Monday, January 14, 2008

Why Not Edwards?

Dave over at Into My Own has a very good post entitled, Why Not Edwards that I think is very well done and I recommend stopping by to read.

I have to admit I've wondered at the lack of support by some in the blogsphere that consider themselves to be progressive towards Edwards. Many of those you'd think would support Edwards have decided to support Obama and as Dave aptly points out:
I think people have been drawn to Clinton in part because of her toughness against the GOP onslaught, and in part for nostalgia for the economic boom of the Clinton years. Obama is an exciting speaker, and has a great deal of personal energy. I think people are attracted to him because they feel those qualities will propel him to the White House. But as the Krugman column Stoller cites explains, his policy ideas are always a step behind... Edwards. But Edwards still can't catch a break.

Hopefully Edwards will do well in South Carolina and that some of those who are sitting back waiting not feeling inspired will feel a bit more inspiration...


Mark W Adams said...

Who is this Edwards fellow you speak of? ;-)

Did ya see the new polls from Nevada? It's all tied up!

If anyone thinks this thing isn't a race, and thinks that letting Hillary and Obama beat up each other and just sit back and look like you're above the fray isn't a winning strategy, then you're not paying attention.

What's fun is that it will actually matter how Ohio votes in a primary for the first time I can remember.

Miss Welby said...

hi Lisa, I'm linking the finest American liberal women bloggers like you because in Europe we watch closely this important presidential election. Visit me and see if you want to reciprocate the link. ciao!

Anonymous said...

Maybe you should ask yourself what qualifies Edwards, Obama or Clinton.

Have they written any Bills while in office? What type of leadership positions have they ever held?

How do they qualify to run the economy of the United States? The economy in the past 5 years has been outstanding.

Unemployment has ranged from 4.7% to a low of 4.5%

The best was 5.7% from 92-2000

We have set records for the Dow in the past 5 years

24 straight quarters of economic grotwh.

Cutting capital gaines taxes as well as other taxes has propelled the economy.Raising taxes for social programs has never worked anywhere.

We were in a recession in 1999

What is the Clinton claim to fame as its Administration? The Welfare reform which he Vetoed twice and was written by Rick Santorum? Thats what History says.

Ask yourself, what has Hillary accomplished as a Senator? She has named post offices. That is it.

What has Obama done while in Office? What Laws? What accomplishments? Exactly....nothing

John Edwards? The same...Nothing...Its all on their records.

But on the flip side, Fred Thompson has a long list of accomplishments. He has written Bills. He has worked as an Ambassador. He has all kinds of experience.

Mit Romney the same way. His economics has been outstanding as a Governor and he was also called in to fix the Olympics which was going broke.

Rudy Gulliani fixed a bad mega city that had a bad crime issue. He also was a fantastic leader at 911 and how he handled that.

None of the top Three Democrats give anyone a real alternative to the Republican top three who have done nothing and are not qualified to ewven be in this race as a president.


Cyberseaer said...

The main problem with Edwards is that he was Kerry's running mate. Since Kerry was shot down in flames, most Democrats might feel that if Edwards was the Democratic canidate, the same thing may happen again.

If Obama or Hillary win, then it's another four years of a Republican in the White House. What the Democrats in power seem to forget is that middle America isn't ready for the "enlighten" ideals of the coastal parts of America, namely California and New York.

But who cares about that. Old people from Brooklyn who now live in Florida will once again decide the fate of this country. UPDATE TO THE DIGITAL WORLD DAMMIT!!!!!

Scott G said...

People are not as enlightened as we are. I have been for Edwards since before the 2004 Iowa caucus. Maybe people don't' support him because I do.

Anonymous has inspired me. I think maybe I should look at Giuliani who has profited off 9/11 more then anyone besides Halliburton and its subsidiaries. Add to that the fact that the city was no more prepared on 9/11 then it was when it was first attacked in '93, and I cannot think of a better person to put in charge of the entire nation's readiness.

Fred Thompson cannot stay awake long enough to be president. But maybe someone who takes three eight hour naps a day would do us some good and be rested if we ever did need to wake him up.