John Edwards should head the DNC

Terry's got to go.

after trotting him out to do that "We're going to fight until every vote is counted" speech last night, and then conceding this morning.

from. Edwards didn't even carry his own state and we owe him something?

the great thing about Edwards. He sucked! the Media sold us underwhelming goods with their "can talk an owl out of trees". The man was of no assistance in this election whatsoever. I am tired of making the same mistake over and over again. We do not need John Edwards for a damn thing!

Came off as a lightweight - was almost laughable when he talked about terrorism. Added nothing to the ticket. Didn't even help in N.C.

But gee, did you hear his "two Americas" speech?

I knew my primary instincts were right.

A fucking Clarkie has the guts to criticize Edwards? Wasn't it Clark who talked about what a great job Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld were doing? Take your self-righteousness and shove it. Clark was a one-trick pony playing with mustangs.

EDWARDS was the best thing to happen to our party. The fact that the milquetoast KE04 advisers underutilized him wasn't his fault. He should've been at the top of ticket as many Repubs I have talked to have admitted as much.

Edwards was the ONLY major candidate to talk about poverty during the primaries. He was the ONLY one who gave a shit about the poor and what they go through. All the others were too busy sucking up to the "middle class." Edwards was the ONLY one who had the guts and courage to talk about the class division in this country -- NOT Clark, NOT Dean, NOT Kerry, NOT Gephardt. And when he tried to talk about class division in the general election, Shrum and the other "advisers" told him to put a sock in it.

And Edwards was NOT chosen to "carry NC." He was chosen for broader appeal to the lower class. You know, they call them "poor people?" Ever heard of them? Or still too worried about the middle class tax cut. Making $70k a year and still can't pay the bills. Boo-fucking-hoo. Try making $17k a year or $7k a year.

I'm sorry, but I'm mad. :grr::grr::grr: Steaming mad. I'm not going to stand by and watch the candidate who I've stood with since Jan. 2003 be defamed by people who haven't a clue what the fuck they're talking about. KERRY was at the top of the ticket, MCAULLIFE was head of the DNC, SHRUM, LOCKHART, WHOULEY and CAHILL led the campaign. If you wanna lay blame, lay it at their feet. But I'm not laying it at their feet. I'm laying it at the feet of Diebold (Wally O'Dell), Blackwell (Katherine Harris of 04) and the 51% of bible-thumping Americans who want a fucking theocracy.

Edwards will be on the 08 ticket wither as Pres or VP and I will be the first in line to cast my vote for him.

you would have heard Clark's tax policy which was more liberal and would have helped the poor more than Edwards. Edwards is a has been, oh wait, no that would imply he was something to begin with. Edwards is a never was.

what Edwards stood for.

All you can hope for is more angry people like you, right? And, hey, psst. Clue here: Bush one because he polarized the electorate he created people like you. And for every 53 people like you, there were 58 people who looked at you and voted Republican.

I'm actually quite nice and cordial. I get along with people easily and I'm well liked. The reason you think I'm angry is because all you do is read Edwards' posts. Maybe if you took your head out of his ass and looked at the rest of DU, you might see that. ;-) Face it, your guy is now a loser because he lost on the national scene. Having him as head of the DNC would make us look like huge losers. Something we don't need at all right now. You would at least agree with me on that one I would think. You just think Edwards would be a great DNC chairman because he won't have a mic for at least two years without it. I don't see how pointing a loser into the DNC chairman would help us.

...takes me back to primary season...

Well, you can't deny that you're pretty angry when you post about Edwards.

The truth is, neither Clark nor Edwards are going to be DNC Chair, so I'm not holding my breath...

I don't think Clark should be DNC chairman. He isn't a politician, he hasn't had an elected Democratic position.

The Clarkies are just jealous of Edwards. It has been that way since the primaries. It still is.

Clark was nothing more than a pathetic stooge, an opportunist with his head up Clinton's ass.

There's a reason why Kucinich (most progressive candidate of all) stood with EDWARDS during the Iowa caucus. Because EDWARDS was the only major candidate with a working plan for the poor. He was the ONLY major candidate who talked about poverty. He was the only major candidate who realized what it was like to actually have to struggle in life.

Dennis Kucinich agrees with me. That's why he backed Edwards in Iowa and is close friends with him. Kucinich was so poor growing up that his family was homeless and living in cars. They didn't have a dime in their pockets. And he stood with Edwards in Iowa. He DIDN'T stand with Clark, he stood with EDWARDS. Maybe because Edwards was the only candidate besides Gephardt to support more protectionist trade policies to help American blue collar workers. And because Edwards had a realistic tax plan for the poor. And because Edwards had a plan to allow poor kids to go to college. And because Edwards supported increased social programs to help the poor.

Don't fucking lecture me on what it's like to be poor. Don't lecture Dennis Kucinich and don't lecture John Edwards.

Clark was the candidate of the opportunistic.

Dennis Kucinich and John Edwards were the candidates of the idealistic.

And we're NOT going to let that dream die.

Wes Clark fought harder for the Kerry/Edwards ticket than Edwards did. And Clark didn't even have anything to gain from it. He did it purely out of love for country and the urgent need to get Bush out of office. Edwards was never in it for anything more than his own naked ambition. If he hadn't been chosen as running mate, he wouldn't have done jack shit for Kerry.

Hopefully the one good thing to come out of this election is that it will put a permanent end to the political ambitions of Edwards. He's damaged goods now.

He was never anything more than an empty, vacuous Ken doll. The ultimate opportunist. And if you don't think Clark knew what it was to struggle to get by economically during his childhood, then you simply know nothing about him. He just didn't whinge on about it constantly the way Edwards did.

You say you don't like standing by and watching your candidate get defamed by people who havn't a clue what the fuck they're talking about? Well guess what, I don't like it either. Join the fuckin' club.

Because voters saw him for what he was - an opportunist. Overwhelmingly they gave their approval to John Kerry and John Edwards. In some states Edwards drew a third of his support from Republicans and Independents.

And John Edwards worked his ass off during the general election for the Kerry-Edwards ticket. Visited every single battleground state, did two, three or more rallies every day. How dare you criticize him! Your anger is misdirected and truly pathetic.

Clark is nothing more than a stooge for AIPAC and the neo-cons. Right now his consulting firm is making big $$$ off the occupation of Iraq. Sorry, but these are the facts. If you're going to launch baseless attacks on John Edwards (who sacrificed so much and has done so much for this country and the Dem Party) then I'm going to fire right back at Clark.

Oh, and how can we forget these gems?

"If you look around the world, there's a lot of work to be done. And I'm very glad we've got the great team in office, men like Colin Powell, Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, Paul O'Neill - people I know very well - our president George W. Bush."

- Wesley Clark

"I tremendously admire, and I think we all should, the great work done by our commander-in-chief, our president, George Bush."

- Wesley Clark

to win a state that was neither his home state nor birth state. That is something that Edwards didn't even manage. As for opportunist, Edwards made it very clear that his assistance to Kerry was contingent on his being chosen as running mate. Clark campaigned tirelessly for the ticket when there was no possibility of personal gain for himself from it.

And you can find plenty of quotes of Democrats saying nice things about the Bush administration, especially early on. You have heard about something called the "honeymoon period" havn't you. I'm sure if you worked on it, you could dig up some choice quotes from Edwards as well.

At least Clark was actively testifying to congress against invading Iraq while your boy was cheering the war on. Even after it became clear there were no WMD, Edwards still said the invasion was the right thing to do. Somehow that has a little more substance to me than a few nice words spoken by Clark about Bush, taken out of context.

I am not angry, except for the fact that picking Edwards as running mate may very well have been what cost us the election. But when someone gratuitously insults Clark in the name of defending Edwards, I'm going to do the same damn thing.

Edwards had such a strong second-place finish that Clark's win was almost statistically insignificant. I watched the Oklahoma primary returns in realtime. Edwards and Clark battled back and forth for first place all night. Edwards consistently outperformed Clark in the other primaries.

As far as the Iraq War, Clark was a cheerleader of the invasion from the very beginning. Much more so than Edwards, who merely cast a nuanced vote to give authority. Clark is a hawk, a neocon and a warmonger who was behind the Iraq invasion from day one. I guess I can't blame him, since he's involved with consulting firms that are making big $$$ off the conflicts in the Middle East.

And I never attacked Clark until (as usual) the Clarkies here started ganging up on Edwards.

Edwards didn't. Clark OPPOSED the unilateral invasion of Iraq and opposed war except as a last resort if all other options failed. He was the only candidate who even talked about PNAC. The neocons HATED him.

Edwards was totally in favor of the war. He even said it was the right thing to do even though there were no WMD. I don't know how you can be much more of a warmonger than that.

Edwards was the hawk neocon warmonger. A cowardly chicken hawk who's never seen combat himself, yet happily sends other people's sons and daughters off to die and get maimed in an unnecessary war.

Oh, and apparently some of his own investments made some pretty good money off of the invasion.

I thank God that Edwards will now never get to be a Democratic nominee because I believe that I would have had to vote Green rather than vote for a neocon lite like him.

I never said a thing about Edwards until your own totally gratuitous attacks on Clark. I kept my opinions to myself during the elections but it's very liberating to say what I really think now, and I appreciate your giving me an opening. You have provided me with a real opportunity for catharsis and I thank you.:)

I never attack someone else's candidate unless they attack mine first.

In the end, he and Kerry picked up their pink tutus and rolled over for Bush like they did on Iraq. He should just go back to NC and put out his shingle.

No, the only guy -- the ONLY guy -- that should resurrect the Democrats is Howard Dean. He knows what needs to be done from the grass roots, he won't be beholden to either corporate interests or the DLC (which should also have the s**t kicked out of them), and he's a REAL Democrat.

And if they don't hire him, his 2008 campaign should start NOW.

He was suppose to help in the South. Um, did he?

He does have a future in the party, but I'm not sure if head of the DNC is the place.

How was Edwards going to deliver the south when the farthest south he went was to NC for a couple rallies?

He and Kerry working together pulled things close or won every state the team decided to compete in. The campaign was stellar the last 6 weeks. How can you blame Edwards?

I'm not sure where he helped. I ask this not in a mean way but in a questionable way.

Edwards class background and concern with race and poverty and middle class opportunity offset some of the weaknesses in Kerry's candidacy.

If the media won't tell you the truth about Edwards or follow him around the country when he's in small towns, there's not much more you can do. When they did cover him, people liked him and he rounded out the ticket extremely well.

Edwards because his populist message would have worked well in the South.

He did come to Raleigh last week for a Rally and about 7500 folks went to see him (myself and other DU'ers). But, alas...it didn't seem to work, but then our NC vote was screwed up and no one wants to hear it.
:-(

And he didn't help one bit in the South. I want someone with more fight heading the DNC. I agree that Terry has got to go, though.

...and sue the living fuck out of DIEBOLD. And then help the IRS remove the tax exempt status of every church in America which openly campaigned for that fucking fascist piece of shit.

someone who worked for a victor, or someone likely to make a victor.

Joe Lockhart.

I'd much rather have John Edwards be the face of the Democratic Party than Howard Dean.

His wife was a better campainger than him...

Edwards was suppose to be the unrelenting, angry attack dog and not Mr. Sunny. He screwed up the VP big time, he was never a good fit in the first place.

Dean would be perfect to be DNC head. He works better firing the base than as the face of the presidential candidate. Terry MacAuliffe and the DLC need to be scraped off the walls.

I'd prefer him as the "Progressive Wing" because I've left the mainstream Dem party as of today with Kerry's Consession Speech.

I backed Clark, voted for Edwards and was 100% Kerry in the end, but Dean is the only one with the energy and the commitment to do the job.

Gotta be Howie.

I like John Edwards. He's a real nice guy. But TOO nice to be in a political campaign these days. A little too pretty and nice and has no "teeth" for that political bite. Nice guys finish last. Second place is the first to lose. Don't get me wrong please. I do like the man. He's just too nice. Nice doesn't get it any more.

Wes Clark was (and still is) my guy. Great general, not so great as a politician. Howard Dean, Wes Clark and Kucinich stood up against the Repugs this time around. Just what we needed.

Dammit, we are NOT wrong. Some people keep running on about how to attract southern votes or midwest votes. Regargless of that, we are NOT wrong on the issues. The Repugs are. Maybe if we run a candidate who actually believes in what we do, and is willing to actively promote our ideas instead of hide from them and deny them, we can make some progress against these crooks. No wonder so many people think we don't stand for anything. Hell, I agree with them!

We should be out there convincing people that our way is the best way, instead of pretending we are just like Bush but only smarter. That's bullshit.

I'd rather lose honestly than to lose this way - playing moderate in order to attract people who don't give a fuck about us and never will.

How hard can it be to convince people that liberal is not a dirty word? Yet not one fuckin Dem will say that in public. Not a one. WTF?

the one that lit a fire under kerry's ass.

n/t

Wake up.