I like Edwards.
I've kinda held back on making posts about my Edwards-love here on LR, out of deference to luna_k's Hillary-love. But when I mentioned it, she told me there was no need, and she'd love to see some Edwards-squee too. So here 'tis. [x-posted to my journal]
Edwards on corporate greed vs. regular Americans:
[direct link]
It seems to be a supporter-made vid rather than an official ad, but it sums up pretty well why he's my candidate. He's talking about stuff that really matters: the huge and widening gap between the very richest and everybody else, and how beholden politics is to huge multinational corporations.
And by talking about these issues, and putting out progressive policy proposals, he's influencing the other Democratic candidates in a positive way:
On the Democratic side, John Edwards, although never the front-runner, has been driving his party’s policy agenda. He’s done it again on economic stimulus: last month, before the economic consensus turned as negative as it now has, he proposed a stimulus package including aid to unemployed workers, aid to cash-strapped state and local governments, public investment in alternative energy, and other measures. [Paul Krugman, New York Times 1/14/08; emphasis mine]
(Hillary fans, Krugman says good things about her in that column, too; he criticizes Obama for his alarmingly familiar "cut taxes" answer.)
The corporate-owned media likes to portray Edwards as so much of a long-shot that he couldn't possibly win; CNN removed him from their latest poll, even though he's done far better so far than Giuliani, who they've kept in. Democrats are concerned about electability, and thanks to his dismissal by the media, they don't think Edwards is electable. Thing is, they're flat wrong; Edwards beats every possible Republican candidate by more than Hillary or Obama, and he clobbers either Romney or Huckabee by more than 20 points:
Despite the media saying she's the most electable, Hillary seems to be the least electable of the three; in that CNN poll, she's projected to lose to McCain. (In other polls she beats him, but less often than Obama, and both of them less often than Edwards.) I'm not saying that's a good reason not to support her; the general election would probably throw all those numbers into flux. But for those who do consider electability as a factor, it's a fabricated and false reason not to support Edwards. (And for those people, actually a plausible reason to reconsider voting for Hillary.) ETA: more general election match-up polls, with similar results: McCain is the strongest Republican; Edwards the strongest Democrat. Clinton looks shockingly vulnerable.
The more they write him off, or write about him only to speculate where his supporters "will go", the more I'm resolved to vote for him. And despite all the attempts to marginalize Edwards, he's far from out of it; in a recent Nevada pre-caucus poll, Obama gets 32%, Clinton 30%, and Edwards 28%.
If you like what you see from Edwards -- or even if you just think shutting a viable candidate out of the discussion for being too populist is a dirty rotten trick -- you might consider making a donation to Edwards this Friday. And talk him up. 25% of voters say they still haven't heard enough about him to decide if they like him or not. (If you can't stand the guy, that's your prerogative... but do me a favor and suppress the urge to tell me just now? kthx.)
www.JohnEdwards.com
P.S. -- If you're not sure, you can find out when your state votes here.
Edwards on corporate greed vs. regular Americans:
Click to view[direct link]
It seems to be a supporter-made vid rather than an official ad, but it sums up pretty well why he's my candidate. He's talking about stuff that really matters: the huge and widening gap between the very richest and everybody else, and how beholden politics is to huge multinational corporations.
And by talking about these issues, and putting out progressive policy proposals, he's influencing the other Democratic candidates in a positive way:
On the Democratic side, John Edwards, although never the front-runner, has been driving his party’s policy agenda. He’s done it again on economic stimulus: last month, before the economic consensus turned as negative as it now has, he proposed a stimulus package including aid to unemployed workers, aid to cash-strapped state and local governments, public investment in alternative energy, and other measures. [Paul Krugman, New York Times 1/14/08; emphasis mine]
(Hillary fans, Krugman says good things about her in that column, too; he criticizes Obama for his alarmingly familiar "cut taxes" answer.)
The corporate-owned media likes to portray Edwards as so much of a long-shot that he couldn't possibly win; CNN removed him from their latest poll, even though he's done far better so far than Giuliani, who they've kept in. Democrats are concerned about electability, and thanks to his dismissal by the media, they don't think Edwards is electable. Thing is, they're flat wrong; Edwards beats every possible Republican candidate by more than Hillary or Obama, and he clobbers either Romney or Huckabee by more than 20 points:
Despite the media saying she's the most electable, Hillary seems to be the least electable of the three; in that CNN poll, she's projected to lose to McCain. (In other polls she beats him, but less often than Obama, and both of them less often than Edwards.) I'm not saying that's a good reason not to support her; the general election would probably throw all those numbers into flux. But for those who do consider electability as a factor, it's a fabricated and false reason not to support Edwards. (And for those people, actually a plausible reason to reconsider voting for Hillary.) ETA: more general election match-up polls, with similar results: McCain is the strongest Republican; Edwards the strongest Democrat. Clinton looks shockingly vulnerable.
The more they write him off, or write about him only to speculate where his supporters "will go", the more I'm resolved to vote for him. And despite all the attempts to marginalize Edwards, he's far from out of it; in a recent Nevada pre-caucus poll, Obama gets 32%, Clinton 30%, and Edwards 28%.
If you like what you see from Edwards -- or even if you just think shutting a viable candidate out of the discussion for being too populist is a dirty rotten trick -- you might consider making a donation to Edwards this Friday. And talk him up. 25% of voters say they still haven't heard enough about him to decide if they like him or not. (If you can't stand the guy, that's your prerogative... but do me a favor and suppress the urge to tell me just now? kthx.)
www.JohnEdwards.com
P.S. -- If you're not sure, you can find out when your state votes here.