This is why I want Edwards to be nominated on the second ballot in place of Obama

[brentspeak]

Two words: Austan Goolsbee, Obama's chief economic advisor.

You can kiss "hope" of restoring America's manufacturing sector goodbye with Goolsbee whispering in Obama's ear, as this fawning article by George Will demonstrates. (Will approves of Goolsbee's arguments in favor of "staying the course" with Milton Friedman-type "crush the little guy" economic policies.)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/03/AR2007100302003.html

[scheming daemons]

1. Don't worry... Edwards will be Obama's secretary of Labor..... or Attorney General.....

....

[onehandle]

2. Economists were with Edwards.

There is a reason.

[patrice]

3. "Either/Or thinking" is maladaptive, as in "suicidal". This is the REAL "Third Way". nt

[Exilednight]

4. There is no second ballot. The nominee will be decided either before the primary ends or ..........

on first ballot selection. All delegates will be awarded between the two candidates.

[WA98070]

5. If we don't get Congressional leadership we're screwed by any of the three...

[lapfog_1]

6. Manufacturing isn't coming back.

Well, it may come back, but it won't employ anyone.

Cheap overseas labor pools are simply a stop along the path to total automation.

Shipping will soon be a significant, if not dominate, cost of production. The way to eliminate shipping is to re-locate back to the U.S. and Europe. To do so while maintaining the current cost of production will entail a very high degree of automation... and the automation is becoming less expensive and much higher quality than in previous generations of factories.

So... in 20 years (or less) we'll see a return of manufacturing to North America, but don't count on having lots of high paying (or even low paying) skilled manufacturing jobs.

[Bucky]

7. Second ballot. Good one! :o)

[karynnj]

8. Edwards has shown no ability to actually win votes

He did not do that well in Iowa - essentially tied with HRC and 8 points behind Obama even though he spent a huge amount of time and effort there. He was also not that good a debater. As to Obama's economic adviser - he will, like every other President listen to many. It was Edwards who voted for the bankruptcy bill, who was his adviser then?

[brentspeak]

10. Obama would not have won Iowa if the Rev. Wright furor had erupted back then

Also, how Edwards voted in the Senate is meaningless; what policies he would pursue as President is what matters.

[cali]

14. if ifs and ands were pots and pans......

[karynnj]

17. Had Obama been hurt then by this, Clinton not Edwards would have been

the likely beneficiary. No one knows what Edwards would really do in office because of all the candidates, he had the least consistency in who he was at various times. He clearly saw an opening for a left wing populist - so that was what he ran as. I may be proven wrong by what he does in the future, but I trust his words less than I do HRC's.

[TNOE]

9. GEORGE WILL?

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Right.

[DavidDvorkin]

11. The party will be in serious trouble in November if the candidate is not either Obama or Clinton

I supported Gore and then Edwards, and I'm still sad about how things worked out. There was a time, of course, when the public expected the candidate to be chosen after a number of ballots and much back-room dealmaking. But those days are long gone, and the modern Democratic voter would be outraged if the party chose as its candidate someone other than the two who remain in the race.

The general election would then be a disaster for us.

[Phx_Dem]

12. I like Edwards

and I hope Obama appoints him Attorney General, but he doesn't have a prayer of being the Presidential nominee. In 2004 he didn't get enough votes to become the nominee, and this year he wasn't able to garner enough votes to continue past Super Tuesday. Just ain't happening.

You have no idea how much I wish this race were between Obama and Edwards (even though I would still support Obama), but, sadly, we're stuck with Hillary.

[cali]

13. gad. how simplistic. And it ain't gonna happen.

that's utterly ridiculous. Goolsby is hardly Svangali. And such economists as Stiglitz have endorsed Obama. Anyone who thinks that a man who failed miserably in two primary cycles and couldn't even help in his home state as vp nominee, is going to get the nomination, is living in a complete fantasy world.

[QC]

15. Goolsbee was once head economist at the DLC. n/t

[John Q. Citizen]

16. I want a pony. Do you think I can get one on the third ballot?

[ProSense]

18. "Barack Obama believes..."

Barack Obama believes in change, but not change for change's sake or change, as some are proposing, in the guise of tried but failed policies. His belief in change is all about the American Dream being once again every American's dream.

Barack Obama believes in vigorously enforcing our existing domestic labor laws and standards. He believes in all workers having an easy and unrestricted ability to join a union, including part-time and contract workers. And he believes in affording low-wage workers the "mobility" they need in order to earn something more than low wages.

Barack Obama believes in fairer and more progressive individual income taxation, taxation which will see every American once again paying his or her fair share. How can anyone but the wealthiest of Americans be satisfied with an economy which has seen forty percent of all economic growth over the past 20 years go to only the top one percent of American families? Where half of the nation's individual income now goes to just 2% of the taxpayers?

Barack Obama believes in incentivizing American companies to create and retain high-quality jobs here in America, instead of unnecessarily and often unfairly shipping millions of them overseas.

And Barack Obama believes that U.S. trade agreements must provide clear and measurable benefits for American workers. He believes that in order for free trade to also be fair trade, trade agreements must incorporate reasonable labor and environmental standards and prohibit illegal subsidies and currency manipulation. He believes that in negotiating trade agreements, "one size does not fit all" - it never has - and that trade agreements which are not vigorously enforced are not agreements at all, they are just so much paper.

-- Leo Hindery, Jr.

[dionysus]

19. and then later on we can hop in santa's sleigh and go hang out out with the tooth fairy and the

easter bunny in a gigantic shoe...