Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Undecided - Comparing Obama and Edwards

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
wildflowergardener Donating Member (863 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 11:45 PM
Original message
Undecided - Comparing Obama and Edwards
Hi. Up until pretty recently I have been hoping that Gore would get into the race. I've given up on that now and finally have to make a decision between my two other choices, Obama and Edwards. Saturdays debate was the first I have seen. If I was going only on that I would have to put Edwards a little higher. I went to Edwards website, and liked everything I read about what he says he's going to do. I went to Obama's too, and honestly I was too tired after reading many of the detail points on Edwards to give it an equal amount of time tonight. I need to go back another day after I haven't spent an hour reading the other.

My main question is though - are there any differences in policies they are proposing that I should be aware of that might help in my choice. So far from skimming Obamas they seemed pretty similar to Edwards. Are there any websites that compare what the candidates are proposing in an un-biased way - point out where there differences might be?

Meg
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
begin_within Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 11:52 PM
Response to Original message
1. A key difference, in my opinion:
Edwards does not accept contributions from lobbyists or political action committees. (Yes, he has accepted donations from trial lawyers. But has clearly stated on "This week with George Stephanopolis" that all lobbyists will be excluded from his White House, including lobbyists for trial lawyers - even though they have contributed to his campaign, the still don't get access). Edwards' decision to refuse donations from lobbyists and PACs means he is not tied to special interests and is free to make decisions in and for the public interest. The same cannot be said for Obama and Clinton - they are both, directly or indirectly, tied to corporate dollars, and money is the lifeblood of politics. They may seek the same types of changes Edwards seeks, but they are hamstrung by their ties to the corporate money that went, even indirectly, into their campaigns. Where do you think the $100 million for each really came from? This is a key difference between Edwards and the other two. Other people are probably going to post counter-arguments, but I think this is a fundamental difference that puts Edwards at the top, in my estimation. Kucinich was my first choice, but he has been ostracized by the commercial media.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
silverojo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 11:54 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. These are the reasons I prefer him over Obama
But if he can't win the nomination, I'm behind Obama all the way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 11:59 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. I agree
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Egnever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 11:59 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. This is red herring
if you actually look at the campiagn contribution numbers from opensecrets.com and do the math the percentages from each industry given to each candidate as compared to their total intake is almost exactly the same.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 12:01 AM
Response to Reply #7
12. It's not just quantity, it's *quality*
See my other post. Not all special interests are created equal and that's an incredibly important distinction that needs to be made.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Egnever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 12:11 AM
Response to Reply #12
19. I can live with that and I responded to your post
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 11:56 PM
Response to Original message
3. I believe that Obama has a more consistent record
Edited on Sun Jan-06-08 11:57 PM by FrenchieCat
and has not had to say sorry for all that he has done prior to running this election.

I also believe that Obama has done more in his few years in the senate, than Edwards did in his six.


I forgive Edwards for co-sponsoring the IWR, I just can't reward him for it.



Apart from that, I believe their policy agenda to be quite similar....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K Gardner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 11:57 PM
Response to Original message
4. These are both fine, respectable, remarkable and dignified men.. we could hope for
no better, truly. That said, the decision will come from your heart. Listen, read, watch CSpan and You Tube videos.. catch of much of THEM as you can and certainly, be wary of what you read here :-)

This is going to be a good year.. you can't lose with either of them. :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AmBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 12:20 AM
Response to Reply #4
24. In recent polls, Edwards beats all the Republicans, but not Obama.
Edited on Mon Jan-07-08 12:21 AM by AmBlue
If we're thinking strategically, he's the best choice. When I was knocking on doors for Kerry/Edwards in 2004 I had so many Republicans tell me that if it were Edwards at the top of the ticket they'd vote for him. Since then, I've known many other Republicans that tell me they like him and would vote for him.

Best of all, he is "ready to fight" for middle class Americans: for healthcare, for our jobs, for an end to the corporate stranglehold on Washington. Knowing how ugly the Republicans can be when they are up against a wall, my money is on John Edwards. And if you haven't watched his town hall meeting today in NY, it's a must see:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x81541
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 11:58 PM
Response to Original message
5. Why I can't personally support Edwards in the primaries
His record as Senator on many issues is the direct opposite of what he says he would do now.

I'd like to compare Obama's record as not only Senator but also his 8 years as State Senator in Illinois to Edwards, but do I compare Obama's record to Edwards' record or Edwards' newfound opinions, which directly conflict with what his actual senatorial record is.

There's Senator Edwards, who while on the Senate Intelligence Committee at the time he was co-sponsor of the Iraq War Resolution, was firmly for going to war with Iraq. His speeches vocalizing his hawkish stance was even used on the White House web site to show strong support among Democrats.

At that very same time, Barack Obama was on record and on video being firmly against going to war in Iraq.

Do I compare Edwards' newfound policy on Iraq after his apology or what he actually did when it was his chance to show his progressive side?

Then there's the trade issue regarding China, for example.

There's Senator Edwards, who voted for the China Free Trade act that opened the doors to the very things he complains about now in regard to issues of trade with China. Lots of jobs were lost in his home state of North Carolina due to that decision.

Obama's record has been about looking at free trade that points to not implementing such trade with the issues of human rights, environmental controls, employee rights and other matters that make it fair.

Do I compare Obama's record on trade with the Senator who voted for China free trade or the candidate who thinks that trade policies due to the passing of the China free trade agreement are wrong?

In terms of experience, comparing Obama's 8 years as State Senator and 3 years as Senator to Edwards' one 6 year term as Senator is something to consider. Edwards is the least experienced of all the Democrats.

I would suggest you compare the Edwards as Senator first before you consider Edwards the candidate. If you want to see where Barack Obama stands on issues as well as his consistent voting record, go to his web site www.barackobama.com .

That said, I wish the Edwards campaign well and wholeheartedly support his fans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 11:59 PM
Response to Original message
6. I just wrote this so I might as well repost it here
I know anti-Edwards types bring up JE's record senate record, but the fact is ALL three of them have a questionable senate record in some respects.

Edwards gets unfairly bashed because he's currently putting forward the most progressive agenda and rhetoric so people single out *his* Senate record (which has the most dust on it and is therefore less relevant IMO) in an attempt to dismiss the idea that he can be progressive now (or going forward).

PS---I hate when people say lawyers are behind Edwards so therefore he's just as beholden to special interests as anyone else. Not because it isn't true, but because lawyers are SO low down the list of special interest groups we should fear.

Does anyone *really* fear undue lawyer influence compared to the influence of Big Oil, Big Pharma, The Telecom Industry, The Defense Industry or Health care Industry (to name some obvious examples)?

Finally, it's important to point out that the idea that Edwards would have just a much "bad money" if he were the front-runner isn't necessarily true. My evidence? Look at the *percentages* of where he gets his money. Much more of Hillary's money (I picked her because she is the fundraising front runner) comes from business interests vs labor interests for Edwards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Egnever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 12:09 AM
Response to Reply #6
18. where are you getting your percentages?
Just asking I would like to look at them. I am pretty much anti hillary so comparing him to her doesnt really work for me but I would like to compare him to Obama. From real clear politics when you actually compare the total funds raised to the breakdowns of individual interest you find that the ammount given to each is pretty close as a percentage of total contributions
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 12:13 AM
Response to Reply #18
20. I got those percentages from Opensecrets.org
There was a pie chart that showed the percentage of money from business vs labor interests. I saw it a couple of months ago and I *assume* it's still there!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Egnever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 12:19 AM
Response to Reply #20
23. It is I just looked at it actually
Something interesting about that breakdown. Edwards has raised more money total from pacs than Obama has. According to the charts.

I dont know that I actually trust those figures.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 11:59 PM
Response to Original message
8. Two IMO:
1) Edwards was a moderate in the Senate voting for the bankrupcy bill and free trade with China, and didn't convert to populism until after 2005. Obama has been consistent in his ideology.
2) Edwards voted yes on the IWR, Obama opposed the war from before its inception.

Gobama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 12:04 AM
Response to Reply #8
13. I live in IL
and Obama is my second choice so I don't dislike him.

But in fairness, Obama was not *in* the Senate so it was FAR easier to go against the grain in that context and speak out against the war considering he didn't actually have to vote on it (plus it's not like he was representing an especially conservative state).

There's also all of the no-show votes (on tough issues) in his history I'm not crazy about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 12:15 AM
Response to Reply #13
22. He was running for the Senate in the primary in 10/02
when he came out hard against the war at an anti-war rally. That was BEFORE the IWR when the drum beat for war was loud. The attempts to marginalize that are admirable * snort * but to some that matters. A lot. Particularly when put up against two candidates that voted for the war.

His "present" votes were strategic, i.e., he coordinated some with Planned Parenthood. That accusation is specious.

Vote for whoever speaks to you. To me that is Obama, by a long shot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 12:21 AM
Response to Reply #22
25. I'm not trying to "marginalize" anything
Like I said, if Edwards doesn't win I'd be HAPPY to support Obama (and *very* unhappy to support Hillary).

Also, it's not clear that ALL of his votes were strategic, although yes, *some* were:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22335739/

Hey, I'm not bashing the guy, I like him (just not as much as JE at this point), but that doesn't mean I'm going to pretend he's perfect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 12:23 AM
Response to Reply #25
26. On that we agree.
They and none of us are perfect.

ABH. Cheers!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 12:00 AM
Response to Original message
10. I think if Obama wins the nomination, the country could use Edwards as VP
and vice versa.

An Obama/Edwards ticket would be a very powerful combination.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 12:00 AM
Response to Original message
11. I believe it's a matter of what approach you prefer
I think their end goals are not too far apart.

However, Edwards sees it more in terms of having to shake things up, and start from the premise that we don't owe the corporations anything, and that it is up to them to make their case.

Obama is more of a "let us all come together and reason with each other" approach.

Personally I think Edwards' approach is what is needed at this point in history.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Capn Sunshine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 12:04 AM
Response to Original message
14. I love Edwards message
but Obama's message is transcendant. They are similar, but Obama wants your vision and participation.

BTW someone posted Edwards does not accept PAC money, but there were several (Labor based, BTW) PACs doing ads and writing letters to voters before the primary to the tune of several millions of dollars.

Obama has pointedly stated most recently as last night's debate that he will not allow lobbyists in the White House.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 12:08 AM
Response to Reply #14
17. I'm not part of any union
or for that matter, any industry that really involves unions.

But the power of unions/labor in this country has been reduced dramatically since Reagan took office. Something like 33% (if I can remember correctly) of the workforce used to be unionized compared to something like 7% today.

In that context, I'm just not all that worried about undue influence from labor interests. If anything, we need MORE of it to help restore some balance as FAR too much power has gone to business interests.

Again, it's not just "special interests" period, you have really consider who what those interests are and what practical impact they have on most Americans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
red2blue Donating Member (70 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 12:06 AM
Response to Original message
15. Two great candidates, However I do believe
that we are in for a fight for our country. And i want a fighter!

If i had to take on all the big power in this country i want the best TRIAL attorney fighting on my side. And i'm not looking for a plea. I want to beat them and beat them and beat then and beat them again.


That why just sent another $250 to the EDWARDS campaign. I was going to send $200 but $50 bucks more won't break me :).

BTW my retired mom send another $100 today!

This is a fight that we cannot afford to loose. So i want the best fighter we got on our side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 12:07 AM
Response to Original message
16. The truth about Edwards' Senate record
You are going to see a lot of Obama's folks distort Edwards' record, as they have done on Kos and other netroots sites over the past year, banking on people accepting their self-serving revisionist history because few people are actually going to take the time to research someone's Senate record from at least four years ago. They have long sought to eliminate Obama's only competition on the netroots with this. It didn't work...

PurityOfEssence (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sun Jan-06-08 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #9
17. Repost of Edwards' Senate Record notes

Much has been said about Edwards’ supposedly conservative term in the Senate. Like much “common wisdom”, this is largely unfounded.

When remembering that he came as a neophyte from a rather red state, it’s quite surprising to see just how populist he was on many key social issues. (Well, it’s not surprising to many of us, but to those of you who’ve been poisoned with the endless snideness about the “new” Edwards and the “old” Edwards, it should be an eye-opener.)

He only sponsored two bills, but he co-sponsored a whopping 203 in his six-year term. This is a partial list of them (yes, I omitted the Patriot Act and IWR; much has already been said about them) and bears a quick skimming. They’re in chronological order, so details can be found fairly easily. The two bills he sponsored were for research into the “fragile x” chromosome associated with mental retardation, and the “Spyware Control and Privacy Act”, an important early bulwark against attempts to compromise our computer privacy. This last one is a true civil-rights issue, taking on corporations and attempting to secure the rights of individuals, and it’s visionary stuff.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:SN03180:@@...

Russ Feingold said he was a “terrific asset” in getting campaign finance reform through. He was the person who deposed Lewinsky and Jordan in the impeachment trial; quite an important task to entrust to a newcomer in literally his first year in office. His opposition to Ashcroft in the confirmation hearings was vigorous and mesmerizing, even if it didn’t work. This is also the guy who tirelessly fought to keep the sunset provisions from being stripped out of the Patriot Act. His votes on labor and trade are solidly leftist, although he did vote for the China Trade Bill. Then again, since this was something Bill Clinton was solidly for, he was voting with his party. (Funny how Hillary supporters take him to task for this vote…) He also (along with Dodd and Biden) voted against the free trade bills with Singapore and Chile, unlike Senator Clinton, who voted for them.

Here’s a guy who constantly brought up the issue of “predatory lending” even though he hailed from a state with a huge banking and financial services industry. If you listen to or read his stump speeches from late ’02 and early ’03, you’ll wonder what the hell his detractors are talking about when they say that his populism is a new tack; his platform was economic and worker-oriented from the beginning, telling of how the Bush Administration was systematically shifting the burden of taxation from wealth to wages.

So here’s that partial list of the bills he co-sponsored. This is not a list of his votes, just those bills he actively got behind and worked to get passed. This is hardly the stuff of a closet conservative or an opportunist, as he’s been tarred, nor is it the record of someone who was just phoning it in. I would request, in interest of fairness, that the deriders among you at least skim through this VERY long list; it’s all pure fact.

When taking all this in context, it’s interesting to reflect on Kerry’s sneering that he probably couldn’t win re-election had he decided to run. Kerry may have been right on this point, but if so, it’s because of Edwards’ populism and social decency.

Details can be found here; each phrase separated by a comma is a particular bill, and in most cases attempt to use the bill’s title to lessen confusion and give the sense of the legislation.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/?&Db=d107&querybd... (FLD004+@4((@1(Sen+Edwards++John))+01573)):

Sense of the Senate for funding lifestyle research for preventative medicine, Sense of the Senate honoring National Science Foundation, Sense of the Senate to preserve six day mail delivery, designating “biotechnology week”, Children’s Internet Safety Month, Joint Resolution against excessive campaign donations, to protect the civil rights of all Americans, Bi-partisan Campaign Reform, Restrict access to personal health and financial information, Establish a Center for National Social Work Research, provide more effective remedies for victims of sex discrimination in work, provide incentive for fair access to the internet for everyone, require fair availability of birth control, increase the minimum wage (’01), protect consumers in managed care programs, emergency relief for energy costs to small businesses, prohibit use of genetic information to discriminate on health coverage and employment, provide families with disabled children to buy into Medicaid, eliminate the loophole for interstate transporting of birds for fighting, provide funding to clean up contaminated land, informing veterans of available programs, Designating part of ANWR as wilderness, establish a digital network technology program, reduce the risk that innocent people be executed, restore funding for Social Security Block Grants, provide for equal coverage for mental health in insurance policies, amend Clean Air Act to reduce emissions from power plants, establish uniform election technology (sponsored by Dodd), extend modifications to funding for Medicare and Medicaid, Federal Funding to local governments to prosecute hate crimes, reinstate certain Social Security earnings exemptions for the blind, overhaul RR retirement plan to increase benefits, Establish a Nurse recruitment and retention program, amend FDA to provide greater access to affordable pharmaceuticals, Establish African American Museum within the Smithsonian, Federal funding for research of environmental factors in Breast Cancer, Increase hospital benefits under Medicare, Establish Tariff Quotas on milk protein imports, Federal funding for mental health community education, protect patients in managed care plans (again), establish Office on Women’s Health in HHS, increase the minimum wage, allow media coverage of trials, prohibit racial profiling, improve health care in rural areas, protect consumers in managed care plans, prohibiting trade of bear viscera, provide greater fairness in arbitration of motor vehicle franchises, provide adequate insurance coverage for immunosuppressive drugs, provide financial assistance for trade-affected communities, acquisition and improvement of child-care facilities, prohibit employment discrimination based on sexual orientation, establish programs to deal with nurse shortage, establish a National Cyber Defense Team to protect the internet’s infrastructure, provide services to prevent family violence, require criminal prosecution for securities fraud, reissuance of a rule on ergonomics, ensure safe pregnancy for all U.S. women, improve investigation and prosecution of rape cases with DNA evidence, improve national drought preparedness, increase the minimum wage (yet again), assistance in containing HIV/AIDS in foreign countries, emergency assistance for small-businesses affected by drought, child care and developmental block grants, provide economic security for America’s workers, enhance security for transporting nuclear waste, FEMA hazard mitigation grants, increase mental health benefits in health insurance, criminal prosecution for people who destroy evidence in securities fraud cases.

Is this the record of a corporate appeaser? Is this the record of someone just loafing about and collecting a paycheck?

Funny what you find when you read a little, isn’t it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Egnever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 12:14 AM
Response to Reply #16
21. Your links dont work
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tennessee Gal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 12:30 AM
Response to Reply #16
27. Please fix links.
Very interesting information.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 12:38 AM
Response to Original message
28. Obama backs nuclear energy. Edwards does not.
That is key for me. I do not want to leave my great-great-great-great grandchildren the task of cleaning up nuclear sites that we don't now have the technology to clean up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 10:13 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC