day of a "free ride" are over. Dems may have been willing to give him a free ride this last year, but the repbulcians won't, and the indpendants won't. Voters are going to want substance, and not a candidate that seems to play it safe on most issues. You can sit on the fence in the primaries, but when the general comes along, you have to take one side or the other.

[mth44sc]

7. Well that was to cute for words...

But this John Edwards supporter says your post is bullshit and that you are not really a John Edwards supporter.

(edited for spelling)

[2hip]

15. What are you talking about?

I can't make any sense from your comment.




              Edwards '08 tees!

[mth44sc]

19. I don't imagine you can/ N/t

[Muttocracy]

23. But he is selling stuff apparently? n/t

[robbedvoter]

82. Must. Protect. Market.

[Snotcicles]

9. They have their dismal inept record of governing for the past eight years

they can't run away from, staring them in the face. They don't even want their own self in power anymore they can't afford it either.

[Benhurst]

10. You may be right. I don't know.

We do have a long history of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

No matter who we pick, I'm afraid the election will be stolen. The stakes are too high. Too many powerful people face ruination and serious jail time if the rule of law is reestablished. And the people haven't been allowed to choose a president since 1996.

[Crunchy Frog]

12. John Edwards because he's a white male

is basically what you're saying.

[2hip]

24. Unfortunately, yes

The GOP can hardly be considered "evolved". Yet, if our female candidate had a last name other than Clinton, it would be easier to hurdle the blinding GOP hatred to get her elected.




              Edwards '08 tees!

[BlueJazz]

20. A part of me does not want to agree with you...but Alas.....

...your words ring true.

I believe part of the problem (Here on DU) is the Northerners truly don't realize how biased and petty some Southerners can be...

I live in the south.

[Benhurst]

41. So do I, and I agree.

And they seem to think Southern Democratic primary victories lead directly to general election victories. If only that were true.

[gateley]

22. Gosh! Thanks for bringing your wisdom to DU!

Good thing you don't participate in that discussion board heavily populated by Repugs anymore! :eyes:

Welcome to DU! :hi:

[mth44sc]

25. kinda hard the believe

that folks fell for this one...

[gateley]

33. It was his/her choice of a certain word that got my blood boiling. Unnecessary. nt

[2hip]

35. Please note - it wasn't MY word but THEIRSl

I was attempting to convey the GOP mindset. If I failed to do so and offended you, I apologize because that was not my intention.




              Edwards '08 tees!

[gateley]

39. Who is THEY -- do you have a link? nt

[2hip]

42. THEY are the knuckle-dragging Repugs

You can find them everywhere.




              Edwards '08 tees!

[gateley]

43. Yes, we know you can find them everywhere, like on that board you previously

frequented.

And yes, we know how they think.

Your argument has been presented here before several times. No one ever felt the need to use that word. You didn't need to, either, to get your point across.

Yes, it disturbed me and yes, apology accepted.

[cali]

59. No, you reflect the GOP mindset

And your candidate is the one with electablitlity problems- even beyond the other two. The GOP will have a field day if we make the mistake of nominating JE. He will have NO money to fight back against the puke frame. And no, the 527s can't do it for him. He has a $50 million dollar cap on what he can spend through freakin' August. And he's already spent a good chunk of that. The puke candidate will have hundreds of millions- just like JK and bushco did. How will they frame him?

Fortress
Hypocrite
House/asking others to sacrifice
Haircut
Epic flip flopper
Angry/Class War

The bulk of voters in a GE think of themselves as middle class and they will eat that shit up.

[2hip]

61. The bulk of the middle class are getting screwed

They're eager for someone willing to acknowledge their hardships/dilemmas and fight for the interests of the People instead of Big Business for a change. If Edwards wasn't hitting home with his message, Clinton, Obama and even Romney wouldn't be constantly retooling their stump speeches to emulate him. (Plenty of threads on DU for you to search for yourself if you don't believe he's being copied, sometimes word for word.)



              Edwards '08 tees!

[cali]

68. They're all cribbing from each other.

And Obama talked about the ills of corporate influence months ago. Now Edwards is cribbing from Obama about change. So is Romney. Obama is stressing the anti-corporatate message more because of Edwards. This happens in virtually every campaign.

Middle class voters are NOT buying JE. They didn't in NH, and he couldn't even get a win in Iowa where he had everything in his favor- lots of LOCAL media coverage, 3 years of campaigning and he still couldn't beat Obama.

And you didn't address my list of pitfalls for JE in the general.

I don't know why I'm even bothering. JE won't do well in SC because he has virtually NO African American support. He won't do well in NV. His message hasn't worked in two small states where retail politics are way more important than the MSM and where people have seen him up close and rejected him. As someone who doesn't trust JE's election conversion, I'm glad of it. His record in the Senate was enough for me to reject him in 2004 and again this year.

[Triana]

26. Edwards is shown to be the only candidate who can beat all the Repubs...

...who are currently running.

THAT is electability!

[cali]

60. No. Not even close.

That's a snapshot before the GOP has framed his ass. And they will. And he won't have the bucks to counter it. Period. If you don't understand how limited he is due to caps, you have no idea what we're in for if we nominate JE.

[2hip]

63. Now tell me how the GOP will frame Obama or Hillary?

You're deluded or naive to think money is the answer to the attacks the GOP will launch against Obama or Clinton. All the money in the world won't fully counteract those GOP attacks or erase them from the minds of voters.




              Edwards '08 tees!

[cali]

66. Of course it's largely about money and frames. duh.

that's hardly a secret. Are you so delusional that you believe that the MSM will help JE get his message out if he's the nominee. LMAO!

How will the GOP frame Obama? Very carefully. I'd guess, depending on the candidate, they'll go for the "inexperience" angle, and the he's a big scary lib angle. They'll use the vaunted Southern Strategy against him.

Clinton? They'll try and use the Clinton administration as an anvil, and exploit her high negatives. Also paint her as too liberal, out of the mainstream, etc, etc.

Edwards? They'll paint him as a hyocrite trying to start a class war. I've long thought him our weakest GE candidate- long before I decided on a candidate.

Yeah, it's about message in the GE and sadly, Money = Message in that contest.

It's delusional to think otherwise.

[2hip]

69. So you think the Obama/Clinton money machines can beat the GOP?

That worked so well for us in the last two elections.

If the average American is pissed off enough, a little class warfare may be exactly what they want!




              Edwards '08 tees!

[cali]

71. This is not 2004. And in 2000 Gore won. Or didn't you know that?

There is no incumbent president. The economy is not OK, and Americans trust the dems on the economy over the repukes by a large margin. The war is highly unpopular. Not so much in 2004. They have a very weak roster of candidates.

Historically, Americans just don't go for the class warfare thing, even though I think it is something that needs to be done. And they don't like candidates they perceive as "angry". I don't see JE that way, but that's been the media frame and you can bet that if he's the candidate the pukes will run with that too.

You need money to fight against the puke slime machine. He doesn't have it. He can't have it due to legal prohibitions.

You've been unable to respond cogently to any of my points.

I actually think that it's possible that he could be elected- but he's the weakest in that regard. You're stuck in some loop that prevents you from realistically assessing the political environment.

[robbedvoter]

84. Last national election GOP won - 1988. Afer that - straight loss and theft. Edwards knows

even if he keeps the Omerta on it.

[kelligesq]

27. Agreed. If Obama is the Dem candidate, Huckabee will be the Repug President.

with the 30% of evangelists and the south who would find him more acceptable
than Obama.

The other totally scary choice would be they would elect Giuliani, but the country will not accept Obama no matter how much Democratic Senators and Congressmen keep pushing and endorsing him.

If they keep it up, and dont realize that Edwards is the only democrat that the whole country could find acceptable, once again the Democrats are going to shoot themselves in the foot.

Nancy Pelosi with her no impeachment, and a deaf ear to the people, appears to be behind pushing Obama - she of the congress which garnered an 11% approval rating since she and the dems have taken over and ignored our demand to end the war and impeach. Tin ear.

[EVDebs]

45. A Bound Man: Why We Are Excited About Obama and Why He Can’t Win

http://radio.nationalreview.com/betweenthecovers/post/?q=ZTZlNzEzM2RhYTcwOWQ0Y2I1ZGI3NzZjMTM3NDg1ZTU=

The bargain Obama cut most likely was on Nov 29th with Michael Bloomberg,

Obama meets Bloomberg after Harlem fundraiser
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2007-11-30-obama-nyc_N.htm

If Huckabee wins the GOP nomination, it seems to me, Bloomberg will enter the race because the corporate interests all want to be best served. The GOP is playing some kind of waiting game with John Edwards in order to take him out early; then they'll insert Bloomberg as an 'independent' in order to assure Wall Street a victory.

[2hip]

48. Great links and analysis!

"...bargaining will only get you so far."

Ain't that the truth!



              Edwards '08 tees!

[EVDebs]

50. Thanks. The media bargain appears to be 'don't get specific' . Check this out...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4039978&mesg_id=4039978

[2hip]

53. If the Grassroots shout loud enough, the media will come

They are, after all, ratings whores. The question remains: Will they come soon enough?




              Edwards '08 tees!

[kelligesq]

101. I was really angry at CNN today 4 not giving JE as much time as the others so this is email i sent

CNN on Sat. just gave JRE 2 mins of airtime twice, followed by poll not mentioning him -

I and 300,000 other democrats have read this message to you. WE will complain to the FCC and demand your license be revoked , those are public airwaves owned by us,and you dont give equal time and mention to Edwards which you give to Obama and Clinton.What mention you do give is negative.

We dont like YOUR choosing what candidates Americans have choice of by not giving air time to ALL candidates.

Schneider, (a neocon who signed a PNAC letter to Bill Clinton along with Cheney & Jeb Bush) followed Edwards appearance on CNN, who does the polls and gave the poll results of Obama and Clinton...no mention of Edwards even though polls show across the country Edwards shows as most electable...just mentioned Clinton was ahead .

You may be owned by Time Warner, but wherever your stations air, WE THE PEOPLE OWN THE AIRWAVES. YOU MAY HAVE COOPERATED WITH BILDERBURG FOR 60 YEARS AS DAVID ROCKEFELLER SAID IN 1992 THANKING YOU FOR KEEPING BIDERBERG'S SECRETS WHILE ATTENDING THEIR MEETINGS.....BUT AMERICANS DONT WANT ONE WORLD GOVT. AND YOU SHOULD BE SERVING AMERICANS, NOT FASCIST CORPORATIONS and Bilderburg Trilaterals desires to TAKe OVER OUR COUNTRY and the world !!!@!!!

Bring Ted Turner back to manage this station. At least the news was more honest!!!

[AndyTiedye]

110. The Interest of the Networks' Parent Corporations Trump Even Ratings

For example, NBC will promote the war, and warmonger candidates, no matter how unpopular they are, and even if it decimates their ratings, because GE makes more money off the war than they do off of NBC.

[Thrill]

30. So your argument for Edwards is he is electable because he is a white man?

Thats weak

[kelligesq]

37. No my argument for Edwards is he's the most acceptable because he's not Bushlite

Both Obama and Hillary are so far to the right and represent the corporate interests in this country that they are both unacceptable to the rank and file dems. The new youth who are jumping up and down for Obama are not a majority of voters and certainly aren't consistent voters.

Evangelists vote. Southerners vote. Westerners vote. Oldsters vote.

If the dems continue to push Obama, it's hello pres huckabee.Another 8 years of
REpublicans destroying the country with their corporate sponsors.

There was no school during the caucuses in Iowa when Obama came in first.
There was school in New Hampshire when the 5700 college kids didnt show up.
So Obama didnt come in first.

Common Sense.

[2hip]

How will the GOP see Obama and Clinton?

I'm asking you to view the scenario through our opponents eyes. As I've stated elsewhere on this thread, having a female candidate with a last name other than Clinton would change the dynamic and make her more electable, so it's not about Edwards being a white male.




              Edwards '08 tees!

[kelligesq]

65. No, I think female unknown name wouldn't have a chance at all - out in first

round even before Biden and Dodd and Richardson etc.

They might be somewhat upset because they were prepared for it to be Clinton, probably have all their ads and swiftboaters already printed and figure she's such a divisive figure she'd be easy to beat.

Although the GOP didnt expect Obama, I think they'd be happy if he became president. Essentially he's one of them, they know he's been bought (C of C, insurance companies, healthcare companies, NAM, oil) and he could be their puppet. Much better appearance than junior, the world would think how wonderful
America selected a black man who was Muslim as a child, world criticism would stop and Corporatists would continue their march toward world dominance without
resistance with Obama as their front.

They would be most unhappy if Edwards were the candidate and made or even worked toward the changes, populism. Would probably break his chops as much as they did
Bill Clinton's because Clinton wasn't supposed to be elected, Pappy was. Clinton's election delayed their world dominance by 8 years - so when Junior came in he moved fast to undo the Constitution and civil rights, raise up the Corporations with monies from the Treasury in "tax cuts" - really gifts. Returning the US to pre FDR status. Edwards would return to FDR populism status.

One more word about Bill Clinton. I think he also tried appeasement, gave the GOPS Nafta, some things they wanted as he got more and more tired of fighting them at every step. His winning ways, his oratory, his ability with people, friend or foe pleased the world, earned trust, so that if Bill said Nafta, Cafta was good, we said Okay, Bill said so. Watching him of late hanging out with Pappy, taking money from Murdoch and that ilk, even chummy meeting in his own home with arch enemy Scaiffe, the man who spent millions if not billion trying to destroy Bill Clinton, accepting a couple of hundred thousand from Scaiffe for his foundation, indicates to me he's given up the ghost. Joined em.

Hillary to the dem base is far right, what the DLC calls center. Obama wants one big happy family (ha).His programs are those of the right. Neither of them are democrats as we have known democrats. They're republicans and I wouldn't even call them republican light. There's no difference in their programs than those of the rethuglicans. Cooperation - One Party. What countries do we know that have had one Party, no opposition? How did the populace fair?

[2hip]

67. How about a KNOWN female name -- like Boxer, for instance?

If Boxer were running instead of Clinton, can you see how the dynamic would be different?




              Edwards '08 tees!

[kelligesq]

70. 2 Hip, I added to my last post - do read pls - now onto Boxer

nice woman. But without the weight, gravitas of a Hillary Clinton.

Not a "presence".

Not a chance, nor would she generate excitement,

hmmm - I feel like I'm in a poll. LOL

got anymore?

[alittlelark]

32. You seem to be coming from the JE camp

But I don't buy it.

Your words are quite ugly.

[kelligesq]

38. playing a little race card are you ? read the rest of my posts, jr.

:spank:

[alittlelark]

46. Actually,

I attempted to w/ subtlety accuse You of playing the race card.

Did it feel.... well.... uncomfortable?

Obvious and ugly.

[kelligesq]

47. "Obvious and ugly" nonsense and repetitive attempts to bait. Silly games

and now you're on ignore. I have no time for frivolous people.

:spank:

[alittlelark]

49. Wow, I've never felt threatened enough to 'ignore' someone.

Too bad you won't see this, and deal w/ me calling you a chickenshit.

[The River]

36. Hillary & Obama

are both being set up by the media as cover stories
for "Election Theft 2008©". Either one will do.

The official spin will be that:

"In the privacy of the voting booth too
many Americans let personal bias change
their vote at the last minute. They just
couldn't vote for a ______ for President"

How do you disprove that frame?

Call it sexist because it is.
Call it racist because it is.
Call it an inconvenient truth because it is.

Thats the way the GOP operate.

[Skittles]

40. so we better vote for Edwards?

who CO-SPONSORED THE IRAQ WAR RESOLUTION? NO FUCKING THANKS.

[2hip]

44. And the new & improved 2009 GOP WH will bring you -- WHAT?

A brand new war in Iran and a totally fucked up SC? Yeah, that's the ticket!




              Edwards '08 tees!

[Skittles]

77. I refuse to pander to racists and bigots and homophobes and mysoginists

and until everyone does the same we will be STUCK WITH THE SAME. I might not care for Obama or HRC but I certainly would not vote against them because my piece of SHIT redneck neighbors would never vote for them.

[EVDebs]

89. They'll go for Huckabee or Bloomberg once he's in the race.

In any event, Obama and HRC need to adopt John Edward's economic script (and stick to it) or they'll be toast in November. Better yet, the nominee should be Edwards anyway. He's the only candidate that has been shown to beat ALL the GOP's candidates.

[kelligesq]

100. Interesting on news: only 16% New Yorkers would vote for Blumberg - not good news for him

to be president that is.

He's also obviously described as pro business, anti gun, etc etc

just what we would need , another pro business corporatist

[EVDebs]

55. Obama will probably make Colin Powell DefSec for his endorsement

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2624876

Now THAT'S "change" and "hope"

[kelligesq]

74. I cant envision Powell accepting any office after what he's been through

with the current administration.

Furthermore, by Colin caving to junior and doing the neocon bidding at the UN
he has lost much of the trust and good will of the public.

Poor man. He should have known better than to get involved with that crew.

[EVDebs]

88. The Economy should be topic #1 at any debate. Edwards has it locked

Our Economic Crisis Must Become the Top Political Issue in 2008

by Danny Schechter, AlterNet. Posted January 11, 2008.
http://www.alternet.org/election08/73001/?page=2

"So far, none of the debates are focusing on solutions for the growing economic squeeze." No, they haven't and The Shock Doctrine is being used by neocons to put a happy face on the subprime fiasco. No candidate of either party is going anywhere in their presidency unless the economic effects of Bush's nation-building in Iraq are addressed. A ten year occupation (to 2013 would destroy our country economically, yet McCain says 'a hundred years'.)

The corporatist's agenda needs to be stopped dead in its tracks. Obama and HRC aren't the ones capable of doing it, Edwards is.

[Skittles]

85. I don't care for Edwards, HRC OR Obama

I am entirely disgusted with this entire primary process and I find it especially disconcerting that DUers bought into the same tired candidates THE CORPORATE MEDIA CROWNED AS FRONT-RUNNERS

[kelligesq]

99. dont blame you, but many do not buy into those crowned by the MSM

fear not.

[Skittles]

107. really?

I don't seem to know ANYONE who thinks for themselves but then I DO live in f***ing TEXAS :o

[EVDebs]

51. Actually, it's still "It's the Economy, Stupid" and with the Fed cutting rates

right now, while a recession is starting, the more jobs go in the tank the more people will realize Edwards is THE ONLY CHOICE.

The rest of the pack will have to come to John for advice on economic matters.

[kelligesq]

75. Recession. Other than Bill Clinton or Robert Rubin, can you name anyone

off the top of your head who you think could pull us out of the recession which looks like it be world wide within a year or two?

When America sneezes the world economies catch cold....they're overflowing with
almost worthless dollars and can't get anyone to buy them.

All they can do is use them here or maybe in Panama which uses the dollar.

Here's a funny. I was in Las Vegas in October and went to a show.

The entire auditorium was filled with non-English speaking Chinese people.

Getting rid of their dollars.

[EVDebs]

92. Edwards. Period. Obama can't and Hillary can't

We're headed for a DEPRESSION not a mere recession and we're going to need a new FDR, not HRC or BO.

Edwards KNOWS what needs to be done and will do it.

Clinton supports the WTO (remember Seattle 1999 ?) and Hillary gets lots of Indian support for her stance on H1b visas etc that outsource jobs to India. Obama tried to mention this but got shouted down. The M$M doesn't want to talk about ANY of this.

[kelligesq]

102. EVDebs - you're right about the big "D" word - yes it's the economy

and I know JE would know the programs, but it's going to take more than programs -

a heavy economics person in his cabinet to get us out of the worthless dollar - a genius to figure out what to do about the 9 trillion in debt ( I dont believe that for a minute, its prolly far more since we know you can make figures say anything you want - prolly somewhere between 20 and 30 trillion in debt) Bill Clinton was no slouch at that but he had Robert Rubin..boy genius.

[EVDebs]

108. Income redistribution is needed FAST. Too much concentrated in Bush's top 1%

Read Kevin Phillip's Wealth and Democracy. The solution is clear. I recommend this book to all Edward's supporters.

[Arugula Latte]

52. Nominating Clinton is suicide for us, but Obama will be liked by both sides.

I don't know why people can't grasp how widely despised Hillary is and how she is the only person who can motivate the other side to come out and vote against her in droves. I want to scream when I think about what a wasted opportunity it will be for us if she is nominated. We desperately NEED to win the White House and she is our biggest chance of blowing that.

[EVDebs]

54. Widely despised but look at that delegate count, won't you ?

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/scorecard/

The establishment's candidates have the most delegates. Edwards isn't liked by Wall Street and board-room interests. Grasp that.

[Arugula Latte]

57. I know. It's so frustrating that a person who wants to take on corporations

has an almost impossible task to try to get elected.

I'm realizing our nominee will be either Hillary or Obama.

Obama will be a much, much better choice for us.

[kelligesq]

72. Obama will be a much much better choice for the Republicans

that would please them greatly. They could happily live with him as
President because he has a history of giving them all they want.

It's Edwards who would make them very very unhappy.

They just dont like Hillary from past wars, but essentially, like Obama, she's one of them.

[ShadowLiberal]

56. Agree 100%, a Hillary nomination would GUARANTEE the Repukes retain control of the WhiteHouse

Worse yet, look at the Supreme Court, if you think a narrow 5-4 neocon majority is bad just wait until it's a 6-3 or 7-2 majority.

We need to nominate someone who's proven they can get independents, and even some republicans dissatisfied with the neocon direction of the republican party, to vote for us.

[kelligesq]

104. Sure both sides like Obama who never met a lobbyest he didnt like including the mob

but that wont do anything for THE PEOPLE

This election is about wresting our govt from the corporations and putting the
people, jobs for them, economic stability back for them as well as restoring the
Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

This election is make or break for America's very existence as it has been known.
If it continues the way it has been for the past 7 years, it will not be America,
I would bet they'll even give it a new name. LIke NOrth American Holding Company or something. Get it?

[Name removed]

58. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[robbedvoter]

80. And while at it, better be a Republican man, too! ("electability" comes down to that eventually)

[Bread and Circus]

62. You are right... but I don't think you really understand how a lot

of Republicans think about black people.

I live in a very red area of a blue (though on the bubble) state (more of a bluish purple state). When I talk politics and the race at hand, Obama is the least offensive to them. This is most likely because he is using the least offensive language. They wouldn't agree with his policies if they took the time to know them, however it's not about something so practical. It's more about the "how am I going to feel when this guy is on TV" effect.

I know there are a few responses to this:

1.) bollocks.... Republican hate blacks...they are all bigots. This is patently false.
2.) you are just shitting me. However, polls and the primaries to date prove otherwise.
3.) we don't want a guy the right wing likes. Um, please read the original post, electability matters.

But in closing, if Edwards can pull this out and get nominated, I think he could win it for sure. I'm much less confident of Clinton on that score. But then again, she has built in support from women and I think a lot of women will come out to put the first woman in the White House.

I think it's a mixed bag to be honest.

1.) Obama's message is the least offensive (and probably the most productive at a time like this).
2.) Edwards message is probably the most accurate in terms of getting to the heart of the matter, but it has a grievous quality to it and has conflictual overtones to it (not quite sure how much more conflict we need at home considering the shitstorm we've got ourselves into overseas). However overall he is palatable.
3.) Clinton is polarizing on a cosmetic level plus the RW has a whole myth about her that demonizes her but defies reason. However she has built in support of women and female solidarity is fucking incredibly strong.

I pick Obama because the guy actually inspires me and a house divided cannot stand. I'm tired of the U.S. being at war with itself and his rhetoric means to address that.

Edwards gives me raw meat, but his rhetoric and actions do not always meet and he's had his fair share of corporate money. He's got Nader's message but Clinton's history.

[Steely_Dan]

64. Yeah, Well...

we had our chance to nominate someone who would have been a shoe-in....But noooooo, we couldn't actually put someone up who was the most experienced or qualified, could we?

Now, we got a horse race. I "hope" we win.

-P

[kelligesq]

73. You all speak as if there's going to be a legitimate election without fixed machines - guess

what?

Most states are using the optical scanners. They dont count the votes properly as recent tests have shown, even without "fixing", and on top of that, they can
be "fixed".

The only benefit will be if they save the sheet that people have made out there can be a recount. If they dont, ...............

[Perry Logan]

76. I think we should run a dog for president, just to humiliate the Republicans.

It's silly to worry. People are not going to forget the Neocon Nightmare of 2000-2006.

[martymar64]

97. Then in 2009, Bush's War will be Hillary's War

If Obama wins, it will be Obama's War. With anbyone but Edwards, we as a country are screwed.

[NoBorders]

78. I hear apolitical people say 'all I know is I hate Clinton'

it may be the result of years of RW smears, but some people sure have strong feelings about her.

[Skittles]

86. the media demonized her beyond the point of logic

the same way the crowned Saint Ronnie Reagan. It shows how easily a great many people can be swayed by lies, innuendo and propagands.

[NoBorders]

87. They really created an image

around her, it's amazing how effective they were. What shocks me is that apparently Bill Clinton and Richard Mellon Scaife have now reconciled somehow???? Don't have a link, just read it somewhere.

[robbedvoter]

79. Electability is about stupid! (MSM made - meaning "who we tell you to vote for")

Ultimately, only a GOP-er is "electable" in their mind.
It's just another word for "but what will THEY say?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4034159
We ae the majority party - we can run on our values, not THEIRS. They haven't won a national election since 1988!
See my signature.

[Colobo]

90. The three of them are electable. It's just that Obama is the best candidate

of the three.

[EVDebs]

91. Edwards would be the best President

So far, none of the debates are focusing on solutions for the growing economic squeeze.

http://www.alternet.org/election08/73001/?page=2

and Edwards owns that debate. Obama makes a great candidate but he's all hat and no cattle on the economy.

[kelligesq]

93. EVDEBS - from your link - Bank Governors talking big D word

""The central banks are trying to dissociate financial problems from the real economy. They are pushing the world nearer and nearer to the edge of depression. We hope they will eventually be dragged kicking and screaming to do enough, but time is running out." -Bernard Connolly, global strategist at Banque AIG.

"The kind of upheaval observed in the international money markets over the past few months has never been witnessed in history," says Thomas Jordan, a Swiss central bank governor."
______

also while Conyers and others are asking for jail for the subprime lenders,
Countrywide's CEO which just went bankrupt and bought by Bank America, just received $88 million dollars for being one of the major causes of the subprime
disaster.

88 million dollars for causing a disaster for millions of people.

Does that make sense?

Corporatism lives.

[kelligesq]

95. google Harpers Magazine + Obama to find out who Obama is..

owned bythe worst of the lobbyists and corporatists.

Looks good, speaks beautiful oratory, not a democrat or a populist.
according to the bills he's written. Too much cooperation with the
rethugs leading me to believe he's a rethuglican in sheep's clothing
similarly to Hillary - same corporate lobbyist sponsors

[Imagevision]

94. It’s about ELECTABILITY, stupid? - Not so, Bush swiped two elections, h-e-l-l-o...!

[kelligesq]

96. Fixed machines. And the sheeple wanted to have a beer with him n/t

:mad:

[zulchzulu]

103. Edwards will be out of the race on February 6th

As for thinking that Americans are too racist to elect an African-American for President, oddly you miss the polls where many Independents and even moderate Republicans along with millions of Democrats would and do support Obama.

Sure, the knuckledraggers are out there and are racist. They also don't usually vote anyway.

Edwards is going nowhere. Your allusion that a Southerner who at this time is behind in his home state in polls would have a chance is amusing.

All the best to the Edwards campaign...we Obama supporters wait with open arms when you decide to support him after Edwards leaves the race.

[kelligesq]

105. Thanks. I'll wait to hear it from the man himself - not wishful thinking of yours :)

Yep. They said Obama was going to take New Hampshire and all those people told the polls oh yes, I would vote for Obama, but didnt.

Obama will be out after the court case starts in late February and his dealings with the mob - shall we say payoff for future favors - come forth.

He might get a lot of Italian votes then lololololol - but I doubt it.

[ileus]

106. and he' clean too...

[Mister Ed]

109. What are you up to? Smearing all three front-running Dem candidates at once...

Heaping this misogynist trash on Clinton, and racial slurs on Obama, all to make Edwards supporters look bad?