Posts with the tag 'John Edwards'
The fact that the rumors of Edwards’ infidelity have been around for a long time and the MSM only started covering it when Edwards confessed.
If this has been a GOPer, it would have been ’round the clock coverage until the miscreant was forced to admit it…
UPDATE: Advice Goddess points out that the LA Times, Tribune of The People, Defender of All That is Good and Scourge of The Powerful put an intern on the case.
The L.A. Times And Rielle Hunter: Way Too Little, Way Too Late
Finally, finally, after suffering nationwide media blog ridicule, the L.A. Times squeeezes out a story about how they didn’t tell the story, plus a “timeline,” bylined Kate Linthicum, of l’affaire Edwards and Hunter…
…I hadn’t seen the byline Kate Linthicum before, so I looked her up. Yes, while they’re throwing all the experienced reporters out of the place, we’ve now got the apparently undersupervised intern (Barnard Class of 2008) writing the paper…
Tags: John Edwards, media bias
August 9th, 2008
So much for tabloid trash, I guess:
John Edwards repeatedly lied during his Presidential campaign about an extramarital affair with a novice filmmaker, the former Senator admitted to ABC News today.
In an interview for broadcast tonight on Nightline, Edwards told ABC News correspondent Bob Woodruff he did have an affair with 42-year old Rielle Hunter, but said that he did not love her.
Edwards also denied he was the father of Hunter’s baby girl, Frances Quinn, although the one-time Democratic Presidential candidate said he has not taken a paternity test.
Edwards said he knew he was not the father based on timing of the baby’s birth on February 27, 2008. He said his affair ended too soon for him to have been the father.
A former campaign aide, Andrew Young, has said he was the father of the child.
According to friends of Hunter, Edwards met her at a New York city bar in 2006. His political action committee later paid her $114,000 to produce campaign website documentaries despite her lack of experience.
Edwards said the affair began during the campaign after she was hired. Hunter traveled with Edwards around the country and to Africa.
Edwards said his wife, Elizabeth, and others in his family became aware of the affair in 2006.
Edwards made a point of telling Woodruff that his wife’s cancer was in remission when he began the affair with Hunter. Elizabeth Edwards has since been diagnosed with an incurable form of the disease.
That she was in remission makes a difference? I guess Edwards found he was off the short list….
UPDATE: Edwards says his family became aware of the affair in 2006 - but NRO’s The Corner points out a December 25th, 2006 article which has Hunter working for Edwards…did the family find out between Christmas and New Year’s? There’s more to this than meets the eye….though, also noted at NRO, congrats to Edwards’ PR people for dumping this on the day war breaks out in Russia and the Olympics begin.
Tags: John Edwards
August 8th, 2008
This is a news story about how the Obama camp plans to get Hillary out of the race - and it is a nightmare scenario for the United States:
After today’s primary election in Puerto Rico and Tuesday’s final contests in Montana and South Dakota, the remaining super-delegates will come under huge pressure from fellow party grandees to declare their hands.
The Obama camp, however, remains nervous about Mrs Clinton’s intentions and ambitions, and is preparing a face-saving package that will allow her to continue to play a role in health care reform, which has been her signature issue for more than a decade. Despite pressure from some Clinton allies, Mr Obama and his advisers do not wish to ask her to be his vice-presidential running mate. “They will talk to her,” one Democrat strategist close to senior figures in the Obama camp told The Sunday Telegraph. “They will give her the respect she deserves. She will get something to do with health care, a cabinet post or the chance to lead the legislation through the Senate.”
Another Democrat who has discussed strategy with friends in the Obama inner circle said that Mr Obama was openly considering asking Mrs Clinton to join his cabinet, alongside two other former presidential rivals: John Edwards, who is seen as a likely attorney general; and Joe Biden, who is a leading contender to become Secretary of State.
Hillary to run health care, Edwards to run law enforcement and Biden to run State - all under an empty-suit leftist! Anyone who figures that a period of Democratic rule will work to conservatism’s benefit is a purblind idiot from this point on!
Hillary’s health care plan is a catastrophic government take over. Edwards is hack lawyer who is a complete tool of the trial lawyers. Biden is one of the Democratic Senators who introduced legislation in January of 2007 calling for no increase in US troop levels in Iraq. Hillary will bankrupt healthcare; Edwards will use the Justice Department to enrich his trial lawyer puppet-masters; the man who wanted to ensure our defeat in Iraq will orchestrate our surrender to Iran over Iraq. And you think Obama will do anything to make it better? He hasn’t the first clue about real political in-fighting and he’ll be a feather blown on the winds of these dedicated political gamesmen. This is what we’ll get if we don’t win - except, even worse, we’ll also get leftwing extremist judges and bureaucrats who will try to regulate us to death “for the children”.
Tags: HillBama, Joe Biden, John Edwards, John McCain
June 1st, 2008
McCain is getting a lot of positive press about his climate change speech - juxtaposing the speech with the “take the gloves off” note to Newsweek, I begin to see a strategy here of hitting out both right and left…nothing like making everyone catch up with you - it means you control the terms of the debate.
Edwards endorsement of Obama has a lot of people talking of him being the Veep, again. I say: bring it ON!!!! Talk about handing us the election on a silver platter…two lawyers who are hip deep in questionable actions running against a war hero…
How much wood would a wood chuck chuck if a wood chuck would chuck wood?
Not much, they’re pretty small.
Discuss these and other burning questions of the day.
Tags: Barack Obama, Climate Change, global warming, John Edwards, John McCain, Veepstakes, wood chucks
May 15th, 2008
Someone is looking for that VP slot.
Democrat John Edwards is endorsing former rival Barack Obama, fresh signs of the party establishment embracing the likely nominee even as Hillary Rodham Clinton refuses to give up her long-shot candidacy.
ADVERTISEMENT
Edwards was to appear with Obama in Grand Rapids, Mich., as Obama campaigns in a critical general election battleground state.
The endorsement comes the day after Clinton defeated Obama by more than 2-to-1 in West Virginia. The loss highlighted Obama’s work to win over the “Hillary Democrats” — white, working-class voters who also supported Edwards in large numbers before he exited the race.
Tags: Barack Obama, John Edwards
May 14th, 2008
It was inevitable… Rudy is going to dropout, and likely endorse John McCain. (Mike Huckabee ought to dropout too, but last night he appeared committed to pressing on.)
John Edwards is dropping out, however, he has not made any immediate endorsement. This, I find interesting. In 2004, Edwards reportedly begged John Kerry to make him his running mate. With a brutal and tight race ahead between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, Edwards is in an interesting position. His endorsement might actually be important at this point. The question is, who will he endorse, and why? I suspect that his endorsement will only come on the condition that he be the candidate’s running mate in the general election. What does he have to lose? He’s a one-term Senator who couldn’t even win his home state for John Kerry in 2004, or his state’s primary this year.
The way I see it, Edwards’ best bet is to endorse Hillary Clinton. An Obama-Edwards ticket just doesn’t seem likely… Two Senators who ran for the presidency before their first terms as U.S. Senators were even finished on the same ticket? Don’t count on it. If Edwards wants to ride anyone’s coattails into the general election, he’d probably see Hillary as his best bet. She at least waited a few seconds after winning reelection to the Senate to declare her candidacy for the presidency.
Tags: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, John McCain, Rudy Giuliani
January 30th, 2008
From last night’s State of the Union:
In the work ahead, we must be guided by the philosophy that made our nation great. As Americans, we believe in the power of individuals to determine their destiny and shape the course of history. We believe that the most reliable guide for our country is the collective wisdom of ordinary citizens. And so in all we do, we must trust in the ability of free peoples to make wise decisions, and empower them to improve their lives for their futures.
So, how do the Democrats view America?
Barack Obama:
So let me remind you tonight that change will not be easy. That change will take time. There will be setbacks, and false starts, and sometimes we will make mistakes. But as hard as it may seem, we cannot lose hope. Because there are people all across this country who are counting us; who can’t afford another four years without health care or good schools or decent wages because our leaders couldn’t come together and get it done.
Hillary Clinton:
I know that we have to change our education program from the federal level and I know that we’ve got to create a better partnership between Washington and Connecticut and Hartford and all of the other communities here. We can do this. There is so much yearning in our country to be part of something bigger than ourselves again. We can provide a really positive view of our future together and we can ask everybody to be a part of it. It’s not just about electing a president and passing legislation through the Congress. It’s about what each and every one of us will do.
John Edwards:
We need a president who will take these powers on and fight to get you your voice back, and your government back. We need a president who is going to fight every day to make sure that all Americans can find good jobs, save for the future, and be guaranteed health care and retirement security. We need a president who is going to lift up the middle class. That is why today, I am proposing my Middle Class Rising agenda, a comprehensive plan to help hardworking families get ahead, and make sure that all Americans have a fair shot at the American Dream.
In a nutshell: President Bush says to rely upon the American people; Obama, Clinton and Edwards say the American people need a vast federal government to do it for the American people. These are the three Democrats who propose to replace President Bush - who propose, in the end, to replace a man who believes in America and Americans, with a man (or woman) who has no faith in the people to do for themselves. How are the 2008 GOPers in contrast?
Mitt Romney:
Republicans for Change believe in small government. Governments should be restrained so that the freedoms and vitality of individuals and enterprises can be unleashed. Compared to free markets and free enterprises, government is slow to act, wasteful, duplicative, bureaucratic, inefficient, ineffective, and unresponsive. Have I left anything out? Other than that, government isn’t all bad.
John McCain:
My friends, I know we are facing challenging economic times, and we must be responsive to the concerns of Americans who fear they are being left behind in the global economy. But nothing is inevitable in our country. We are the captains of our fate. We can overcome any challenge as long as we keep our courage, and stand by our defense of free markets, low taxes, and small government that have made America the greatest land of opportunity in the world.
Rudy Giuliani:
Americans need tax relief as well, which is why I will eliminate the death tax, index the Alternative Minimum Tax to inflation and target it for elimination. I will simplify the tax code to an optional one-page form. I will also expand tax-free health savings accounts as part of a larger proposal to make health care more affordable.
I believe one of the reasons Republicans lost control of Congress in 2006 was because of excessive spending in the years leading up to that election. Over the last decade, nondefense spending has increased 72 percent, and this year Washington spent nearly $24,000 for every household in America.
Controlling spending must be a chief executive’s priority.
So, the top three are also believers in the ability of Americans to make it on their own. Who do you want as your next President - someone who proposes to wipe your nose for you, or someone who proposes to get the heck out of your way?
Your choice, America - make it well.
Tags: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, John McCain, Mitt Romney, President Bush, Rudy Giuliani
January 29th, 2008
Just tuning in now. Already a lot of “buzz” out there for Obama…
Fox calls it for Obama; Hillary and Edwards are battling it out for second.
Obama seems to have won everything - Democrats, independents, youth, black vote…and it seems a crushing victory for Obama.
Hillary has already left South Carolina…didn’t even wait ’round to concede.
Edwards might end up happy with a second place win (still to be determined), but he only got 1% of the black vote in his home State…
Bad news for Obama tonight - white Democrats voted overwhelmingly for Edwards and Clinton, hardly any for Obama. Can you say “racial divide”, boys and girls? And, also, it would serve Democrats right if race wrecked their party in 2008.
Fox News reports that Edwards might have benefited from GOPers crossing over to mess up….errr…I mean “vote in” the Democratic primary. Good job, my fellow GOPers….
And what a black man gets for helping out a Clinton:
Said Bill Clinton today in Columbia, SC: “Jesse Jackson won South Carolina in ‘84 and ‘88. Jackson ran a good campaign. And Obama ran a good campaign here.”
This was in response to a question about Obama saying it “took two people to beat him.” Jackson had not been mentioned.
Boy, I can’t understand why anyone would think the Clintons are running a race-baiting campaign to paint Obama as “the black candidate.”
And that is the same Jesse Jackson who, as Kathy Lopez at NRO points out, helped Bill Clinton out of his blue dress mess ten years ago…ah, the Clintons are as loyal as they are honest.
Tags: Barack Obama, Democratic Nomination, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, South Carolina
January 26th, 2008
Per Real Clear Politics Average - Obama 37.8, Clinton 26.6, Edwards 19.6.
Anyone want to make any predictions for how today’s vote will go?
If you go into the background numbers at RCP, the one curious thing is that Edwards seems to be rising - could it be possible that Edwards will come in second?
Tags: Barack Obama, Democratic Nomination, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, South Carolina
January 26th, 2008
Those may not have been her exact words, but that’s pretty much what she said just a few minutes ago during the Democrats’ debate.
UPDATE, 9:59 PM: Barack Obama just said he would not hesitate to strike against anyone who would do us harm… Sounds like he supports preemptive strikes.
In the end, I have to say, this was a very nasty debate… Aside from the Democrats’ lack of common sense, it was clear that they were not holding back punches tonight. Edwards wasn’t kissing up to Obama tonight. And the attacks from all three were just brutal. I’ve never seen the Republicans get that nasty. Hillary even played the Rezko card on Obama.
Tags: Barack Obama, debate, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards
January 21st, 2008
Politico points out something:
In order to secure a nominating majority prior to the Democratic convention, a Democrat would have to win about 62% of the delegates apportioned by the primary/caucus system. Right now, Hillary has 210 delegates, Obama 123 and Edwards 52, Kucinich 1. Hillary has about 54% of the delegates so far awarded.
Now, Politico looks at this and figures that with Obama and Hillary running neck and neck, there is a chance that neither of them will secure the 2,025 delegates needed to secure the nomination prior to the convention - and thus Edwards, who consistently comes in third, might be the kingmaker, perhaps holding 300 or so of the delegates needed to put either Hillary or Edwards over the top. This, of course, presumes that delegates will remain rigidly loyal to the person they came to the convention for - which may or may not be the case.
My view: When Edwards said he was in it to the convention, I think he meant what he said. Why quit? I’m sure he’s paid for some primo pollsters who were telling him the relative strength of Hillary and Obama and whether or not either of them could land a knockout blow. Could be that Edwards doesn’t see himself as a kingmaker, but as the compromise candidate between the Hillary and Obama delegates. For the longest time I have been thinking that the GOP convention would be brokered with a slight chance the Democrats would be as well - now I’m beginning to shift and think that it might be the other way around.
Time will tell - but a fun political year for us junkies, at least…
Tags: Barack Obama, Democratic Convention, Democratic Nomination, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards
January 20th, 2008
I honestly didn’t see this coming.
Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee, endorsed Sen. Barack Obama for the White House Thursday in a timely slap at Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton as well as his own vice presidential running mate.
Quoting a black American hero in endorsing the man who hopes to be the first black president, Kerry declared, “Martin Luther King Jr. said the time is always right to do what is right. And I’m here in South Carolina because this is the right time to share with you, to make sure that we know that I have the confidence … and that Barack Obama can be, will be and should be the next president of the United States.”
Kerry delivered his endorsement in South Carolina at a time, two weeks before that state’s primary, when Clinton is riding a wave of enthusiasm following her victory over Obama in the New Hampshire primary.
The obvious question to ask is “Why?” Why would Kerry endorse Obama over Hillary Clinton, whose husband helped him significantly in 2004; and John Edwards, who was his running mate in 2004.
After Al Gore’s embarrassing pre-implosion endorsement of Howard Dean, it’s obvious that politicians now are going to look before they leap when it comes to making an endorsement. So, one has to ask why Kerry endorsed Obama now, instead of after Iowa. Endorsing Obama immediately following Iowa could have helped him secure victory in New Hampshire — a state Kerry won in 2004. But he didn’t.
Here’s how I see it. Barack Obama, despite the enthusiasm for his campaign, is unelectable in the general election. John Kerry, who didn’t seek the presidency this time despite wanting to, is sure to want one more go at it. Endorsing Barack Obama helps him on a couple fronts… First, he can conceivably give Obama enough of a boost in the primaries to help him win and secure the nomination, and second, he gets to align himself with Obama’s anti-Iraq war position, which he might see as vital for a potential run in 2012. Would Kerry have endorsed Obama if he won New Hampshire? Probably not, it wouldn’t have been necessary. Had Obama won New Hampshire, he’d most certainly have been a shoo-in for the nomination. But now, Kerry sees he needs to do what he can to ensure Obama gets the nomination … if deep in his heart, he really wants to run for president again in 2012.
Tags: Al Gore, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Iraq, John Edwards, John Kerry, New Hampshire, Primaries
January 10th, 2008
It’s on. Predictions… thoughts… reports?
UPDATE:
Mitt Romney, John McCain Both Predicting Wins in Granite State
Obama, McCain Lead in Early (Negligible) NH Voting
GOP’s Thompson in SC instead of NH
NH primary could make, break candidacies
Analysis: NH win could launch McCain
Early returns (7% reporting) shown on Fox show Hillary and Obama neck-and-neck (37 and 36% respectively), and McCain with a good edge over Romney (38 to 28%).
Some early thoughts: If Huckabee comes in a distant third, he loses any momentum he gained in Iowa. If Romney comes in second, especially a close second, he’s still in the race. If McCain holds his early lead and wins by 10 points or so, it could be a two man race between him and Romney again. Ron Paul could defeat Huckabee.
UPDATE: Exit polls via Fox:
McCain: 35%
Romney: 30%
Huckabee: 13%
Obama: 39%
Clinton: 34%
Edwards: 18%
Here are my thoughts if these figures hold out… Hillary is still in the race, and could easily bounce back. Obama may be in a good position with two victories, but I’d have thought his bounce from Iowa would have been bigger.
For Huckabee to go from 1st place in Iowa to 3rd place is not good. He may have jumped in the polls from Iowa, but his inability to at least come in a close second only highlights the fact that his victory in Iowa came courtesy of the Evangelical vote. If Huckabee can only win a primary when there’s a high population of evangelical Christians, than it’s going to be a long primary season and a potential brokered convention.
UPDATE, 8:11 PM ET: Fox projects McCain winner in GOP primary…
UPDATE: Clinton still edging out Obama 40-35% with 13% reporting… Can Hillary win tonight
UPDATE, 8:53 PM ET: Clinton: 40% Obama 34% (23% reporting)
What if Obama loses?
Michael Barone says Hillary could take New Hampshire…
UPDATE, 9:33 PM ET: Revised/updated exit poll:
Clinton: 39%
Obama: 37%
Edwards: 16%
UPDATE, by Mark Noonan: Here’s my insightful commentary - wow!
This is just amazing - and while the talking heads are saying that Edwards is out, I think there is no reason for anyone, on either side, to back out. I’m settling in for a long primary fight.
UPDATE, by Mark Noonan: Fox News is reporting that the Culinary Union out here in Nevada, which was set to endorse Obama, is now holding off. Hillary and Obama are both locked in a tight fight here in Nevada - the Culinary is a massively important union in Nevada. For Democrats, its the brass ring…and if this report is correct, then it would be an indicator that the Democratic power structure has decided that Obama must be stopped. Keep in mind - next up is us in Nevada; our caucuses are on January 19th.
UPDATE, by Mark Noonan: Edwards isn’t backing out…actually says he’s in the race to the convention!
UPDATE, by Matt Margolis: MSNBC projects Hillary win…
UPDATE, by Mark Noonan: Obama puts down the marker - he’s going to end the war in Iraq; he’s letting the left know that he’s their man. This is where the battle lines will be drawn: the left for Obama, the old-line Democratic establishment for Hillary. Who will win? As an aside, Obama says he’s in this to let the people take back their nation - top donors to Obama? People who work in insurance and lobbyists…there’s a big bunch ‘o change, huh?
Tags: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, John McCain, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul
January 8th, 2008
Rasmussen says so:
The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in New Hampshire shows John McCain leading Mitt Romney by five percentage points. It’s McCain 31% Romney 26%. The survey was conducted Friday night, the night following the Iowa caucuses. As noted yesterday on Rasmussen Reports, McCain was one of the big winners on Thursday in Iowa. The current poll is a reversal from a pre-Christmas survey when Romney had a slight advantage.
Ron Paul earns 14% of the vote and Mike Huckabee gets 11% as the only other candidates in double digits. Rudy Giuliani attracts 8% of the vote, Fred Thompson 5%, some other candidate 2%, and 3% are not sure.
If this is correct, then Romney is heading for a very rough patch in his quest for the White House - losing New Hampshire would be a blow tough for Romney to recover from. The only bright spot for Romney if he comes in second is that the GOP race is still so unsettled that even if he flops several times, there is still a chance of pulling it off - if nothing else, at a brokered GOP convention (something I put down as just a bit less than a 50/50 probability at this moment - for the Democrats, its about 70/30 against). Bottom line - the nature of the GOP contest in 2008 (and, to a lesser extent, the Democratic contest) is that there’s no reason for anyone who comes in second or third to back out. While its not likely, there is even a chance that in the first five contests, the GOP will wind up with five different winners.
The GOP contest is wide open because none of the top-tier candidates have been able to take the mantle of Ronald Reagan - in other words, the Reagan coalition is waiting for a leader, but none of the GOP candidates has yet to seal the deal. The Democratic contest is less wide open, but the Democratic primary voters might be in a mood to really punish anyone who isn’t devoutly anti-Bush in word and deed. Still, there is no reason for any of the top three Democrats to pull out - Hillary because she’s got bag of money to keep it going, while Obama and Edwards circle each other, wondering how the kook left will settle out as time goes on.
Tags: Barack Obama, GOP Nomination, John Edwards, John McCain, Mitt Romney, New Hampshire
January 6th, 2008
A new Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll released today shows Obama on top, with Edwards trailing by four, and Hillary Clinton back in third in Iowa.
What does this mean? It’s hard to say, Iowa polls have been all over the place, so the only thing we should take from this latest poll is that anything can happen. I’m still thinking that Obama is not going to come out on top, but if he does, it could be fatal to Hillary’s candidacy. If Hillary doesn’t win, she better hope that John Edwards comes in first, because an Edwards victory in Iowa, in my opinion, would hurt her less in New Hampshire. Both Obama and Clinton need to win Iowa to get some momentum over the other. If the perception of electability in the general election is as important to caucus-goers this year as it was in 2004, than I think that helps Edwards more than Hillary or Obama.
As for the GOP, I think Mitt Romney will come out on top. Huckabee may have been surging in the polls recently, but that may not make up for the fact that winning Iowa is a key part of Romney’s strategy and therefore he’s been building up a good operation on the ground that will be hard to overcome. If Romney doesn’t win the Iowa caucuses, he’s in trouble.
As for Huckabee’s surge, I don’t dismiss it, but one can’t ignore that since his surge, he was open to attacks and criticism that he largely avoided previously. He also comes across as less able to handle foreign policy, and he clearly appears to be the easiest GOP candidate for the Democrats to beat in November. If the perception of electability is as important to Republican caucus-goers as it is to Democrat caucus-goers, than John McCain and Mitt Romney should benefit the most… however, if Republican caucus-goers think Romney’s Mormonism will be a problem, than McCain experience the bigger boost.
What will be really interesting to see is McCain’s performance. If he can come in second place, it will be good shot in the arm for his campaign and an indication that the message in his recent ad campaigns have worked.
As of this moment, I’m thinking John Edwards and Mitt Romney will be the winners. The second and third place positions for both parties could go either way…
Tags: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Iowa Caucuses, John Edwards, John McCain, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, New Hampshire
January 3rd, 2008
Headline:
How Edwards tries to emasculate Obama
By scratching his eyes out?
Tags: Barack Obama, John Edwards
January 2nd, 2008
Mark and I have spoken privately about our predictions for Iowa, and a couple weeks ago, I said I think it could end up going Edwards, Clinton, then Obama. Mark and I have generally been at odds over how Iowa will turn out for the Democrats, but a new poll now shows Edwards on top, with Clinton and Obama not far behind makes me think that my prediction wasn’t too far out there.
Let me explain why I believe, at this point, that not only will Edwards come out on top, but that Obama will do surprisingly poor, in the same way that Howard Dean did back in 2004.
I watched some of the Iowa Caucuses in 2004, and the one thing that seemed to stick out in my mind was the common question everyone was asking: “Who can beat George W. Bush?” With no incumbent this cycle, the question I expect caucus-goers to be asking is “Who can win in the general election?” And I expect that most will not give “Barack Obama” as the answer. In 2004 Iowa Democrats made the strategic decision to bank their hopes on capturing the presidency on John Kerry. John Kerry had run a terrible campaign up to that point — and even had to loan himself a huge chunk of money to keep himself afloat at one point — but with the war on terror as the primary issue, it seemed logical to pick someone who served in Vietnam (albeit very briefly) and had a bit more experience than a governor of a small state who sealed his own records and appeals to the far light liberal bloggers.
If electability is as important to Iowa Democrats in 2008 as it was in 2004, then I wouldn’t count on Obama coming out on top. Obama’s inexperience is a huge problem for him. And, let’s face it, if liberals really believe that this country is racist, then how could they believe that Obama has a chance to win the General Election?
And how about Hillary? Aside from her past support for the war in Iraq, there is no one more polarizing and controversial than her. Still, I believe Democrats would consider her more electable than Barack Obama.
Democrats can claim all they want that there will be a blowout in 2008, but many factors will drive turnout on both sides, and I’m still thinking that this election will be close like the previous two.
The real thing we get out of this new poll is that Iowa is wide open. In the past few weeks and months, all of the top three Democrat contenders have come out on top of an Iowa poll. In the end, it can go either way. This latest poll strengthens my belief that Edwards can win Iowa.
So anyway, not too long ago I asked our readers for predictions about Iowa. Any revisions to past predictions? Any new predictions?
UPDATE: Strengthening the foundation for my prediction again… QandO points us to a story that says Democrats are worried about the electability of their nominee.
Tags: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Iowa Caucuses, Iraq, John Edwards, John Kerry
December 18th, 2007
Seems we GOPers scare the poor lady:
Elizabeth Edwards, wife of Democratic hopeful John Edwards, lamented with Iowa caucus goers about her fear of the Republican Party.
“Republicans should scare us in a lot of ways,” Edwards said as she was introducing her husband at a town hall in Dubuque, Iowa.
Speaking about Republican candidate Mike Huckabee, who recently surged ahead in Iowa polls, Elizabeth noted, “He seems like a nice charming guy,” before saying that Huckabee, “doesn’t believe in evolution and has some nutty views about what it is we should do about ending violence in our inner city — we should make sure all of our young people are armed. Republicans scare me.”
She went on to warn about the larger party, saying, “Karl Rove may not be working in the White House anymore but you can pretty much be sure he’s going back in the presidential race… I believe he’s going to be back and he’s going be doing that same kind of Rovian politics that we’ve seen before — the kind of attacks that we saw against Sen. McCain in South Carolina we can expect to see against our nominee, ’swift boating,’ all of that kind of stuff again.”
I know we’re supposed to completely lay off Mrs. Edwards as she is dying of cancer - but, come on! This is paranoia writ large! Karl Rove is out to get you! Muhahahaha!!!!
I’ve only met Mr. Rove once in my life - and he seemed to be somewhat less than a spawn of the Evil One. I’m sure he kicks puppies for fun (all Republicans do, ya know?), but he didn’t come across as someone who is hiding under Elizabeth Edwards’ bed with a stack of swift boats all set to go. And I’d like to really know what is nuttier - Huckabee on evolution, or John Edwards thinking he can be President.
Tags: Democratic Nomination, Elizabeth Edwards, John Edwards
December 17th, 2007
The AP had an interesting piece this evening on the coffee tastes of the presidential candidates. As serious coffee addict, I had to check it out…
DEMOCRATS:
New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton: Sometimes black, sometimes with cream
Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards: Doesn’t drink it
Illinois Sen. Barack Obama: Black, but rarely drinks it
New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson: Cream
REPUBLICANS:
Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani: Splenda, Sweet’n Low or Equal, whichever is available
Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee: Splenda
Arizona Sen. John McCain: Cappuccino or coffee with cream and sugar
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney: Doesn’t drink it, has been known to have hot chocolate
Former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson: Cream
Myself… my day must begin with a venti cup of drip coffee from Starbucks, with half-and-half. What really amuses me about this is that most of the answers were consistent. Most either like it black, with cream, or with sugar (or a sugar substitute)… and then there is Hillary who said she has her coffee sometimes black, and sometimes with cream.
Sounds like her ridiculous answer to Tim Russert’s question about which team she would root for if the Cubs and the Yankees ever met in the World Series. Hillary said, “I would probably have to alternate sides.”
It seems like this is another typical have-it-both-ways response from Hillary. Over something as trivial as a coffee preference.
Tags: Barack Obama, Bill Richardson, coffee, Fred Thompson, John Edwards, John McCain, Mike Huckabee,