Thread: John Edwards (D)

Originally Posted by chinthee

he could be more effective by not being officially accountable to anyone.

in theory yes...but this would inevitably lead to leaks to the press about how he's micromanaging and "wonking" in areas of the govt. where he shouldn't be...and, of course, who's really the president.

IMO an oversized personality like clinton needs a job with fixed bounderies.

Originally Posted by Milkman

I haven't seen recent polls on Edwards. I assume he's slipping down a notch as the process continues.

when i last checked he was still in a statistical dead heat in iowa....where he's put all his marbles. if he doesn't win (or come in a very close second) he's done.

Originally Posted by Milkman

And I still don't like his capital gains tax increase from 15% to 28%

the truth is in the details MM...

The Edwards campaign said his plan would raise the tax rate on capital gains, which are profits from investments, to 28 percent from the current 15 percent for taxpayers with incomes greater than $250,000. It would remain at 15 percent for those who earn less than $250,000.

Edwards proposes increase to capital gains tax - International Herald Tribune

Originally Posted by Milkman

This reinforces the fact that we cannot trust then MSM (mainstream media).

Certainly we can...to support liberal policies that emphasize the need for government to solve peoples problems.

edwards makes the electability case...

it should be noted that this info was compiled by edwards' campaign staff.

the aggregate of public polling since Nov. 1 shows Edwards leading former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani -- the Republican frontrunner -- by an average of four points, the same margin Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton enjoys. Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) holds a two-point lead over Giuliani in the seven polls comparing the two.
In matchups with other Republican candidates, Edwards has wider average leads than Obama or Clinton. Against former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (R), for example, Edwards leads by 14 points while Obama leads by 10 and Clinton leads by just five; against former Gov. Mitt Romney (Mass.) Edwards is ahead by 18 on average while Obama leads by 11 and Clinton by nine.

"Unlike other Democrats who will be forced to "run the table" of states where Democrats have been competitive in recent elections, Edwards brings new states into play," writes Hickman. "This provides alternative scenarios -- and a margin for error -- when it comes to winning 270 electoral votes."
To make his point, Hickman points to a series of Survey USA polls (the methodology of which we have written and raised questions about in this space) that do indeed show Edwards running strongest in a variety of so-called "purple" states.
In Missouri, Edwards leads Giuliani by five points while Obama holds a two point lead and Clinton trails by a point; Edwards leads Giuliani by 14 points in Iowa while Clinton and Obama have an eight-point lead. Even in a Republican-leaning state like Oklahoma, Edwards runs nine point ahead of Giuliani while Clinton trails by three and Obama by 21.

Edwards Makes the Electability Case - The Fix

if he can win in iowa (or a close second) and somehow give a respectable showing in NH, i think he'll have a chance for the nomination...and if he gets the dem nomination, he'll be president.

Edwards Update

Reports of a "love child" are surfacing. Most notably, on the front page of the National Enquirer.

Could be wrong.

But the National Enquirer does careful research with lots of lawyers before the run a story - a reason why the paper usually wins in court against lawsuits.

Do I care if Edwards has a kid? No.

What is interesting, is if a large segment of the American populace, does not consider it much of a factor. Maybe; maybe not.

a couple of questions for you MM

1. which political campaign do the new owners of the national enquirer have a connection to? which media source was the first to leak this 'story' from the enquirer? which campaign has shockingly developed a new relationship with that media source?

2. did you pay special attention to the words chosen in the headline of the national enquirer?

Originally Posted by raycarey

a couple of questions for you MM

1. which political campaign do the new owners of the national enquirer have a connection to?

I don't know. Of course it's always a question. But I think selling more editions is the motivation. Digging up dirt on anybody sells.

which media source was the first to leak this 'story' from the enquirer?

We're waiting on that, Ray. I noted the story could be wrong.

2. did you pay special attention to the words chosen in the headline of the national enquirer?

Yes.

It's legalise. Careful on how to state something. It's an implication.

Here is the blurb below. If you can't see it, let me know.



Link: DRUDGE REPORT 2008®

a clinton friend bought the enquirer recently.
there have been multiple reports of clinton feeding info to drudge within the last few months....which is shocking considering drudge's role in the impeachment brouhaha.
and yes, the title is legalese...."woman linked to candidate".

IMO this is most certainly the clintons practicing dirty politics....and hopefully the media will see it for the smear it is.

Originally Posted by raycarey

a clinton friend bought the enquirer recently.

This is interesting.

there have been multiple reports of clinton feeding info to drudge within the last few months....which is shocking considering drudge's role in the impeachment brouhaha.
and yes, the title is legalese...."woman linked to candidate".

IMO this is most certainly the clintons practicing dirty politics....and hopefully the media will see it for the smear it is.

Hillary can be dirty. And now that her poll numbers have dipped she's going on the "dirt offensive."

Originally Posted by Milkman

This is interesting.

yes it is....and what's surprising to me is that this is so obvious. surely people are going to be able to connect the dots, right?

October 11, 2007


The Clintonite who owns National Enquirer

The political world has been holding its nose for the last twenty-four hours while peering at the weekly tabloid National Enquirer, which published a story yesterday alleging that presidential candidate John Edwards had an extra-marital affair.

"The story is false," Edwards told reporters in South Carolina today, according to a reporter who was there.
What the tabloid's readers, in politics and out, may not know is that a key owner of the Enquirer is a prominent New York investment banker and one of Hillary Clinton's key backers, Roger Altman. Altman was an official in the first Clinton administration, and his name is often mentioned as a possible Clinton Treasury Secretary.

The Clintonite who owns National Enquirer - Ben Smith's Blog - Politico.com

Might explain why it all went quiet on the Edwards for VP talk a while back.

I've got a lot of respect for the guys achievements- the son of a Mill worker, he made a fortune as a gifted attorney in some high profile cases. He's always got that to go back to, because he's reached the end in Politics.

Arrogant self serving ambulance chasing c*nt.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

These Democrats can't help themselves can they?

Yes, I agree. Terrible thing to do, having an affair when your wife is suffering from a life threatening disease. A Republican would never do such a thing! Well, maybe a "maverick" Republican would but the rest are saints.

Heh...more evidence Lamestream Media is in the Tank for the Democrats...

http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2008/08/edwards---too-t.html

Sorry, just a Brit looking in, but does John Edwards (D) stand for Dunce?

Originally Posted by bkkandrew

Sorry, just a Brit looking in, but does John Edwards (D) stand for Dunce?

Well, in this case it does but normally, the (D) or (R) behind a politician's name defines his party.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Originally Posted by bkkandrew

Sorry, just a Brit looking in, but does John Edwards (D) stand for Dunce?

Well, in this case it does but normally, the (D) or (R) behind a politician's name defines his party.

oh god.

Originally Posted by norton"

I agree. Terrible thing to do, having an affair when your wife is suffering from a life threatening disease. A Republican would never do such a thing! Well, maybe a "maverick" Republican would but the rest are saints.

of course not!
actually, it seems they prefer to cheat on their wives with men....in public restrooms.

come sept/oct, i hope the left leaning 527s come out strong against mccain's lack of 'family values'. after all, how many of these middle class house wives would vote for a man who has called his wife a cnut?

Originally Posted by raycarey

how many of these middle class house wives would vote for a man who has called his wife a cnut?

Millions.

Originally Posted by pai nai ma

Originally Posted by raycarey

how many of these middle class house wives would vote for a man who has called his wife a cnut?

Millions.

I think it more likly the husbands will be the ones voting for him.

trouble for edwards...

The two-time Democratic presidential candidate acknowledged Sunday that investigators are assessing how he spent his campaign funds — a subject that could carry his extramarital affair from the tabloids to the courtroom. Edwards' political action committee paid more than $100,000 for video production to the firm of the woman with whom Edwards had an affair.


The former North Carolina senator said in a carefully worded statement that he is cooperating.


"I am confident that no funds from my campaign were used improperly," Edwards said in the statement. "However, I know that it is the role of government to ensure that this is true. We have made available to the United States both the people and the information necessary to help them get the issue resolved efficiently and in a timely matter."

John Edwards faces federal investigation

btw, i read an article last week in which HRC's campaign chief said that if edwards wasn't in the race, she would have walked away with the nomination....and that makes me wonder if that's why he stayed in the race....he must have known that the affair would have been made public.