Story here.
So whaddaya think of Edwards?
Tsk. Mods, pretty please change “Edward” to “Edwards” in thread title. We don’t anyone thinking we might get a phony psychic for POTUS.
The way I read it, it is not a reflection of what will occur in the Democratic primary. This is putting each individual Dem candidate up against McCain. Correct?
This polling method assumes McCain wins the Republican primary. I don’t know. I’m not sure this methodology makes much sense to me if I’m reading it correctly.
Yes – I misread it.
Still interesting, though. I never expected to hear much out of Edwards after 2004.
Edwards has three things going for him:
-
Very strong drive to help the poor and middle-class.
-
Not Hillary
-
Not a Black man who shares a name with a convicted war criminal and who’s last name rhymes with a universally hated terrorist leader.
I respect point number one, but apart from that I don’t see much there. His performance in 2004 was lackluster, he’s nearly as green as Obama (without the added charisma and idealism). I really don’t see much going for him. He’s the “safest” choice, but so was Kerry, and see where that got us.
I think this poll, or any other current one, has essentially Zero predictive value for what will happen 2 years hence. Gives the talking heads something to talk about, though.
Yeah. I say fuck it–let’s go with Obama. He’s the least safe of the choices, but I think if you put him in a real race he’ll shine. He garners some respect from moderates and conservatives. He oozes intelligence and seems genuinely likeable.
Seriously, Edwards? How bizarre. I really would like to see the results of this poll replicated.
Nothing. I’d expect his 2008 results to be a little better than Joe Lieberman’s in 2004, but he was a really unimpressive candidate who looked shallow and out of depth. It looked to me like people thought he should be a good candidate, but that didn’t actually make him one. Much was said of his charm, but he ended up looking like nothing but a pretty face. He’s also got zero momentum, having been out of office since January '05.
Mace nailed it. Who was the early poll front runner in 2004? Joe Lieberman.
Come on. These things mean nothing. Once the actual campaigns start going, and people REALLY see how the candidates play out, THEN we can talk about the horse race.
Everyone knows Edwards because he was on the ticket in '04. Although Barak Obama is already famous among political junkies such as ourselves, a big chunk of the population still hasn’t heard of him. If at least five percent of the population is people who haven’t heard of Obama yet but will support him once they see him in action, then that puts him in a tie with Edwards.
Of course a great deal can change between now on '08, and both parties will have to go through a potentially bruising primary fight.
Not sure, but I think this polling was done in October. Of course I saw that on Fox News last night and this is The Nation so I must be wrong.
I think McCain might hope it is Edwards. John Edwards is likely to look good to registered Dems, but how do you think he will play with moderates and conservatives?
At least Obama has a presence that makes him interesting to moderates. He also suffers from the latent bigotry that will probably ruin any chance he has of winning.
Clinton will be hard pressed to win as so many dislike her.
If the Dems want to win, I hope they come up with a stronger candidate than these three. Given the choice, I would vote for Obama over the other two. Who else is there? Can someone else step forward? Is there a Bill Clinton-like governor without the scandals?
Obama vs. McCain, I would still be leaning toward McCain, but he looks a lot less attractive as a candidate than he did back in 2000. He has actually positioned himself away from moderates on several new issues where he used to look strong.
If McCain has Rudy as his running mate, I am voting the ticket in a heartbeat. Same if he adds any of several other truly moderate socially liberal Republicans like Bloomberg or the Senators from Maine. Counter-balancing the South West with the North East will make a strong ticket. Keep any Neo-Con far away.
For the record, I would never vote for a man who made his fortune as a lawyer winning injury law suites. I know many moderates than feel very similar.
Jim
Disgusted Republican here. While it would be unlikely that I could be persuaded to vote for a Democrat of any of the stripes they come in these days, I do offer this advice to my Democrat friends. For God’s sake, nominate someone LIKEABLE. You guys are so obsessed with all kinds of litmus tests and want someone who is ideologically pure, the kind of guy that can quote Chairman Mao’s “Little Red Book” chapter and verse, but you need more than that to win elections. Where did you guys dig up John Kerry? I can see the smoke filled room now:
“C’mon boys! We’ve just GOT to find someone that seems more out of touch with the average American than Bush!”
“How about that guy from Massachusetts?”
“KENNEDY?!?”
“Nah, the other guy, Kerry.”
“Yeah! He’d be good. Supercilious attitude, batshit crazy billionaire wife, what’s not to like!”
“Plus he looks French!”
“Gentlemen, I think we have our candidate!”
(Handshakes all around)
Seriously, guys. Kerry? PHIL ANGELEDES? Democrats nominate repelling boobs like these and then have the nerve to complain that the election wasn’t fair? Puhleeze.
So, back to the OP, at least Edwards is likeable.
In other news, likeable isn’t in the Firefox dictionary.
I think John Edwards is as personally likeable as any of the candidates out there. He passes the “would you like to have a beer with this guy?” test. Kerry was just the opposite.
Pros for Edwards- people like him. He admitted making a mistake in voting for the Iraq resolution. He’s very much aligned with the working class and labor. His populist policies make a sharp contrast to the Bush aristocratic years.
Cons- He’s got that goofy grin. He didn’t carry a single state for the 2004 ticket.
He’s a strong candidate. Unlike Hillary, he can claim to have jumped on the anti-war bandwagon in its early days. Unlike Obama, he won’t lose votes because of his race. Of all the early contenders, he’s got my support. There. I just doomed him.
McCain v Hillary- not in a million years. McCain is going to get swiftboated by the neocons in the 08 primaries. He can suck up to Bush all he wants, but he isn’t a True Believer in the eyes of the Far Right. Hillary is going to get her ass handed to her in Iowa. Her hawkish policies just aren’t going to fly in the Democratic primaries and if Obama doesn’t finish her off, Edwards will.
Dennis Kucinich is very likeable. He has a reputation for being endlessly argumentative and turning every conversation into a debate, but I’ve met him, and he’s likeable enough to make Ronald Reagan look like Dick Cheney. More importantly, he comes across as a straight-talking guy you can trust. When he gives a speech, he never says anything jovial or reassuring or vague or meaningless or ambiguous. He gets right to the beef. Very rare in a politician.
:dubious: Get thee to the Pit and stay there forever.
Oh for crying out loud. The guy is utterly unelectable. A president must project strength, and Kucinich doesn’t.
You’ve got a nice imagination, but the way I remember it is that Kerry decided to run and most of the voters voted for him in the primaries. If I had the time to write
I mean to add this to my list of negatives for Edwards - although I think it makes no sense at all.
I didn’t even think Mrs. Kerry’s mental status was controversial. She made like ONE public statement during the campaign that revealed her, geez what how can I phrase it without bannination, here goes: “rather unique perspective on life”, (does that pass?) and they threw a blanket over her, so it is obvious what the Kerry campaign itself thought about her.
Always a safe bet. (Scroll to second poll on page.)
All in how it’s framed. Make a commercial showing some quadriplegic thanking Edwards for helping him get compensation from some unresponsive corporation that made defective equipment that crippled him, and it might win votes.