Edwards is the only Candidate Who Can Be Trusted As President

[JDPriestly]

Obama is not ready to lead. He responds to the direction of others, but does not lead. He simply has not lived long enough to lead the country.

Hillary's first and last thought appears to be: How does this look?

Only Edwards knows where he is coming from and precisely where he is going and why. Only Edwards was able to foresee that the economic issues, not security, would dominate the presidential campaign. Edwards has vision. Edwards leads. Edwards is our best candidate, and he proved that once again in this debate.

[maddezmom]

1. come on now, I'd take any of them over the repugs

:)

[OzarkDem]

4. Edwards and Clinton, yes

I think Obama would be completely controlled by the GOP and corporate lobbyists. He's just not experienced enough to stand up to bullying or pressure. He's smooth, but I can see where he would easily let others more powerful second guess his decisions.

[JDPriestly]

36. I agree. Obama looks green behind the ears to me.

But then, everyone is getting younger all the time from my viewpoint, old lady that I am. I can't tell a 25-year-old from a 35-year-old anymore. That is when you know . . . .

[pauldg0]

41. Nope.............

Not any of them...some can't beat the other guys.

[OzarkDem]

2. Agree, that's a dangerous trait in Obama

As a president, he would be easily manipulated, especially by those who control his campaign donations.

[dogman]

3. If you're looking for apologies.

That's not leadership.

[OzarkDem]

8. Leadership is learning from mistakes

and moving forward. You can't lead if you're afraid to make decisions or refusing to learn from experience.

We already have enough of spineless leadership in DC, Edwards would be a much needed change.

[dogman]

14. Who pays for the poor judgement in the first place?

This country has hundreds of tears of experience on which to base judgment. Was he asleep in History class? Had he already forgotten Vietnam or the robber barons?

[OzarkDem]

16. Mistakes?

Everyone makes them, even presidents. Edwards has made far fewer than Obama or Clinton, he just owns up and learns from them.

Obama and Clinton had to answer for their mistakes. They spin and divert attention instead of answering head on.

Put an inexperienced guy like Obama in office and you'll see plenty, only he won't be learning from them. You know, like shady real estate investments.

[dogman]

22. How many thousands are dead from a questionable real estate deal?

Obama has more experience in politics than Edwards.

[JDPriestly]

37. Excellent. You are so right. Only the very young have made no mistakes.

Obama and Hillary don't admit theirs quite as readily. Obama is particularly vulnerable and defensive on this point. I still haven't heard a clear apology from Hillary about the Iraq War.

[ChiciB1]

5. He ALWAYS Comes Out Looking & Doing Well At The Debates....

but just look at what is being said by PUNDITS! Just like ALWAYS!!

It's Edwards for me... he's calm, cool and very collected and answers questions directly. Obama tends to follow and has some good lines, but he does follow!

[cmaff05]

6. You're joking right?

The same guy whose entire campaign is based on pie in the sky rheotoric and a message that is conflicted by his Senate record?

How exactly can he be trusted?

Have you ever looked at his Senate record? The man says one thing and then votes for another.

[Clark2008]

50. Exactly.

The only reason Edwards started his 2008 campaign using populist rhetoric is because he wanted to curry favors with the netroots. What I'm not sure about is why the netroots like him, given that lousy record.

[stravu9]

7. Because He Is NOT OWNED BY CORPORATE INTERESTS!

Which he will OWE later, like a deal made with the Devil!
They have sold their Polical Souls and will govern accordingly!

[AndyA]

9. Yes, Edwards is in tell the truth mode and the others can't deal with it.

All human beings make mistakes, it takes a big man to admit he was wrong and want to fix it.

I'd rather have someone who's honest and admits they made a mistake than someone who lies and commits crime in an attempt to cover it up.

Honesty in American politics: how refreshing! Who knew it could be done? :shrug:

Thanks, John Edwards for proving there is still an honest politician out there!

[cmaff05]

15. We need a candidate with vision

Not a candidate who will follow the majority and then apologize later. The latter is John Edwards in a nutshell.

[OzarkDem]

20. I'd say you're describing Obama

and Obama hasn't learned not to follow others blindly. Thanks, but I'd rather not wait til he's in the White House for you to figure that out.

[cmaff05]

26. Explain to me how it describes Obama

What glaring legislation has Obama been wrong about?

Compare it to Edwards...

IWR... wrong.
Bankrupcy... wrong.
Yuka... wrong.

We could go on and on.

His rheotoric is grand but his record shows that he is all talk.

[JDPriestly]

38. Obama has repeatedly voted to fund the War without

insisting on benchmarks. Obama just doesn't show up for the tough votes.

[cali]

44. Edwards was a war monger. Obama's record on funding the war is

identical to Ted Kennedy's, similar to Feingold's and Leahy's. Obama has voted for every bit of legislation that calls for getting out of Iraq.

Bringing up Iraq is a HUGE mistake for Edwards supporters. He pimped for war for the administration. He worked with Lieberman to bomb the shit out of Iraq. He was far more gung ho than Hillary. And he stuck by the hideous war for 3 years. Than he apologizes. Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of dead civilians in Iraq.

[AndyA]

21. John Edwards is leading the way with his vision.

The others are following behind, eventually catching up and announcing their own version of Edwards' vision.

I'll take the original over a copy, thank you.

[cmaff05]

30. heh

All Edwards is, isrhetoric. That's it. His record shows that he talks big but has consistently voted against his rheotoric. It's the reason why he won't win the nomination, people can't take him seriously. A white male who says all the right things, is presidental looking... why the heck can't he win the nomination? Because everybody knows about his disjointed Senate record and how he does one thing and says another.

[dajoki]

33. No...

he won't win the nomination because it would throw a wrench into the corporate media's best laid out plans for the election.

[AndyA]

46. Yes, by all means let the corporate media elect your next President for you.

Again.

Look! Over there! A cliff! Follow the lead sheeple. :eyes:

[dajoki]

49. I will not follow the sheeple...

I am voting for Edwards. I was just making a statement on what the media wants. You know yourself that there has been a blackout of Edwards from the begining. I live in PA and I just hope my vote means sometning because of our late primary.

[AndyA]

45. He is also the ONLY Dem candidate running who consistently BEATS

EVERY Republican.

Remember, we must still win the election, and Obama and Clinton can't do it. Polls going back more than six months show this to be true.

How's that for rhetoric. Keep supporting another candidate, and we'll wind up with another Republican in the White House! :eyes:

[GreenArrow]

34. he's leading by appropriating the vision of others

and claiming it as his own.

[AndyA]

47. Funny how Edwards announces his plan for withdrawing troops,

economic stimulus, or whatever, and then Barack and Hillary announce theirs...later.

Edwards is the only Dem candidate who beats every Republican in polls going back six months. Pick the best candidate to beat the GOP. And it's not Hillary or Barack.

[swag]

10. Pure bullshit.

Best wishes, s.

[Whisp]

11. but he can't seem to read reports very well

when it comes to warring and stuff.
I wouldn't call that a good thing.

[democrat2thecore]

12. TRUSTED?!?!?!?!

Only Edwards knows where he is coming from and precisely where he is going and why.

As I have said, Edwards is a classic example of "Watch what I say - not as I did when it was ON THE RECORD"

IWR: I was wrong. Sorry.
Bankruptcy: I was wrong. Sorry.
Yucca Mtn.: I was wrong. Sorry.

Yet, he knows where he is coming from and precisely where he is going and why? Not quite.

[OzarkDem]

18. And what did Obama and Clinton say in response to theirs?

spin, baby, spin.

[anamandujano]

27. Hearing more reversals from him was somewhat disconcerting.

I didn't care for his regretting his vote for IWR, but hearing more tonight really didn't play well. He is basically saying his judgment is flawed and he might not get it right. Those were all very big issues.

[democrat2thecore]

28. I agree. Very unsettling -nt

[JDPriestly]

39. Edwards has lived and learned.

Hillary hasn't. Where does Hillary stand on NAFTA? Where does she stand on the electronic surveillance and our Fourth Amendment rights? And what is her stance on getting out of Iraq? Hasn't she had several views on that?

[Renew Deal]

13. Yes, he can be trusted to apologize for his many fuck ups.

How many apologies did he have to make tonight?

[OzarkDem]

17. IIRC each of the candidates had to deal with 3 or so

You only noticed Edwards because he owned up to them, Obama and Hillary avoided talking about them.

I'd rather have the honest guy, thanks, but that's because I'm an honest person and admire that trait in others.

[Renew Deal]

19. I'd rather have someone that gets it right the first time.

[cmaff05]

23. And Edwards has shown himself not to be that person

Consistently on the wrong side of pretty much everything. He talks the talk but his record shows that he doesn't walk the walk.

[OzarkDem]

24. Yeah, like getting into ugly catfight with his opponent

right out of the gate in Primary season. Obama and Clinton both came off looking like bitchy high schoolers. No one with experience or true leadership skills would get down and sling the mud like that. He acted like an arrogant, spoiled adolescent. I don't feel like seeing if that's representative of his leadership style.

Edwards stayed above it, that's true leadership.

[Renew Deal]

25. Since when is apologizing for repeated mistakes "leadership"

Does Edwards get anything right?

[democrat2thecore]

29. Right again, Bleachers. -nt

[JDPriestly]

40. You'd best stay home, then, Bleachers.

No one gets it right the first time all the time. Maybe you are just too young to have learned that yet.

You have forgotten how many people (me included) believed Bush on the IWR. First of all, if you read the IWR, you will realize that the Senate voted to require the president to report back on a number of issues before going into Iraq. Instead of doing that, Bush just recited the language the Senate had passed in the IWR describing the information he was supposed to provide the Senate before getting permission to go into Iraq. John Dean discussed that fact in great detail in his book, Worse than Watergate. I recommend you read it.

Also, Bush and his friends including, especially Colin Powell, simply lied about the intelligence. Powell went before the United Nations with all kinds of visuals and completely conjured up stories about the evidence of WMDs in Iraq. Edwards has explained that he realizes that he should not have trusted Bush. Sorry, but I, too, thought I could trust Bush and, if not Bush, Colin Powell. We were all betrayed at that time. I guess I am quick to forgive Edwards for his mistake because I made the same mistake.

Edwards is an honest man.

I'm waiting for Hillary and Obama to explain why the corporations and their top employees are supporting their campaigns. Hillary and Obama can't be on my side and on the side of the corporations at the same time. I support John Edwards for president.

[JDPriestly]

51. Check the facts.

Hillary was either uninformed or just wrong.

On the Bankruptcy bill, 15 other Democrats voted for the bill.

The Yucca Mountain Bill merely authorized the Atomic Energy Commission to accept and review an application for the use of Yucca mountain site. The Senate overwhelmingly voted to pass that bill. So, many, many very liberal senators voted for it. It was a vote for the storage of nuclear waste. As Edwards explained, false evidence regarding the safety of the Yucca Mountain site was submitted to Congress to influence the vote.

I suspect that one of the reasons that Edwards is so critical of the D.C. establishment and of the taking of corporate lobbyists' money is the fact that he saw so much lying and so many dirty tricks and peer pressure of a wrongful kind being used in the Senate. He has described the arm-twisting and other wrongful conduct that he saw in the Senate. You cannot sit down to the table with criminals and expect to walk away with your billfold in your pocket. Thieves steal. And extortionists threaten. That is what they do. The American people need a government that works. The evidence, especially purportedly scientific evidence presented to Congress should be truthful. If the senators cannot trust the information provided to them by the administration, our system is not working. We need to change it. Stopping corporate donations and limiting the amounts that private donors can donate even more are essential to regaining a government that has integrity.

[Blue Congress]

31. I trust them all to ...lead us to Iran...

None of these candidates have been shown to have good judgment on Iran, all are still perpetuating Bush's phony war on terror.
Nothing will be done domestically as long as they continue that bullshit, not to mention it gives them an excuse to spy on Americans and treat us like criminals in our own country.

But trusting Edwards vision? He has nice words, but he has done nothing to prove he has leadership abilities, in fact quite the opposite. How can you trust a man that was pushing for the war in Iraq when it was so obvious it was all a pack of lies?

[Fabio]

32. this is probably the funniest post i have ever seen on du

(As i assume it was meant to be)

Why would I "trust" edwards (over HRC and Obama) when he has changed his positions on trade, the iraq war, the bankruptcy bill, licenses for illegals, healthcare, campaign finance, china trade and a host of other issues. Plus he worked for a hedge fund -- ooooh!

[Bonobo]

35. Boo hiss.

[BigBearJohn]

42. go go go Johnny go

[cali]

43. well, that's an opinion that I think is nonsense

trust is precisely my issue with JE. I don't trust him because he's given no reason whatsover for ANYONE to trust him. He's still my second choice behind Obama, but trust? Not with the numerous election conversions he's racked up. Too many to count.

[Perry Logan]

48. You might try a more positive approach. Instead of declaring the other candidates untrustworthy...

...why not just say yours is the best, and explain to us why you think so? You damage the party when you bash other Democrats, and it's completely unnecessary.