Obama is more electable than John Kerry was.(and about as progressive).

[kid a]

discussion
=)

[TwilightGardener]

1. True--there's nothing to make fun of Obama for, besides his ears.

People want to discount it, but the "respect factor" is real. Gore with the supposed internet invention, earth tones, and alpha-maleness, Dukakis as Snoopy in a tank, Kerry windsurfing and faux goose hunting, and being called Lurch--Dems will always be relentlessly mocked and ridiculed. Bill Clinton was able to beat it, and Obama is too cool for school.

[MagickMuffin]

8. Sure, like they haven't been making FUN of his NAME

let's see, what have I heard

Barrack Hussein Osama.

If BO wins the nom. I'm sure it will become much worse.

But you can believe whatever you want to believe.

[TwilightGardener]

9. It's not really that funny or noteworthy. It certainly didn't scare the largely rural, Christian

whites of Iowa.

[MagickMuffin]

11. How do you know that the people who caucused for Obama wasn't doing so to hamper Clinton?

I wasn't there so I can only guess what took place. If the GOPers wanted to stop the Clinton machine then the logical thing to do would be to vote for Obama. I don't believe they would vote for him in the GE.

Then there is also the fact that any college student could caucus in Iowa. Imagine how that could also skew the vote in Obama's favor.

And of course the attacks on Gore and Kerry were really not that funny or noteworthy. But the MSM made sure that it was, and they WILL do the same for Obama.

[TwilightGardener]

12. I doubt most people would turn out to vote in numbers like that for

negative motives, and if they did--then HIllary should CERTAINLY not be our nominee--we'd lose big time. And college students going out of their way to caucus is an incredibly positive sign, for Obama or any of our candidates--what does it matter where they're from? It's a NATIONAL office we're shooting for here, not an Iowa state office. We got MASSIVE turnout, and it seemed motivated by positive feelings.

[politicasista]

18. Thank you. I don't understand the need to tear someone down just to promote others

I like Obama, but I wouldn't tear Kerry or Gore down just to promote him. That's tacky.

[MagickMuffin]

19. It 's a really sad sad SAD state of affairs when DUers continually tear down their own

Just because BO came in first in Iowa, his supporters think he won the GE. When you have cross over voters who are trying to drive out another candidate seems to me, the sampling is skewed so much it really doesn't make that much difference. I certainly don't give that much weight to the Iowa caucus.

Gore and Kerry are EQUALLY the best candidates that should have run in '08. But unfortunately we have what we have. I'm not excited about any of them. I wish I could get excited about the candidates.

JE, comes the closest.

[politicasista]

20. Thank you. It is really sad.

We don't need to play the repukes game of bullying.

[MagickMuffin]

22. Isn't it telling how BO preaches unity in his speeches and yet his supporters here haven't figured

that out???:shrug:

[politicasista]

24. That is telling

They don't practice what he preaches (at least some don't).

[MagickMuffin]

25. And of course they forget/forgot WHO let BO speak at the 04 convention....

Which just so happened to be KERRY.

I don't agree with the OP's original post that BO is more progressive than Kerry. Kerry has proven himself as a fighter for us, unfortunately people STILL refuse to recognize his contributions to progressive causes.:shrug:

[politicasista]

35. Bingo!

That is something that should not be forgotten. And yes, they seem to forget who is progressive or on our side, not to mention saying who wanted to fight more.

[JI7]

27. Kerry won the largely rural Christian whites of Iowa also

Kerry and Obama actually won the same type of voters except the turnout was higher this time. which will help Obama in the GE.

[Clinton Crusader]

2. IMHO, Edwards is more electable than all of them...

but hey, that's just me....

:bounce:

[ananda]

4. .. and me.

I like Edwards best.

He's the least imperfect of all the Dems,
and he's putting out a pro-people,
anti-corporatist messge.

Go Edwards!

[demosincebirth]

6. ...and me, too.

[SammyWinstonJack]

14. And me!

[melody]

7. more electable than the current crop, absolutely n/t

[KittyWampus]

15. Edwards has switched positions on so many issues, he's actually the weakest candidate

He wouldn't be able to fight back either.

Because while he professes to be "anti-corporate" etc. he just amassed even more money in a Hedge Fund.

And that therefore does fuel the really petty stuff like his expensive hair cut and new McMansion.

[nonconformist]

26. And me! nt

[ananda]

3. Disagree on the progressive part.

I believe that Obama is pushing to the right, and
towards corporatism, in order to appeal to Reeps
and Independents.

That worries me greatly.

I presume that he'll be better than Bush, but being
not that much better is little comfort since this
country and its government has so far to go to
recover.

Sue

[papau]

5. O is more conservative/corporate but also more political - note real belief is agnostic per link-but

he joined church for contacts (called commmunity in article)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections08/comment/story/0,,2235747,00.html

that political skill may well mean he is more electable once he gets buy in by the base - and it seems he's accomplished the Base getting on board part of the campaign (leading in latest ARG NH poll 38/26/20 for O/H/E http://www.americanresearchgroup.com/)

[avaistheone1]

10. True. Obama is not a progressive.

He is a corporatist.

[KittyWampus]

16. Please give some facts to back up your assertion on his being a corporatist. Thanks!

[Blue-Jay]

21. I've seen a few people post that about Obama,

but nobody has ever provided any basis for that. Maybe you could be the first.

[bobbolink]

13. It's that assumption that has kept us "in line".

And despondent.

[Gloria]

17. I don't think Kerry pandered as much as Obama has already done....

He is making me sick

[robbedvoter]

32. No? "If I knew then what I know now, I'd still have supported the war" (on Edwards

advice as we now know)

[sandnsea]

38. That's not what he said

He said he still believed the resolution was something a President ought to have in the situation we were believed to be in, but he would have used it differently. And yes, Edwards is the one who was stubborn on not backing off that vote.

[karynnj]

39. How many times have people posted with links in response to your ever repeated comments

that Kerry NEVER said that - he did not support the invasion - he spoke against it in January 2003. The comment was on the IWR and he did not say "if I knew then what I know now". Quotes should be used ONLY when you know the actual words because you took the time to actually get them.

The question asked was reported in several ways - the answer seemed to be the stock answer on the IWR and it made no sense given that condition. It was a gaffe or at least became a gaffe when they didn't correct it - but Kerry spent most of Sept and Oct simply saying that he would not have gone to war, which was actually a good way to deal with it.

Over the course of a long campaign, every candidate will mishear, or give a poor answer (this was one of only a few examples of this in the Kerry campaign). They are out speaking for many very long days in a row. There is no a candidate who did not have gaffes already in the pre-primary season.

We will be lucky if Obama, or Edwards or HRC if they are the candidate, handle the interviews and debates as well as Kerry did.

[BenDavid]

23. Oh yes and we all believed that kerry edwards would fight for

the presidency uh huh right............. now we see that obama has said there will be no more stolen elections...Well heck, if he says he's going to fight, just like Gore and Kerry/Edwards promised that they were going to fight, that's good enough for us - right?
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO HELL NO!

[SammyWinstonJack]

28. Gore did fight. And Edwards wanted too and said as much, then Kerry conceded.

[robbedvoter]

30. So, Edwards couldn't even fight...Kerry on this? Some fighter!

[SammyWinstonJack]

33. Maybe he did and lost the fight? I don't know and neither do you.

[robbedvoter]

34. So, if he lost the fight to Kerry (and kept silent all these years) - how tough is he?

he can't prevail over his fellow ticket candidate - will he prevail on the BFEE forces?
And if he wanted so much, why didn't he champion that truth since then? he might have helped himself - both in chances for s fair election and in gaining respect from voters like me.

[politicasista]

36. Except Kerry spoke out about the election problems way before

Edwards did and got ridiculed, and still does for it. I am all for supporting 08 candidates, but I think we shouldn't demonize one just to lionize others.

[karynnj]

41. Edwards came out with a statement from the campaign

It was certainly the position at that point in time of John Kerry. It was not an independent statement by Edwards.

Kerry and his wife spoke out on voter suppression and irregularities and the potential of hacking machines at least 10 times in 2005 - in the MSM - Edwards did not.

[JI7]

29. Obama doesn't come off or appear as liberal as Kerry did

that should work to OBama's advantage. Obama is also more at ease in speaking of religion and reaching out to people using religion than Kerry was. much of it has to do with the way Kerry grew up.

i don't think Obama would have done well if he ran in 2004. Kerry did almost win that and with a few changes he would have.

but 2008 should work well for Obama. there is no incumbant, it's an open race. and the Republicans are not united as they were back then.

[robbedvoter]

31. Just one point: Kerry won! (Then the two "fighters" folded)

[wisteria]

37. No he isn't. But he does have the slot of the darling of the media

and mostly young people energized about him. However, Most of the babyboomers on up in age do not support him when you look at the numbers.
It is unfair to compare to compare the two. Senator Kerry's race was tough and very hard. He had to go it alone. The media swayed towards Bush going with the CW and Kerry had to contend with the fear of further attacks on this county and a public still immersed in fear. Things have change 360 degrees since 04 and the climate is now a lot more favorable towards the Democrats. However, Obama still has issues. His lack of experience, he sappy campaign based on pie in the sky hope and his real lack of ideas. In my estimation he doesn't come close to being the leader that Senator Kerry is. But in this time in our history when people are tired of the BS he has a chance that Kerry didn't.

[undercutter2006]

40. yeah you really didn't elaborate enough did you

are you trying to complement obama or the opposite?

you gotta provide some kind of point of view to start a discussion