Friday, November 30, 2007

John Edwards Interview

An article found on the John Edwards blog worth reading.

I saw John Edwards last night on a talk show.
I think it was called Meet the Candidates. He was interviewed one-on-one (as are the other candidates - I just happened to catch him).
I really liked what I heard from him. He answered each question directly without any dancing around the issues, stammering, or vague politician-style answers.
He's the only candidate I've seen so far that has any real concept of the world WE live in. The rest are SO out of touch - must have been born into wealth, and don't have a clue what is going on, except in their own privileged experience and surroundings. I found myself several times finishing his sentence with him.
I remember Kucinich asking, What would it be like to have a president that's right the first time?
I want to find out what it would be like to have a president that is fighting for me!

Wednesday, November 28, 2007

The Expectation Game

If the Iowa Caucus were held four month ago your mainstream media would of expected Senator Edwards to win because their polls told them at that time he would. The theory is if you win in Iowa it would create a slingshot effect to victories in New Hampshire, Nevada, and beyond propelling the victorious candidate to the nomination.
The expectation game the media plays is often as important as an actual victory in Iowa. For Example in 1984 Gary Hart finished a very distant second to Walter Mondale, receiving only 15% of the vote but Hart did better than the media expected. The next thing you know Gary Hart came within an eyelash of taking the Democratic Nomination away from Mondale, and the insiders. Another example was the unexpected victory of Kerry's and a very strong second place showing of Senator Edwards. We all know what happened then.
Since Hillary has been the undisputed front runner according to the all the polls showing strength in Iowa running first until recently, one poll showing Obama ahead which means little the numbers are still within the margin of error. The expectation game according to the media is, it's going to be either a Hillary or Obama victory in Iowa. I would argue if Hillary or Obama would lose in Iowa or finish a distant second they are in big trouble. It all goes back to the expectation game. All we have been hearing is Hillary or Obama, Senator Edwards is seldom mention. With all the money spent and press coverage that Hillary and Obama have been given the pressure is on both of them to win. As I stated earlier four months ago the expectation was that Edwards would win but not anymore. I am almost sure Edwards is going to win. His poll numbers are good enough for him to win but all he needs to do is to have a strong showing finishing a strong second to Hillary. Edwards would become the anti-Hillary candidate those results would be unexpected by the media because to them it seems that Edwards sometime does not exist. It would certainly be a sweet victory and beyond for Edwards.

Monday, November 26, 2007

To the Voters of Iowa and Beyond

Shortly after the Democratic voters of Iowa would have gathered in churches, school buildings, government building, and senior citizens center to caucus to make their decision who they think the next Democratic Nominee for president should be. President Bush will be addressing the United States Congress and the nation in the traditional "State of Union Address". Let us examine the State of the Union since president Bush has taken office


First of all he did not get off to a very good start, The Republican controlled Supreme Court had stolen the 2000 election. The newly appointed President Bush then had the audacity to say that " He had a mandate from the American people to govern", ignoring that Al Gore had received over a half a million more votes than he did. How in a world could he say he had a mandate? Let us look at what has happened in the last seven years Since the Republican and Bush pull that shameful take over? We have had a major terrorist attack on 9/11 where nearly 3000 people had lost their lives, and the mastermind behind the evil act Osama Bin Laden is still at large. The world just for a brief time rallied around the United States, giving Bush an excellent opportunity to achieve greatness in solving many of the world's problems and bringing the perpetrators of 9/11 to justice. No, instead he selected to pull a so called "bate and switch" on the American people in attacking Iraq. We were told that Iraq had massive amounts of weapons of mass destruction, and they were attempting to develop a nuclear bomb. We were told that Iraq was a direct threat to the United States. There was also an implication that just maybe Saddam Hussein was involved with the 9/11 attacks. It was all lies. The lies have causes nearly 4000 American soldier's their lives, nearly 70 thousand casualties. Tens of Thousands of Iraqis have lost their lives. Billions upon billions of dollar spent on this ill-conceived war. Billions of dollars are missing and cannot be accounted for. There have been bribes and no bid contracts given to Bush and Cheney's corporate friends. In the battlefield front our soldier's have been deprived of the proper equipment, body armor, proper food, and water. Once again Bush has the audacity to say, he is a friend of the American Soldier. To often when the wounded warriors come home their medical needs are not taken care of. They fall into the category of an already over crowed group of forgotten American, forgotten by Bush who had said on many occasion. " America will take care of their Veterans" The Soldiers that have fought in this war that Bush had started, Bush now has turned his back on them. The United States was respected in most corners of the world. We were that "Shinning City" that Reagan once said. Now we are despised and not trusted by much of the world. All the credit for all the above destruction should be given to Bush, he has certainly earned it.
On the home front our gas prices are now over three dollars a gallon. Has there been any real effort by this president to find any alternative clean sources of energy. The answer is no. Why should he? It would not be in the best interest of the oil and gas industry, Bush's corporate friends. The oil and gas companies are only showing a profit margin that is unheard of in all of human history. In the energy area Bush would not dare to do something that would be in the best interest of the American people.
When Bush took office less than 40 million of Americans did not have health insurance, now over seven million have been added to that number. Has Bush done anything to address the health care crises in our nation? Once again the answer is no. Why should he do anything to address the needs of 47 million Americans, when it is not in the best interest of the insurance and drug companies?
I have not even touched on a failing education system the Global-warming problem that Bush chooses to ignore. I could go on for hours.
I am asking the voters of Iowa to support John Edwards for President because he has the brains and most importantly the courage to stand up to those corporations that control this country. Hillary Clinton who is a very capable person but would do little to address the real problems in Washington the corporate lobbyists, she would be obligated to them. She is the Status Quo Candidate. Obama is also very capable but he is to nice and to green to deal with the back stabbing element of our government. The American people are at war here at home against the corporations that want to keep us down for the sake of their bottom line. We need a fighter for a president like John Edwards. Edwards has been fighting his entire adult life against many of those corporations, in the courtrooms or now as he is campaigning for Presidents. The voters in Iowa and beyond need to ask themselves a question that Robert F. Kennedy asked many years ago. "What kind of a nation we are and what direction we want to move in."


Friday, November 23, 2007

Edwards might be Gaining in the polls

The Zogby Poll is consistent with other polls that have been recently released, showing Hillary Clinton losing around 10 percent of her support among Democratic voters. The question then, who is gaining at her expense. In Zogby's Poll, Obama has gained 2 percent but Edwards has gained 4 percent. One possible conclusion is whatever support Hillary is losing 40 percent of her lost has gone to Edwards as compared to Obama's 20 percent. The remaining 40 percent is divided among the rest of the Democratic Field or went to the undecided category. This 4 point gain might be the result of Edwards going after Hillary in such an aggressive manner. If that is case, the main question is, does Edwards have enough time?

Tuesday, November 20, 2007

Polls don't mean much In Iowa

History will show one thing about the Iowa Caucus. It can be very unpredictable. Polls really don't mean much especially when you look at the history of the caucus in that state.
As far back as 1980 President Carter and Senator Edward Kennedy were running dead even in most polls at the end of the night Carter won 2 to 1. Just Four years ago it was a fight between Howard Dean and Dick Gephardt. Once again the polls were wrong.
The difficult part for the pollsters is figuring out who is going to participate in the caucus on any given night. This has always been the main challenge in predicting Iowa. A candidate could be ahead in the polls but if his or her support is soft they could be in trouble come caucus night, especially on a cold snowy night in January. A well organized smaller group of caucus goer who are dedicated to their candidate could very easily be victorious. It is my understanding that Edwards support is very strong among his followers also he has one of the best organization in the state. As long as he stays close he will have an excellent chance to be victorious in Iowa.

Sunday, November 18, 2007

A map to victory for Edwards

Here is an article I found on the John Edwards Blog it is worth reading.



JRE needs to maintain and display his Southern Charm- rather than petty campaign stunts. This is one of the things that voters from other parts of the country seemed to like about him in '04 -and is a quality which leaves the impression of being optimist & presidential, in the mind of voters....
Even though he didn't win the nomination in '04, an easy argument could be made that he would have won Iowa & the nomination...Absent the talk that circulated of JRE as the VP nominee. (I feel Obama is the one that will fall into the vp trap this year). The campaign is in good position- higher in Iowa/ NH polls than this time in '04.
Now is not the time to .....
pull stunts to gain media attention- that's the easy & ineffective route, & does not make a candidate look Presidential. Voters are intelligent enough to can read the facts of a situation w/out gimmicks to drive the point home. (One can look at SC Governor Mark Sanford's stunt with pigs on the state house steps to see that such sideshows are never well received, at least in the South- even if voters agree with the point being made). Along with an Iowa win...the South is going to be crutial in the primaries.
JRE looks most Presidential when he is in small crowds or in one-on-one interviews.....When we are able to see his level-headed & thoughtful- decision making skills and his knowledge of how to solve problems. Such stability ultimately will win over undecided voters in Iowa (and elsewhere). I think this is one reason Dean ended up losing in Iowa- People like to vote for a candidate that delivers a message of big ideas (maybe even radical change), however without the air of being too radical or angry.
In Kennedy's campaign speeches, (that I've seen on TV as I was born in `79) he does a very good job of mastering both elements in unison (passionate about big ideas/ big change Stability/ Presidential composure).
The large majority of undecided voters are JRE's for the taking if he is able to leave a mental picture with voters that he is both Presidential & an agent of Change/ big ideas: Seeing as how...1)Obama will get the "VP" & "not enough experience" talk; and 2)Hillary is so polarizing, a trait that rarely picks up undecided voters. Also, there is a delicate balance needed to win over the voters who loosely support her but may not think she is electable.
The good news is- voters have a short memory regarding campaigns and candidates- which provides a clean slate, over the next month or so, for the campaign to refocus on JRE himself and allow voter every opportunity to get to know him... his ideas, his sincerity, his character, and the fact that he is most elect able around the country in the General election - Primary Voters will elect the candidate 1)they feel good about and 2)that can win in November... But voters want to feel in control, human nature- have to figure it out on their own & not be force fed through side stunts, etc. (Morning news shows, ESPN, talk shows, etc, work great for JRE and Elizabeth). Also issues such as Edwards's Rural Economic Revitalization play well in leaving a grounded image in the minds of voters.
The strength and superiority of Edwards' Character, Message, Sincerity, and Personality will win out in the end on their own merits.


add to del.icio.us
add to digg
add to yahoo
related at technorati Tags: , , , (all tags) [Flag this Post]

John Edwards is the most Electable of all Democrats

The latest poll shows John Edwards would be best choice for Democrats. Check this link.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/prweb/20071115/bs_prweb/prweb563021_1

Saturday, November 17, 2007

The democratic Debate

Here is and interesting chart that Senator Dodd had put together about the debate in Vegas. here is the link.

http://chrisdodd.com/talkclock/lv
There's still a year's worth of presidential politics in front of us - followed by about 3 more months of political analysis. Can't wait till it's over. More than that - can't wait till we're done with Bush & Cheney. January 20, 2009 - Oh happy day!
I watched the Democrats debate last night, if you can call it that. The moderator, Wolf Blitzer, didn't seem to have much control. The candidates ignored the time limits placed on them. The Hillary supporters booed anyone that criticized her, as if it were on cue. There really wasn't much substance to the questions or answers.
It seems as if the media is determined to shove Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama down our throats. The questions given to Hillary seemed geared toward helping her clean up her image that was damaged in the last debate and clarify statements she had made to the media and in speeches. When asked if she was "playing the gender card" she said "No," then went on to tell how proud she is to have a chance at the presidency as a woman, and about an elderly lady that said women couldn't vote when she was young and she hoped to live long enough to see a woman president. If that's not playing the gender card, what is?
While Hillary's answers were pretty vague, Obama was a real disappointment. He got a decent amount of air time, but for the life of me, I can't tell you anything that he said. Richardson was unimpressive all around. Kucinich, unfortunately, comes across as a nerd on television, and we all know you can't be president if you don't look good on t.v. Biden and Dodd have the most experience with foreign relations, but the press isn't giving them any attention. (It's all about Hillary and Obama.) Edwards was well-prepared, seemed well-informed, clearly expressed his opinions on the issues, and had the strongest presence.
Biden, Dodd, and Edwards are the best qualified to be president, but the press finds it more important that a woman and a black man are running. Is this novelty really more important than covering all the candidates and letting the PEOPLE decide?


Friday, November 16, 2007

You must be Joking Hillary

The Hillary Clinton campaign must be joking accusing John Edwards of acting like Bush. How in hell can they make such an allegation. Hillary acts more like Bush than any of the other Candidates campaigning for the Democratic nomination. She never answers a question with a yes or no response, unless it is a simple question that does not offend her targeted voters. Hillary receives huge amounts of money from insurance and drug industry. She supports the Iraq war by stating she wants to keep combat troops there. Then states that she opposes the war. Hillary has never admitted it was a mistake to go to war and to vote for it.

In Summary: Hillary receiving huge amount of money from the lobbyist that represent the Insurance and drug industry. She talks out of both side of her mouth and she wants to keep combat troops in Iraq. She never admitts when she makes a mistake.

The above summary fits not only Hillary but Bush as well. When Hillary is accusing Edwards of acting like Bush she better look in the mirror.

Thursday, November 15, 2007

The Time to Act is NOW

My father was a World War II disabled veteran. It was by his example that I became a strong Democrat. It was his sacrifice, along with millions of others that fought, and some paying the ultimate sacrifice, that helps preserve our freedoms in this country. We owe it to all of them to do what ever we can to see to it that John Edwards is elected as our next president.

When I was growing up in the center part of this great nation, I was reminded daily what war can do by watching my father struggle with his disability from the injuries he received. In a small way, I know how war can affect a family. My father never complained about his disability.

My father was a strong Democrat. He always told me that the Democratic Party was the party of the people. I never knew what he really meant until very late in his life. In the 1980s my father was dying of cancer in a veteran’s hospital. One weekend as I approached my father’s room, walking down the hallway I noticed something was very strange; men were crying out in pain room after room after room. Then it hit me. I did not see any medical personnel, no nurses, doctors, or even nurses’ aids. It took me about ten minutes - I finally found a nurse, and I asked her, “Where is everyone?” At first she was reluctant to answer me and finally told me that they were short-staffed because of the Reagan budget cuts. There were only two nurses for every floor and one doctor, she told me. I did a little research, and it was true. There were some cuts in funding, and the money was diverted to some weapon system.

The more I thought about these neglected men and women dying in the Veteran's Hospital, the angrier I became. Here we have these brave men and women who were asked to fight, and they did, and won. Now in the twilight of their lives the very government that they fought for has turned their back on them. I promised myself that I would never vote for another Republican ever again. My father died over 20 years ago. I know the situation for the veterans is even worse today.

Our government is corrupted. We need a president that is willing to stand up for those who have stood up for our nation. We need a president that is willing to stand up against powerful lobbyist and for what is right for the American people.

This is a call to action. We need to do everything we can, knock on doors, call friends, relatives, and contribute money to help John Edwards get elected. We need a president that will stand up for what is right and to fight the greed in our government. John Edwards has the courage and the strength to fight. I will fight to restore the country that my father fought for. I will fight with John Edwards. The question is - will you?