Letters to the Editor
-
renegade iconoclast
You're absolutely correct, but we have yet to perfect the time machine. Thus, as we stand, the robbery and thuggery that was the 2000 election, and that has ensued from that election, cannot be undone by anything but reassertion of the fundamental principles of this country, starting with the Bill of Rights. It's simply my opinion that Edwards/Obama is the straightest lines between the point where we are and the point where we desperately need to be.
-
Boy was that a buried lead!
Did folks check out the story at CNN? For the first time this cycle, a Democrat beats all Republicans in a national poll and the headline is: "Huckabee would lose to top Democrats by double digits."
I think Edwards is the most electable candidate in the Democratic field, for both the good and bad reasons. He's been in and out of the system, and sides with regular folks more explicitly than other candidates. He's also a white man, which eliminates bigotry from the equation for more than a few swing voters.
To the person who suggested Obama/Edwards, I can't pick a bone with electoral experience -- it's within the margin of error (Obama has run more successful races and Edwards has run in a national presidential race).
But I give Edwards the edge, due to his expertise in thinking like the enemy. While trial lawyers are deservedly denounced as a class, it takes remarkable skill to operate on the level Edwards operated on -- lots of achievements with no tell-tale, ambulance-chasing cases to haunt him. He knows how corporations think about the law, and from his Senate and candidacy experiences he knows how they influence the law, lawmakers and elections.
Also, I think another poster pointed out that Obama as VP would train the nation to think about a black man in the White House -- and I have little doubt that such a presidency wouldn't use Obama as a free agent to manage his own body of work, setting him up for a run in 2016. God knows, Dick Cheney really expanded the possibilities when it comes to Vice President.
-
To Anonymous 4:17
Polling is more than an art.
Sure, polling in Iowa is difficult, and should be understood as more "flexible" than other polling. But a huge amount of statistical data goes into good polling, which can be an excellent predictor or recorder of human action. I don't want to go into detail, but consistent variations in data (where patterns are well beyond the probability of random chance), produce information that is pretty damn close to scientific. In fact, the polling you cite that had Kerry winning on election night supports some of the most statistically valid claims of fraud.
Polling -- real polling -- produces useful data. That is why pollsters are rich.
Though you might tell your preferred candidate that it's not magic, and can't tell you who you are.
-
mc wrote: "Recall that John Kerry was highly touted . . . .
as the 'most electable' challenger to Bush 4 years ago. Turns out, he was so safe, so middle of the road, that the most unpopular president in generations had little trouble tearing him down."
The problem wasn't the concept of electabilty. The problem was who was doing the touting: the pundit class and Karl Freaking Rove! All the while they were ridiculing Dean and ignoring Edwards because they would have been tough to beat. The touters did not have the Democratic party's best interest at heart.
Who do they like this year? A black man who's under 50 and and less than halfway through his first term in the senate and what might be the most reviled white woman in America. Both of them, aside from their demographic specialness, are also remarkably safe and middle of the road. If you get all your news from the MSM you might think that nobody else is running. Be very afraid. The Dems need to look at the whole field and make their own judgments about electability. Not one vote has been cast. It's not too late.
-
Why Edwards/Obama...
...rather than Obama/Edwards? I personally find Edwards' stand on income inequality more compelling and find the likelihood that he would NOT be in Wall Street higher than Obama. Obama has made a few comments that are a bit too business-friendly and centrist for my tastes. And the concert Obama was involved with the "ex-gay" singer who denounces gays left a rather bad taste in my mouth, though I know Edwards has his own gaffes in regards to LGBTQ issues.
-
So Huckabee's losing head to head polls now...
He was also way back in the pack just a few months ago. All of the sudden it looks like a Guiliani/Rommney/Huckabee race. (Hey whatever happened to that Thompson guy?)
Do not underestimate this man. His sort of populist folksiness carries a lot of weight that people don't pay attention too. His low numbers in head to head polls could very well be thanks to a current lack of recognition.
Is it me or does he remind anyone of Reagan? The folksiness, the smooth way he avoids answering hard questions, the constant punchlines? (Seriously, how is "Jesus never would have run for office." a legitimate answer to a question?)
Here's my point though. What's the chance that in a Clinton-Huckabee race 11 months from now that Clinton loses her lead? Pretty high. The right wing will come out to vote against Clinton, especially with a guy like Huckabee. The left wing is less likely to vote for Clinton. I have heard no response to this point, despite it having been brought up numerous times.
An Edwards-Obama ticket would be progressive, ground breaking and appealing to wide swaths of the population. A Clinton-anyone ticket? Show me conclusively that she would put together a progressive change to the broken status quo, and then we'll see where we're at.
-
nobel president?
so how would Al Gore match up against the republican field? Imagine a Nobel laureate as US president! America respected again,.. climate change becomes a priority,.. coherent, nay, articulate presidential speeches....Nah, jus dreamin.
-
Ah, al dole
That would be great. I had to pack in that hope, and my need to believe had already resulted in my overlooking Edwards' flaws. In fact, I'm already beginning to think that Obama's fealty to banks and hedge funds is only temporary. Hope is a powerful tool of delusion.