Edwards agrees with voter: Hillary is not electable

Interesting exchange.
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2007/12/26/politics/fromtheroad/entry3647492.shtml


I think he should be making this point more forcefully. The fact is that the polls show that Hillary is much less competitive nationally against Republicans. And yet most Democratic primary voters think she's the most electable. The electability argument swayed voters in 2004 and I think it could sway them again this time, even if there are some major flaws with it.

this time.

:thumbsup:

Not a weeks gone by these past several months that he hasn't done or said something stupid or naive.

If the full force of the spotlight ever really were to fall on him, one would be hard pressed to imagine what would happen....

and trailing by double digits nationally, perhaps John isn't the one to talk as, apparently, neither is he.

than any Dem.

He couldn't carry his own state last time around. Neither could Gore. We need someone who's at least popular in their home state.

She just carpetbagged her way to NY because there's a large Democratic base there. Those people would vote for a Tasmanian Devil if it had a "D" beside the name. She's never had the practice of fighting an uphill battle to get elected.

It's looking like he won't even when his own state of North Carolina in the primaries, if he even makes it that far.

it's a perfect Tim Russert trap.

say was unelectable?

you would think Hillary is unelectable. Just SHOCKED, I tell you! :eyes:

And Mr. 3% Biden ahead of Hillary in electability? (and then TeamJordan23 woke up from his dream to the realization that, yes, Hillary was in double digits ahead Nationally and Biden wasn't a front runner, therefore effectively ending his tortured, but well-intentioned, Most Electable Front Runner example)

and when she loses the GE, i hope you feel good about yourself. :patriot:

and I trust -- present differences aside -- there will be a brief and glorious (historic?) time when ALL Democrats on DU will be happy (perhaps overjoyed?) to have a Dem back in the White House.

and yes, i would be overjoyed, but she won't do it. she's way too polarizing, and you pretty much have to hope the likely Dem voters that hate her, stay home and don't vote for the R (and yes, i'm including all 3rd party candidates as R's since that's constantly screamed out here - vote for anyone besides a Dem is the same as voting for a R).

she isn't as polarizing as some on DU would have her believe. With over 70% of Democrats supporting her, as polarizing is that?

enjoy it if it happens. :hi:

NT

Shouldn't she be blowing them away?

not a coronation ... for either a Queen OR a King. We have yet to take our first votes. She's still double digits ahead of both Obama and Edwards nationally, so I think she's doing just fine.

Of course the media has not ever presented him as having a chance in the primaries. So we follow the media talking heads to Hillary/Obama/Edwards...not knowing why, exactly, but following nonetheless.

Perhaps selling that with his Southern Accent might make him at least have a chance in his own Home State?

:evilgrin:

Edwards has a very clear view of the issues. His clarity of mind and purpose is a great asset. It sets him apart form the other candidates. Edwards just has to keep being Edwards.

On the ticket that lost to the most unpopular incumbent in American History to win reelection...is commenting on someone else's electablility...

Or is he trying to get us to forget that too... along with his Senate record...

The fact is that he's now more electable than Hillary according to every poll, so why shouldn't he say it?

2004 really says nothing about how Clinton compares to Edwards. The comment Edwards made is tacky though - why not say he thinks he is best and refuse to say HRC is unelectable.

he was near 50 percent approval. Bush 1 was at 33 percent when Clinton beat him, Carter was also below 40%. The country was also at war. I have heard people who thought that it was wrong for Kerry to attack Bush on how he was running the war - because that was wrong - they were senior citizens who immediately compared it to WWII. (Now, the fact was that Bush was screwing up the war, but many people refused to believe it.)

Countless Republicans such as the undecided voter on CNN after the Republican debate, said that they would vote for Edwards if nominated and noone else. He appeals to Independents, Democrats and Disgruntled republicans, because he speaks with conviction and is not beholden to the corporate interests that have ruined this country.

Obama/Edwards ...

Let's make one of those Giant Leaps for Mankind!

Now THAT is a big problem with the dem party

They think proven losers can win and doubt proven winners can win. Huzzah!

than your competition, but making the argument that your dem competition isn't electable, is a surprising rookie mistake.

Thanks for the post....

I have no problem with any Democratic candidate arguing that they are MORE electable than one or more others for any and all reasons. That is part of what this process is about - picking our best candidate, and ability to get elected is part of that. I discuss that factor also, and I have my opinions about which candidates will have a harder or easier time getting elected. However I NEVER say that any of our candidates are flat out unelectable.

First of all there is no evidence that any of our candidates can't beat the bunch of losers that the Republicans are running. And the public overwhelmingly favors Democrats on issues over Republicans. Having one of our candidates agree in public that one of our leading Democrats is unelectable is politically unacceptable. It was possible for Edwards to instead say that he has some concerns over whether a majority of the public will (in this case) support Hillary and still make his point. Like it or not Hillary Clinton has a great deal of support in the Democratic Party on every level, and she is a front runner for the nomination. It is self defeating for a Party leader, and Edwards is one, to proclaim the person who national polls still show leading for the nomination as "unelectable".

Republicans LOVE sound bites like that to use against Democratic nominees once the nomination contest is over. I guarantee you if Hillary Clinton gets the nomination that Edwards will then change his tune and find her suddenly very electable. But this stupid quote is now on the books, and Edwards will again have to apologize and explain why he no longer believes something that he was on record believing before. It will be yet another "I'm Sorry" moment for Edwards.

and their right-wing corporate media....they just keep watching television and believing the bullshit 30 second sound bytes like good little Hillary robots!

they never work