Edwards won in every DU poll posted.

[alittlelark]

Edwards won with anyone I had 4-6 minutes to talk to.

Edwards wins with those who have no blinders on (Hard core Dem-Progressives w/little MSM influence).


WTF?


Seriously, I just don't get it.

He beat out all R's in 2004, He beats them again in 2008......



WHY DO WE PICK THE WEAKEST CANDIDATES!!!!!!!!!!




OK - I KNOW, the power of the MSM is %&*(%*^%$$%@$^%*)^&^*%#



But, WTF?



An obvious winner that supposedly intelligent people will toss to the wayside....

I am at a loss.:-(

[jgraz]

1. I'm not convinced we DIDN'T pick Edwards

There is a lot of people who do not want to see a President Edwards. How confident are you that the polls and votes are honest?

[alittlelark]

2. I'm not at all confidant....

:shrug: :cry: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[Prefer]

46. I agree - the election was stolen from us a year out

They knew the only way to keep power was to pre-eliminate our ability to even challenge them. And really it's all about painting a plausible story anyway. When McCain beats Hillary or Obama, are we really going to be surprised? We're not even going to bother to believe that it was stolen this time.

[sojourner]

3. i think i'm gonna wait to see what happens. Edwards is a fighter. not counting him out yet.

[alittlelark]

4. I'm hoping for the best.... but DAMN...

He is soooo marginalized that I understand K supporters.


WTF happened to this country?

[sojourner]

7. lost..........lost to propaganda and consumerism and jingoism and stupidity

[Joe Chi Minh]

51. You missed out the real cause: the machines.

[sojourner]

54. i did fail to list them. but read the posts round here. there is SO DAMN much idiocy.

that's not a voting machine. it's spin, stupidity and ........... argh!

edited title for clarity

[napi21]

5. Sorry to say, but I guess DUers are not like the majority. n/t

[Skittles]

12. DUers are more educated politically than the majority

absolutely

[orleans]

34. yes, we're special. that's why i'm here. n/t

[Uncle Joe]

60. I agree the majority relying solely on the corporate media for their information without

the ability, whether chosen or not, to discuss ideas at will with the world are living a corporate media created Matrix, only receiving one way information and as such their perception is controlled to a large degree by the corporate media.

[snot]

6. V. discouraging -- though I don't give up. nt

[bridgit]

8. A couple months back it was Kucinich, Kucinich, Kucinich walking away...

DU can be like a weather vane able to spin in circles without any wind whatsoever :patriot:

[Bicoastal]

9. I'm going to be 100% honest--I think he believes everything he says...

...but most people, including me, don't entirely believe it. He HAS had an image makeover in the last 4 years, and it's hard to differentiate that from the person he was back in the Senate, and in the 2004 election.

I don't think someone who's been "out of the game" for as long as he has can win a presidential nomination. That last person who did it was Nixon, and look how well that turned out...and BTW, that's also why I doubt we'll see Gore run for president any time in the future either. This was probably his last opportunity, and he decided not to.

[alittlelark]

17. So you see the 'Silky Pony'

Kinda cute, kinda :puke: :puke: :puke:

[Hoof Hearted]

10. I'm sorry you're going through this. When my candidate was passed over in '04 I was baffled too,

but if I might suggest - NOT insulting the electorate, NOT insulting your fellow Democrats, who by and large want the very same things you do, and NOT falling back on oft repeated cliché excuses to explain results that didn't turn out the way you wanted?

In '04 I was a volunteer (OTR) for Wes Clark's campaign. It was refreshing and exciting and I put my whole heart and soul into it. I was crushed and confused when he didn't do better but I didn't blame the media, or call people stupid or accuse them of having blinders on or perhaps not being intelligent.

There's nothing wrong with being frustrated, but perhaps it would be more productive to express it without insulting your fellow Democrats and citizens.

Everything is going to be fine. Any three of our candidates would have (and WILL) make a fine president. Whoever gets the nomination is going to win against any republican they put up and in just a little less than one year, things are going to start getting much better.

[alittlelark]

16. Were you also rooting for Wes Clark?

He polled as beating ALL R's. Therefore he didn't exist in the Corporatist 'media'.

[Hoof Hearted]

39. Yes, I traveled with Wes Clark's campaign, did grunt advance work, drove the media around (they are

a bunch of whiney bastards) but it was fun and I was very passionate about it, especially since I got to meet and talk to the man and could really see where his heart was.

He made the great strategic blunder of joining the race too late and then thinking he could run a campaign with little organization in place AND skipping Iowa. Obviously it didn't work out.

Think about this. How much attention did this nefarious "corporatist MSM" media pay to Huckleberry before his win in Iowa? Almost none, and yet he still managed to win that state. Now, if this infamous MSM is so all powerful, how did that happen?

This all-powerful MSM called Rudy the Ghoul the republican front-runner since last summer - until the actual VOTERS started to vote and they were proved wrong. So if he was the favorite, how did that happen?

What I'm trying to say is that scapegoating the 'media' might feel good but under more objective scrutiny, it fails.

[alittlelark]

20. Yeah, it'll all be cool... Neo-Nafta kinda shit

Yeah, we're ALL OVER THAT !!!!!


No, REALLY, we all want our jobs shipped overseas (it's cool, cuz we get welfare benefits).


Hillary is a corporate shill, embarrassingly so. If she wins it will show that our CORPORATE MSM has as much power as they paid for.

[goodgd_yall]

53. Good post n/t

[Sanctified]

11. Sorry but I don't see Edwards as the Majority leader here on DU.

I primarily see support for Clinton or Obama with a few Edwards and Kucinich fans. Plus it's time to face reality, Edwards has no chance of becoming President, he is not going to win a single primary.

[alittlelark]

14. Have you somehow missed EVERY DU poll?

Edwards is at the top of all of them, Kucinich w/ a VERY good showing as well.

[XOKCowboy]

19. Plus every straw poll that Thom Hartmann ever held... nt

[alittlelark]

21. I've listened to 3 of them over the last 2 months

(960 The Quake). It comes out Edwards, Kucinich, ... misc candidates w/ misc #'s not even close to the 1st 2.

[XOKCowboy]

26. Every time.. Edwards Kucinich by a large margins

Now when DU's and Thom Hartmann's straw polls show real those kind of results you'd figure that's who real Progressives want wouldn't you? As someone said in an earlier reply we're a minority in the Democratic Party.

As Molly Ivin's said nothing you can do about being born liberal—fish gotta swim and hearts gotta bleed. I'm with John as long as he's running.

[alittlelark]

29. "fish gotta swim".....

kinda funny analigy

[XOKCowboy]

30. I stole that from Molly Ivins.

It kind of describes my politics. :)

[alittlelark]

32. The planet needs to survive.

I assume that fits into your analogy/ies

[alittlelark]

35. The stooopid sh*t 'fish gotta swim guy' is indicative of our problem.

I assume you folks can THINK!



That is all that is asked of you.

[alittlelark]

25. Uhhhh, how often do you come to DU?

Edwards and Kucinich ALWAYS WIN.

[southerncrone]

13. WE at DU are a minority, unfortunately.

Remember, we're the PROGRESSIVES, the cutting edge folks. The rest of the country is lagging way behind us.

Evolution is slow.

I'm extremely frustrated with this, too, but between ignorance & MSM.........:eyes:

[alittlelark]

15. It just makes me want to cry.....

I'm going to sleep now.

[orleans]

36. "Remember, we're the PROGRESSIVES, the cutting edge folks."

nice way to put it. i'm going to try to remember that when i get politically down. honestly. to think of myself as "cutting edge" instead of some derogatory liberal term i hear (lunatic fringe comes to mind) will make me feel not quite as hopeless and crazed.

[southerncrone]

59. Glad to be of service, even if in the smallest of ways. LOL

I, too, prefer cutting-edge to lunatic-fringe!:D

Our problem is the "lunatic-center" that runs everything!x(

[orleans]

64. no shit. that "lunatic center" definitely seems to be a problem for me

as well as the republikas.

[XOKCowboy]

18. I hope that I'm wrong...

but I think that we're shooting ourselves in the foot again. Hillary and Obama both have HUGE negatives for the uninformed electorate. One is black and Hillary is a Clinton. There are a large number of people that, due to racism, sexism and the hard-core anti-Clenis crowd will never, ever vote for either. I don't have a problem with either candidate about those issues but I also refuse to vote for them because they're either black or a woman. I have a problem with both because of their policies and loyalties.

A year ago here on DU everyone was more populist than Jim Hightower and Molly Ivins because we were so sick of 7 years of B*** rule, the bloody Iraq Occupation, the rape of our civil liberties and a slim majority in Congress that was rolling over for the Repugs every chance they got. We finally get a candidate who espouses the true Progressive agenda and won't be owned by the insurance companies, energy companies, defense contractors or lobbyists. Yet since the Corporate Media says it's Obama/Hillary the lemmings go along and the one true Progressive candidate struggles to get his message out.

I'm an Edwards guy as long as he's in the race. I think he's the best candidate with the best ideas. I also think he's the most electable Dem in the GE. I will also vote for the Democratic nominee no matter who that is. I'm disgusted with the nominating process and the mainstream media so far in this election but I'm a Democrat through and through.

I'll probably have to end up voting for Anybody But A Republican once again. I've been doing it since Nixon. Just once I'd like to see the best candidate win.

[alittlelark]

22. I also hope you are wrong.....

Really, I sincerely HOPE you are wrong.



I hope my paranoia is not RIGHT.

[natrat]

23. so i guess this is what rove meant about permanent republican majority

[XOKCowboy]

28. The one big hope we have is the Repug candidates.

If we can't beat those clowns....

[alittlelark]

33. If we can't 'beat' these CLOWNS

Then this country is done for,.

[cynthia]

61. well said

I have to believe that for once, we will elect the candidate who is the best person for the job.

That's John Edwards.

[Lugnut]

63. It brings to mind Stockholm syndrome

I just don't understand it.

[SoCalDem]

24. He is president of DU

:eyes:

[alittlelark]

27. You are either PUI or attemping a 'snarkiness' award.

If PUI, please lay down in bed, put on headphones and check out into a comfortable happy zone (yanni, REO, whatever....)


If you are attempting a snarkiest award..... U'r not even close. It's actually kinda embarrassing.

[alittlelark]

37. I get it.... sorry, posting in3+ threads.

I get it.

[alittlelark]

31. why does Edwards win w/ the PEOPLE and not the MSM?

....uh, could it have something to do w/ the fact that he is ANTI-CORPORATE!!!??!@?!


No, WTF? Really, are we that stooooooopid?

[Divine Discontent]

38. my Mom switched to Obama

because she said Edwards wasn't allowed to win, in so many words, that they wouldn't let him. I have yet to tell her, that the Neocons and racists aren't going to let Obama get to the White House, but it doesn't stop those who support his message the most from backing him, but my Mom appears to be backing Edwards message because he brings up all the Blackwater, spygate, spying on citizens, etc, stuff, but is thinking Obama... I, however, like many of us here - will back John to the convention! He must stay in, he promised to and I think he understands, all he needs to do is get delegates, as I posted he said to a reporter saying he needed to win a state soon.

Yes, the country is stupid - over 40 million people voted for B*sh-it.

[OneGrassRoot]

44. Your mom is simply thinking like many here at DU....

many times we've seen people post, "Well, I LIKE so-and-so, but he can't win the primary, so I'm going to vote for so-and-so instead."

People think they know what the powers that be are going to do, and try to maneuver around it, rather than vote their principles. We end up getting screwed every time.

I realize everyone gets tired of hearing about my belief in intuition and "gut instinct," but more and more, if we're to survive we need to tap into it. I think we've gotten away from the primal truth that our gut instinct is in place to save us. TOO much cerebral input not balanced with gut instinct has led to many of the horrors of the world.

Too LITTLE cerebral input certainly has done the same (dipshit in chief).

Balance. Easier said than done, however.

[goodgd_yall]

52. My "gut instinct"

told me Edwards had a lot of good ideas, but wouldn't be able to pull them off if he was elected President. Please have an open mind about this. The reality isn't exactly what you would like to believe it is.

[OneGrassRoot]

56. It seems we all have different realities. This primary season has brought ...

that to light.

I understand what you are saying about not being able to pull off good ideas and that's cool that you went with your gut instinct in that regard.

I'm directing my comment to those who believe in a candidate's message AND believe in the candidate, yet are afraid he/she can't win and so vote for someone else.

Believe me, I know the world is farrrrrrrrrrrr from perfect, but imagine what our democracy would look like if people simply voted for who they think the best candidate would be. Not most ELECTABLE, but truly the best candidate. The landscape would be very different, IMHO.

[Political Heretic]

40. READ THIS: Edwards has best numbers against ANY Republican candidate, and yet no Dem. Support

(A very interesting, very important analysis written by an internet blogger by the nickname of Time for Change)

Of all 19 declared 2008 presidential candidates, John Edwards has the highest favorability ratings, the highest favorable to unfavorable margin, and the best poll numbers in head to head match-ups against the opposition party. Yet against his Democratic Party opponents he consistently runs a very distant third, currently standing at a measly 12%, and ranging between 11% and 15% of the vote. The huge gap between his general election numbers and his poll numbers in the race for the Democratic Party nomination is truly remarkable and begs an explanation.

Before I go any further with this I have to admit to what could be construed as a liberal bias in this matter. I feel that at this time in our history our country is very much in need of a liberal President. Conservatives have been in power here for way too long, they are ruining our country, and I am sick and tired of Democrats running away from the liberal label rather than standing up and being proud to advocate a political philosophy that brought us the New Deal, Civil Rights, labor unions, Medicare and Medicaid, and virtually everything else that has brought our country closer to living up to the ideals professed in our Declaration of Independence – in particular the idea that people have an unalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Consequently, I intend to vote for Dennis Kucinich if his candidacy is not dead by the Maryland Democratic primary date (and I may vote for him even if it is), for reasons that I explain here. However, at the same time I recognize that his candidacy is a long shot, so if he doesn't make it, and if no currently undeclared candidates get into the race, I would very much like to see John Edwards win the Democratic nomination.

It's not that I have much against the two Democratic frontrunners, and I would wholeheartedly support them if they win the nomination because they are far preferable to any of the Republican candidates. But I don't believe that they are liberal enough for what our country needs now. I truly would like to see a woman president. But not this woman, as her hawkish words and actions make me feel uncomfortable, especially when compared against the mandate for ending the war in Iraq that American voters gave our elected representatives in November 2006.


A look at the general election poll numbers

First, let's look at the favorable/unfavorable numbers for all declared candidates of both the Democratic and Republican parties (plus Fred Thompson) who don't have a negative margin, according to the latest Rasmussen polls:

Edwards: +15 (54-39)
Giulani: +8 (50-42)
Obama: +6 (48-42)
McCain: +4 (48-44)
Richardson: +3 (35-32)
Clinton: +2 (50-48)
Thompson (Fred): Even (35-35)

Then, lets look at how the top three (none of the others do well) Democratic candidates do against the top four Republicans:

Edwards: +7 over Giuliani, +16 over Romney, +7 over McCain, +11 over Thompson
Obama: +1 over Giuliani, +9 over Romney, +6 over McCain, +7 over Thompson
Clinton: -1 against Giuliani, +4 over Romney, +2 over McCain, -1 against Thompson


Why the huge disparity between Edwards' general election numbers and his Democratic nomination numbers?

[dmosh42]

41. You make a good point, but analyzing the exit polls from NH....

I was surprised how little support he received from the low income voters, and not so great support from middle class. This tells me his message gets across very well to the average blogger, but not the average news reader or TV watcher. Somehow, he needs to get more specific in what needs to change. I feel he's holding back to avoid hurting the congressional leaders and splitting the party. Kucinich faces the same problem, but that's the way it needs to go in order to generate excitement. In a way, I think he has already formed a new wing of the party that wants reform from the old corporate lappers. Hopefully, they can come up with the right equation and make a real fight out of this.

[Prefer]

47. That's because the bloggers see the big picture

they see the shapes of the plots that are taking place. The average person is just seeing the facade that is put on for them.

The small group of us who actually see what's going on are not enough to apparently have an impact on anything. We're irrelevant by scale.

It took us years to disseminate the truth about Bush and Iraq. If we had years we could get people to see that Edwards is the right candidate. but all they are hearing is it's either hillary or ob

[Eurobabe]

42. DU is in no way a good representation of 'Murika

sorry to say. On a bad day here, I am GLAD that this is not representative of America!! :rofl:

[rjones2818]

43. There've been plenty of DU polls

that Dennis won.

[focusfan]

45. i'm going to be honest I don't know why people vote for

Hillary and Obama when Edwards is the man that America needs

[Wednesdays]

48. K&R

"WHY DO WE PICK THE WEAKEST CANDIDATES!!!!!!!!!!"

That's because we don't pick the candidates anymore. The M$M does. :cry:

[Rosemary2205]

49. That CAN'T be true

I know for a fact I've seen at least one with Kucinich far ahead of everyone.

[goodgd_yall]

50. A DU poll isn't a good indicator of what the rest of Democratic voters think

No mystery about it. And in the "outside" world, I myself have not come across anyone who supports Edwards as their top choice at this point in time.

[stravu9]

55. They drink the kool aid? Took the brown acid?

what else?

[ecstatic]

57. He had 2 chances in 2004 nt

[ElsewheresDaughter]

58. I recall Kucinich wining most every poll here. at on time....welcome to the club

[onehandle]

62. Edwards Underground. nt

[conspirator]

65. He who controls the money (oligarch families) controls the sheep, and since the sheep are a majority

,true democracy fails. Because of these lowly educated and highly brainwashable people (not their fault that main stream education is stupidification, this is the elite at work).

[ShaneGR]

66. # of Presidential Candidates I've seen majority of DU'ers support who won in 6 years

ZERO