Edwards has more funds than Richardson Dodd Kucinich Biden Gravel Guiliani Thompson Romney Paul etc.

[Stop Cornyn]

In fact, Edwards has more money than Richardson, Dodd, Kucinich, Biden, and Gravel added together.

I only bring this up in response to those who question whether Edwards' decision to accept federal funds was a true choice or his only option.

Clearly, it was a choice and not the only option for Edwards.

[nashville_brook]

1. thanks for the reality check.

[cobalt1999]

2. He's not competing against Richardson, Dodd, Kucinich, ...

He's competing against Hillary and Obama. It may still be his only option.

[Stop Cornyn]

4. I get the idea he's competing against poverty, a broken health care system, endless war, and the

rest of the Bush legacy.

[cobalt1999]

14. Nope. He can't compete against those until elected.

Right now he is just fighting for the right to go after poverty, etc.

His competition is Hillary and Obama and his eye, strategy, and money are on those two (at least they better be if he is going to have a chance).

[AndyA]

3. Yes, I believe you are correct.

Ignore the ugly, nasty people in the other thread.

They are more than happy to grasp at straws and trash Edwards because their own candidates have such gaping issues that they are more than happy to try to divert attention away from.

Barack promotes an anti-gay, and gives him a platform to speak to a captive audience, and doesn't think Bush has done anything serious enough to be impeached for! (I shudder to think what an impeachable offense in Obama's mind would be...BJ, perhaps?)

Hillary has her hands in every major corporation's pocket, no doubt making promises to them as she stuffs their money in her bank accounts, and her stance on issues changes as frequently as the wind (and the audience).

[Clark2008]

16. I don't have a candidate and, yet, I have far more issues

with Edwards than with most of the others.

Please, don't lump me in with some partisan bickering.

[geek tragedy]

5. He had less than half as much as Clinton and Obama.

Who cares about getting third place? He didn't have the money to contend for the win.

[Stop Cornyn]

7. If the election is only about money, you are right and Edwards made the wrong choice.

[geek tragedy]

9. Not only, but you gotta be able to play

at the high rollers' table.

Television advertising and ground operations with canvassing cost a lot of money.

[Stop Cornyn]

12. Edwards has more money than Giuliani, Romney, and Thompson -- enough for the high rollers' table

I'd be perfectly content with an Obama win.

If Obama wins, it won't be because of his money.

[geek tragedy]

13. Minimum ante is higher on the Democratic

side this year.

[Stop Cornyn]

15. The history books are littered with moneyed candidates who never won

[waiting for hope]

6. Off to the GP with thee -

Edwards is running a fiscally responsible campaign. Thanks, I saw the other thread and appreciate this one. :)

[hedgehog]

8. If Edwards has enough money to carry his campaign to all the primary states,

it doesn't matter how much money anyone else has. The money race was only an issue as ling as it was a zero sum game with everyone going after a small pool of large donors and bundlers. With the internet coming it's no longer a zero sum game. Hit a certain threshold and you're in it for the duration.

[Freddie Stubbs]

10. I'm sure he will recieve more votes than Richardson Dodd Kucinich Biden Gravel Guiliani Thompson

Romney Paul etc.

But those people aren't his most serious competition. Hillary and Obama are. And they are crushing him financially, and in the polls in most states.

[rinsd]

11. Which is why he waited until the 3rd Q numbers came out showing he spent $1M above what he raised

It was all about integrity and public financing.

:rofl:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-02-05-edwards-money_x.htm

By Jill Lawrence and Fredreka Schouten, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — Democrat John Edwards on Monday joined New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in saying he will not use public money for the presidential primary campaign or, if he wins his party's nomination, for the general election.

The move by the former North Carolina senator is the latest sign of trouble for the public campaign funding system, created after the Watergate scandal to set limits and disclosure rules on contributions to presidential campaigns.

Edwards said in an interview that he expects major candidates in both parties to raise unlimited private dollars rather than participate in the public system. He said he needs to do the same "to have the funds to be competitive."

Edwards plans to start soliciting contributions for the general election soon, spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri said. Clinton has been raising money for both the primary and general elections since she got into the race last month.