It almost seems as though Obama and Edwards supporters need to team up

It seems as though many Obama supporters have Edwards as their #2, and vice-versa. It is my opinion that if one of these two gentleman agreed to be the others VP, that the duo would win the nomination handily. Of course the question is, who gets the top spot? I wouldn't even care at this point, I like them both. Just throwing my opinion out there...

I would support Obama/Edwards or Edwards/Obama.

but what electoral help did Edwards bring to the ticket last time?

blue. I would believe that Kerry was by far the main consideration for voters.

otherwise he would have helped, I believe. He was used very poorly. His strength is his stump speaking, and he was sent to greet people at mall openings. I blame Mary Beth Cahill.

Polls have consistently shown Hillary is the top second choice of Obama and Edwards Supporters. In head to head matchups with either her lead only increases...

I am not at all sold on the polls of inevitability.

Not even close!

Putting them both on the ticket is Dems begging for an ass whoopin'! Neither have national security experience, and considering the fact that war is all we discuss these days, I'm not sure how that makes a winning ticket beyond the fact that they both are good looking guys!

When someone here asked for supporters to state 5 things that current candidates had accomplished in their lives, the answers helped me understand why this country gets its just deserts!

Here's the thread!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3272026

Bush: None

Clinton: Got elected in an open governors race twice. Rhodes Scholar.

Bush: Enjoyed the privileges of class.

Reagan: Bad actor. Governor.

Carter: Did something with nuclear subs while in the Navy. Inherited his father's peanut farm and kept it going. Elected governor.

Ford: played on a national champion UofM footbal team and cultivated a deep and abiding love affair with the peole of the greater Grand Rapids region.

Nixon: Worked for J.K. Galbraith in the office of price control during WW2.

LBJ: married well

JFK: Loved many women and displayed tremendous bravery when his PT boat was sunk.

Eisenhower: Good general.

Truman: hmmm.

It's hard to come up with 5 for any of these guys, yet, some of them made very good presidents. And I'm not sure if there's any correlation between the number of accomplishments and their performance as president.

But I guess whatever it takes to helps your candidate's case. :shrug:

Which ones have cases that exceed your candidate's?

I would not be able to support Obama in the primaries.

For the people to get behind the philosophy that best suits them, then adjust as people drop out of the race.

Did Obama vote for this Iraq funding, I haven't seen yet.

the candidate can be an effective president, the one that can shape policies that actually help the middle class most effectively.

The middle class have gotten quite enough, thank you very much. At least the top ten percent, which is who "middle class" policies always ends up helping.

Anyway, I think Obama is trying to get on a different path than we've been on for 20 years. God knows I'm sick of it and I don't even care how effective a President he can be. Just so long as we don't go down the path we've been on anymore.

the lines are blurring, anyway, with all the job outsourcing that has happened. I think it is vital to this nations health that families with income of less than 100K are not snuffed out. My household income is considerably lower than this, BTW.

Say they're going to give a middle class tax cut, and casually forgets that you have to owe taxes for the tax cut to benefit you; so it doesn't help the people they say they're going to help at all. Like school vouchers and tax credits. Unless they're refundable and cover 90% of tuition, they're no good at all.

40% of Americans earn less than $11.00 hr, and nobody is looking out for them at all.

I began hoping for Edwards/Obama in 08. I still do.

I put Edwards on top as he's my candidate. I want Obama because I was in Boston for the convention and Obama's speech made my heart race - as did Rev. Al's.

It seemed unlikely that Obama would be considered for a spot on a national ticket just a couple of years into his Senate term, but his speech was so superlative that it became my hope.

Edwards is the guy who's been fanning the flames of vitriol over this funding bill. The man who helped lead the charge into iraq is now trying to exploit a bad situation to gain political points.

First there is the bogus claim from Edwards supporter David Sirota that the House vote was going to be in secret, obviously it was NOT,

then there are the attacks on Obama and Clinton for not coming out against the bill as fast as Edwards did, even though how fast someone comes out with a position is substantively irrelevant, as long as they come out the right way in the end.

Then there is the insinuation they waited until the bill was safely passed in order to then vote against it, despite the fact that they DON'T GAIN A DAMN THING from doing that! What do they gain from the mere fact that the bill passed? Do they look like they "support the troops?" No, they still voted "against the troops."

with Obama's and Clinton's votes, Edwards loses whatever edge he tried to get by sniping about this supplemental from the sidelines.

I don't think Obama gains anything by teaming up with Edwards.

I rank Edwards as a panderer at best however....

even though how fast someone comes out with a position is substantively irrelevant, as long as they come out the right way in the end.

This is hogwash, I am looking for a leader as president and it absolutely does matter to me when someone comes out with their position. If they come out with the right position ahead of the crowd they are a leader if they come out behind they are a follower.
In my next president I want leadership!

Though obama and clinton came down on the right side in the end, the way they handled it speaks of political cowardice. They should have been using their considerable influence at this point to steer this debate instead of waiting for it to be resolved before committing. Anything less shows they have no true dog in this race IMHO other than getting elected. I am sick of people running to run and I think a lot of people out there are sick of it also.

a minimum wage increase was in the bill, surely you don't vote against that so easily?

I don't blame Obama or Clinton for taking time.

Edwards is on the bottom. If Obama chose Edwards as his running mate his standing with me would take a serious hit.

I can't emphasize enough how unhappy I'll be if Edwards wins the primary. I will almost certainly lose almost all interest in politics if that happens. Not a threat. Just being honest.

I don't want to see this guy in national office again. He belongs back in Chapel Hill playing gentleman farmer or lord of the manor in "John's Lounge" on his new estate.

and help Al Gore become our next president.