# John Edwards is a very impressive Presidential candidate **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 6, 2007, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-edwards-is-a-very-impressive-presidential-candidate/391017 "2007-02-06T00:47:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![catsix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e19b73/32.png) [@catsix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/catsix)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2007, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-edwards-is-a-very-impressive-presidential-candidate/391017/141 "2007-02-07T18:32:29Z")
> [@](#): > > **Caridwen** said: > But you’d support a party that is spending a trillion dollars on a war? How much do you think that’s costing you? Where did I say ‘party’? I said I wouldn’t vote for John Edwards. I can vote for someone other than John Edwards in the primary, where it is **impossible for me to vote for a Republican at all**. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2007, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-edwards-is-a-very-impressive-presidential-candidate/391017/142 "2007-02-07T18:35:06Z")
[QUOTE=Contrapuntal] If James Carville were a guest on, lets say, The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer, and said that about Rudolph Giuliana, would you discount his opinion because he isn’t voting for Rudy? [/QUOTE] Pretty much, yes. Because James Carville would want watchers to believe it wasn’t a good move even if it was brilliant. Now, if James Carville could demonstrate that it was having effect X or effect Y, that’s different. Say, if the poll numbers showed a big change and he wanted to guess what might be the reason. But otherwise, a biased person is likely attempting to lead opinion, not report it. Edited to add: In retrospect, “discount” is too strong a word. I wouldn’t completely disregard the report, but I would also not take it as anything but bias unless it could be confirmed elsewhere. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2007, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-edwards-is-a-very-impressive-presidential-candidate/391017/143 "2007-02-07T18:44:18Z")
That’s fine. I won’t convince everyone. I’m just going to offer a prediction - that by this time next week, either or both of these women won’t be working for John Edwards anymore. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2007, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-edwards-is-a-very-impressive-presidential-candidate/391017/144 "2007-02-07T19:26:32Z")
[QUOTE=Mr. Moto] I’m just going to offer a prediction - that by this time next week, either or both of these women won’t be working for John Edwards anymore. [/QUOTE] Looks like your track record in [predicting the past](http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2007/02/07/edwards_bloggers/index.html) is 100% this week! 😉 > [@](#): > > The right-wing blogosphere has gotten its scalps – John Edwards has fired the two controversial bloggers he recently hired to do liberal blogger outreach, Salon has learned. > > The bloggers, Amanda Marcotte, formerly of Pandagon, and Melissa McEwan, of Shakespeare’s Sister, had come under fire from right-wing bloggers for statements they had previously made on their respective blogs. (I’m just kidding about predicting the past, btw - even though the _Salon_ story was filed before you posted, I’m sure you didn’t know.) Of course, the story goes on to say: > [@](#): > > Speculation from sources that the two bloggers might be rehired was bolstered by Jennifer Palmieri, a spokeswoman for the Edwards campaign, who said in an e-mail that she would “caution [Salon] against reporting that they have been fired. We will have something to say later.” ---
**Author:** ![Caridwen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c89c15/32.png) [@Caridwen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Caridwen)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2007, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-edwards-is-a-very-impressive-presidential-candidate/391017/145 "2007-02-07T19:38:27Z")
I’m sort of disappointed by this. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2007, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-edwards-is-a-very-impressive-presidential-candidate/391017/146 "2007-02-07T19:39:18Z")
[QUOTE=Aeschines] I’m going to vote for whoever the Dem candidate is in '08, [/QUOTE] That’s sad. Why won’t you listen to all the candidates and decide on the best? ---
**Author:** ![Caridwen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c89c15/32.png) [@Caridwen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Caridwen)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2007, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-edwards-is-a-very-impressive-presidential-candidate/391017/147 "2007-02-07T20:11:30Z")
What’s so sad about it? Don’t you believe each party has a basic philosophy? I’m pro-choice, pro-union, concerned about the environment, believe in helping the poor, against deregulating business and believe in equal opportunity, separation of church and state, civic freedom and I support gay marriage. I can listen to candidates all day but I doubt if I’ll ever come close to finding a Republican candidate that would reflect my views. I’m sure people with opposing views feel the same way. ---
**Author:** ![DoctorJ](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doctorj/32/2904_2.png) [@DoctorJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DoctorJ)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2007, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-edwards-is-a-very-impressive-presidential-candidate/391017/148 "2007-02-07T20:46:42Z")
> [@](#): > > Yes she is. The one I linked to has been disappeared. Read what I wrote. The post you mention was removed, well before this mess got going. Here’s what she replaced it with: > [@](#): > > UPDATE: Since people are determined to make hay over this quick shot of a post, I’m deleting it and here’s my official stance. The prosecution in the Duke case fumbled the ball. The prosecutor was too eager to get a speedy case and make a name for himself. That is my final word. Michelle Malkin and Danny “not the actor” Glover dug up several supposed incidents of deleted posts. All of them were either lost in server transitions (along with entire months of posts around them) or still there. Taking out one post is far from “trying to sanitize her blog”. If Edwards has in fact fired Amanda and Melissa, he’s pretty much over. His best chance is to capitalize on his popularity among the netroots, who pretty much hate Hillary and aren’t yet convinced by Obama. (Not to overplay the importance of the netroots, but when you’re a distant third you work with what you’ve got.) That’s why hiring them was a smart move. If he won’t stand up for them against the likes of Michelle Malkin and William Donohue, he can kiss that foothold goodbye. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2007, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-edwards-is-a-very-impressive-presidential-candidate/391017/149 "2007-02-07T20:57:18Z")
It’s tough, though, isn’t it? I’ve speculated before that too close an association with the MoveOn crowd can only hurt Democratic candidates, and this might be an example of this. Edwards felt he needed to use these bloggers, yet their profanity and antireligious bias is anathema to mainstream voters, even within the Democratic party. He got stung pretty fast on this one, and it isn’t the first time it’s happened with a Democrat. Nor will it be the last, I’ll bet. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2007, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-edwards-is-a-very-impressive-presidential-candidate/391017/150 "2007-02-07T21:09:30Z")
[QUOTE=DoctorJ] Read what I wrote. The post you mention was removed, well before this mess got going. Here’s what she replaced it with: Michelle Malkin and Danny “not the actor” Glover dug up several supposed incidents of deleted posts. All of them were either lost in server transitions (along with entire months of posts around them) or still there. Taking out one post is far from “trying to sanitize her blog”. [/QUOTE] Taking out one post is refusing to stand by her words. Honest bloggers let their words stand and attach amendments. ---
**Author:** ![Caridwen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c89c15/32.png) [@Caridwen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Caridwen)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2007, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-edwards-is-a-very-impressive-presidential-candidate/391017/151 "2007-02-07T21:12:15Z")
What hurts democrats is second guessing themselves and listening to the Michelle Malkins like **DoctorJ** said. He was #1 in the polls at Daily Kos and I think he’s making a huge mistake. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Carrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@Captain\_Carrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Carrot)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2007, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-edwards-is-a-very-impressive-presidential-candidate/391017/152 "2007-02-07T21:18:25Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > If he was on a typical contingency he bagged about $10 million because a box accidentally fell on someone. A quick $300K because some teen aged girl got seriously hurt by stupidly diving into the shallow end of the pool and no one “adequately” protected her from her own stupidity. And of course you know exactly what happened in both of those cases, so you can dismiss his work as for people who didn’t deserve help. By the way, the case with the 850-pound box that fell on an attorney was for $4 million, so he could not have gotten anywhere near 10. I have heard a bit more about the first case, so let me explain a bit for you. A 5-year old girl was sitting on (or near, I don’t remember which) the drain, the cover detached somehow, and her bowels were sucked out. The company that made the drain knew that there were problems; there had been twelve suits before; but it did nothing to fix the defective design or even attach warnings. John Edwards forced them to own up and pay for their negligence. ---
**Author:** ![DoctorJ](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doctorj/32/2904_2.png) [@DoctorJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DoctorJ)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2007, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-edwards-is-a-very-impressive-presidential-candidate/391017/153 "2007-02-07T21:27:25Z")
> [@](#): > > Taking out one post is refusing to stand by her words. Honest bloggers let their words stand and attach amendments. I don’t disagree. I thought it was a bad move. But Malkin and others have tried to make it into a trend, which it isn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2007, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-edwards-is-a-very-impressive-presidential-candidate/391017/154 "2007-02-07T21:42:01Z")
[QUOTE=jsgoddess] Pretty much, yes. Because James Carville would want watchers to believe it wasn’t a good move even if it was brilliant. Now, if James Carville could demonstrate that it was having effect X or effect Y, that’s different. Say, if the poll numbers showed a big change and he wanted to guess what might be the reason. But otherwise, a biased person is likely attempting to lead opinion, not report it. Edited to add: In retrospect, “discount” is too strong a word. I wouldn’t completely disregard the report, but I would also not take it as anything but bias unless it could be confirmed elsewhere. [/QUOTE] FWIW, I really want the Democrats to win, and I agree with \*\*Moto \*\*on this issue. It was a bad move by Edwards. Of course, I think he is a phony and a lying sack of shit, so perhaps my bias colors my opinion as well. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2007, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-edwards-is-a-very-impressive-presidential-candidate/391017/155 "2007-02-07T23:58:32Z")
[QUOTE=Caridwen] What’s so sad about it? [/quote] Everything. That you’re not willing to consider someone simply because they bear the wrong moniker. > [@](#): > > Don’t you believe each party has a basic philosophy? Yes: only the pursuit of power. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2007, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-edwards-is-a-very-impressive-presidential-candidate/391017/156 "2007-02-08T00:04:08Z")
[QUOTE=Quartz] Everything. That you’re not willing to consider someone simply because they bear the wrong moniker. [/QUOTE] Since a politician chooses his or her party, I can’t view it as any sort of discrimination to ignore those from one party in favor of the other. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2007, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-edwards-is-a-very-impressive-presidential-candidate/391017/157 "2007-02-08T00:42:31Z")
The story about Edwards’ bloggers is coming up on CNN right now. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2007, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-edwards-is-a-very-impressive-presidential-candidate/391017/158 "2007-02-08T00:50:08Z")
[QUOTE=Contrapuntal] Of course, I think he is a phony and a lying sack of shit, so perhaps my bias colors my opinion as well. [/QUOTE] Well, I can hardly claim to be bias-free, since I’m hoping Hillary gets attacked by velociraptors. It’s not going to happen, is it? ☹ ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2007, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-edwards-is-a-very-impressive-presidential-candidate/391017/159 "2007-02-08T01:01:45Z")
[QUOTE=jsgoddess] Well, I can hardly claim to be bias-free, since I’m hoping Hillary gets attacked by velociraptors. It’s not going to happen, is it? ☹ [/QUOTE] If it did, I suspect she would be having dinosaur kabobs for dinner. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Caridwen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c89c15/32.png) [@Caridwen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Caridwen)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2007, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-edwards-is-a-very-impressive-presidential-candidate/391017/160 "2007-02-08T01:01:50Z")
[QUOTE=Quartz] Everything. That you’re not willing to consider someone simply because they bear the wrong moniker. Yes: only the pursuit of power. [/QUOTE] Nice job! You quoted my first sentence and left out my entire explanation. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-edwards-is-a-very-impressive-presidential-candidate/391017.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-edwards-is-a-very-impressive-presidential-candidate/391017.md?page=9)