• Although the current Front runner Hillary Clinton acceptable to me, I personally believe John Edwards would be the strongest candidate in a general election.

    And polls are reconfirming that.

    If he can pull off Iowa, he could be left standing at the end battling Clinton for the nomination.

    From purely electability standpoint, Edwards is much more attractive to your Red & Purple states & districts across the country.

    Since I don't expect any Blue states turning Red, Edward's candidacy just really puts him at a big advantage is so called Purple battleground states.

    With that said, regardless if its Clinton or Edwards, both have a good shot of winning the general. Edwards would just really help out in Senate & House races in purple states & districts.

  • Great Job Lori!

  • comment on a post Iowa Caucus Moving To January 5? over 6 years ago

    I agree with your comment except on Clinton.

    Either Obama or Edwards will have to snatch a win in either IA or NH. They cannot allow Clinton to win both or this thing is over.

    Right now, their best shot of defeating Hillary Clinton is IA. Since she is heavily favored in NH,
    Iowa will be the biggest battleground for the Edwards & Obama team. It has to be for them "Anyone but Hillary" in Iowa.

    If Clinton somehow pulls off winning Iowa ( which is very possible since she has been sharing the lead with Edwards) & wins big in NH as expected- I think it would almost be impossible to stop her at that point.

    If pollings stand as it is, she would be  enjoying huge leads in those upcoming primary states after IA & NH.

    If she pulls off winning 1st place in both IA & NH, that would be such a powerful momentum to stop. Her lead in the upcoming primary states would definitely INCREASE even more due to all that media exposure & momentum.

    In other words, either Obama or Edwards has to win one of those two states to slow her down or this will be a Clinton victory show.

  • Jaehood,

    He realized how bad this people were & stop? LOL LOL.

    You make it sound like Obama is some 5th grader who is being recruited by some gang.

    The guy realizes after 10 years of being a politician & accepting Lobby money that these people are BAD?

    Or is because he realized that he wanted to go run for President?

    His campaign is toast.

  • I am an Edward supporter as well.

    Let me point out one thing to you.

    There is a reason why poll after poll shows that IF Edwards should drop out, the majority of Edwards supporters choose Hillary Clinton as their 2nd choice.

    Not Barack Obama.

    P.S. You keep on saying that Obama no longer accepts. Well, how long ago did he stop?????
    He has been accepting Lobbyist MONEY since he was a State Senator in IL. He was receiving lobby money even in the last 12 months!

    He all of a sudden gets a VISION & starts returning Lobby money in the last 12 months when he decides to be President. You call that Credible?

    PLEASE!

  • This is not even about Hillary Clinton.

    This is about Barack Obama.

    He decides to make this a centerpiece of his campaign.

    Just like in business, Obama deliberately decided that this Issue would be his UNIQUE SELLING PROPOSITION(USP)

    And look now, it turns out that there is NO USP.

    He has the same product as the rest. He has been using lies to try & get ahead.

    Lets get one thing straight. News like this will certainly not give Obama the boost he needs to upset Hillary Clinton.

    This is not how you cut down a 20%+ lead !

  • Com'on!

    Its not like he slept with Lobbyist 5 years ago, 10 years, 20 years!

    Obama was & has been sleeping with lobbyist since he was a rookie up until he raised a very impressive number this year! 2007! Not 1997!

    See, no one should fault him if he accepts lobbyist money because he is a politician.

    But when you LECTURE, PROMOTE, EMPHASIZE, SCOLD, HIGHLIGHT that this issue is what makes you DIFFERENT from a Hillary Clinton. That you are a New, Bold, Clean, Ethical " Lobbyist are Not Welcome" sign in your forehead- then Barack Obama is a hypocrite!

    Let's face it, he would not be where he is today without support from corporate lobbyist. His rise was funded by the same lobbyist that he now pretends to dislike.

    The biggest hypocrisy is his larger Percentage of lobbyist contributions in his warchest compared to the percentage of Hillary Clintons.

    Obama is just a fresh face. But everything else points to a slick politician.

    You may speak better than Al Sharpton & Jesse Jackson but you play the same game.

  • comment on a post Ethical Endorsements over 6 years ago

    This once again proves that these three leaders are pretty the same. They are still POLITICIANS!

    Obama claims to be an outsider but he plays the game behind the scenes.

    Edwards accuses Hillary of sleeping with Corporations & Fortune Magazine, but it turns out he also had a date with them 6 years ago when he was still a Senator.

    This is why I laugh when "idealists" proclaim that.... My candidate is different & will CHANGE the way Washington works.

    " my candidate is different from all the others", my candidate will change politics in america".

    Yeah right! the only thing that changes in Washington are the personalities & the party in power. But they are still & will always be "Politicians First".

  • People seem to be forgetting that this is a MUST win for Edwards & Obama.

    A win for either one keeps their campaign going.

    A Win for Clinton in Iowa & this thing is over!

  • Oh I agree. I think Powell would have beaten any Democrat. Without a doubt, Powell would have won the Presidency.

    As you said, he would get a big enough crossover support from Blacks Democrats  but would also get large enough White Republicans to support him. That's w winning formula.

    People here who attack this diary as racist is either in denial or does not want to discuss this uncomfortable topic.

    Race has & will always play a part in american politics. At least in our lifetime.

  • And I think the position of Senator or Governor is still easier to penetrate & break barriers than as "President" of the United States.

    What bothered me about TN is the number of white voters who voted for Brendesen & the rest of the Statewide Democratic ticket but crossed over when it came to Harold Ford.

    One thing is certain. If Rudy is the GOP nominee, there is no way whatsoever that Obama can beat Guiliani in New York & New Jersey.

    And without either NY or even NJ, it becomes very difficult to win the white house.

  • Absolutely! As Hotline has pointed out in the past, Hillary does need strong support from Male voters. In fact, Hotline points out that Democratic Presidential candidates don't do well with White Males in the general anyway.

    But with a strong showing from Women voters,she has a much better chance of winning with Women voters as her base compared to any ethnic group. You can't even compare the two.

  • Ramo, the views & concerns in this diary are shared by many, in fact a lot of Democrats. That's an open secret.

    Even many Black voters have that concern as well.

    Of course, rarely do you bring that up in public especially if Obama turns out to be our nominee.

    But what areyouready stated is reality.

    All these polls showing Obama close against the GOP means very little.

    Time & time again, enough white voters lie about their preferences when pitting a white vs. a black. One election day, the Black candidate generally does worst than even the polling for that day.

    Even Harold Ford saw that in 2006. ALL WHITE Democrats won by a Landslide in TN. All but Ford.
    And Ford was clearly the more superior candidate & had the better campaign. Even was better looking than his rival And he was against a poor GOP candidate. Inspite of that, even the popular White Democratic Governor could not carry him.

    We had the biggest landslide victory in 14 years by any party, but it was not even enough.

    And the actual margin of defeat was larger than expected. ( he was even tied in polls leading up to the day)

  • comment on a post Analysis: Obama is unelectable in general election over 6 years ago

    I'm sure we will see attacks & exposures against Bill very soon.

    For Hillary's sake, I hope Bill has been a good boy these past 7 years that his been out of office.

  • comment on a post Analysis: Obama is unelectable in general election over 6 years ago

    Its reality. Fair or unfair. Many here can deny it all they want. They can talk of " not letting fear stop us". They can talk about trying to break barriers.

    But the current reality cannot be changed overnight.  At least not in 2008. Maybe not even 2012.

    Many of us who are honest don't even need a poll or a survey to know that.

    Regardless of how much "positive thinking" & "optimism" you throw into this,

    Barack Obama as a black man will not & cannot win in the general election for 2008.

    All these polls right now are meaningless.

    But once america is faced with Obama vs. a Thompson, Obama vs. Romney, even a Guiliani vs. Obama,
    Unfortunately, there are still a large enough group of White voters today who are bias &
    will have a hard time voting for a Black man for President.

    And in an expected close race like this, Obama will need a lot of white votes to carry him over the top.

    A solid all out Black vote will not carry him over the top.

    Can he win the Democratic nomination even if he is African-American? Absolutely! ( But again, because of bias of the more conservative wing of White Democratic voters especially in the Rural South, Southwest, & parts of the midwest-it won't be easy)

    But the biggest problem is NOT with Democratic primary voters. It will be the the indies & the potential crossover White Republicans.

    Let's face it, even Hillary will face bias among White Male voters come the general. Even Rudy Guiliani as an Catholic Italian-American will also face some bias from segments of society.

    But at the end of the day, the biggest bias is still against an African-American.

    Its not a coincidence that we've only had TWO Black Governors in our nation's history. There'a a reason that we so few Black Senators in our history. ( Two of them had to come from Democratic, heavy black Illinois)

    The barriers in Statewide office for Blacks is one simple but clear indication of that.

    White Female Governors & White Female Senators have had a much better, much higher acceptance rate than blacks.

    Its wrong, Its sad, but that's reality.

    Just like it took hundreds of years to change people when it came to slavery & equality, it will take more years( hopefully not too long) for enough White Americans who elect a Black person.

    Democrats, especially Progressive/Liberal White Democrats are a poor gauge of bias & acceptance in america. 99% of Democrats in the netroots alone have no problem with Obama's being black.

    But always remember, many americans are not as accepting yet. The entire GOP alone is one perfect example of that.

Diaries

Advertise Blogads