Edwards supporters have pushed me more firmly toward Kerry.

I really think there must be some delusional talking points coming from camp Edwards. Conspiracy theories about conspiracy theories (all involving some type of convoluted support for Edwards) are abounding in alarming numbers. The effects are creating a much more subtle version of Dean's 'scream'. But I, for one, shall steer clear of such lunacy. :crazy:

1-Ignore

2-X out threads

Really, Saywhat, you will feel instant serenity. Nothing any of us can say anymore will make the slightest difference. :(

Can you send me the link to Kerry/Clark WesDem? I was organizing my bookmarks, and now it's gone!

:hug:

some more conspiracy theories for you to chew on.

or is he still "tied for first"?

We need to get this sorted out before he gets swept on Tuesday and leaves the race.

there was no winner declared for a week while they recounted, but Clark won. I can admit that. Until the recount was certified, edwards can say it's a tie for first.

boy it must really stick in your craw

boy, that must really stick in your craw

that and the media of course, we never stop hearing about it.

We'll be listening.

the clarkies have been toiling in the gutter the past few weeks, just waiting for the day they get there revenge on that no good edwards.

no excuses here, I'm proud of what edwards has done.

And I, for one, will only rub it in to those who have done the same, jenk.

Most of US just want * defeated. That is the bottom line.

Edwards people not really bad, otherwise they would have posted every other post that Wes Clark, was at this time 3 years ago bragging on how and what a fine man Bush was for the oval office... I don't think they did that.

millworkerblablablablablablablablablablamillworkerblablablablablablablablabla

:boring:

:you rock:


dp

I don't understand.

And they say we are rude?????

How dare he!

When he saw the stunning white charger carry the Knight of our Salvation into town, Edwards was supposed to bow in fealty. What a rotter.

It's amazing: Clark attacks and lies about Edwards, Edwards points out the errors and asks for a response. Instead of even answering the questions or admitting the falsehoods, Clark attacks with new distortions about voting records. Somehow, while being attacked and not responding in kind, Edwards is the nasty aggressor and somehow a skunk.

The endless refrains of conservative loser-baiting that comes from the more vehement Clark supporters is just silly. He had a greater right to the office, and that uppity pretty-boy lawyer just don't know his place.

It all makes a lot of sense when you think like a conservative...

Can I have a huffy rejoinder, followed by some dittoing, please?

I guess that makes me guilty of insulting Clark supporters

...leak Edwards' official announcement at his father's old mill. Instead, Clark's campaign folks dwindled Edwards big day down to a press conference on his driveway in Raleigh, with his youngest child tugging at his pant-leg.

How dignified, General Clark....how dignified.....:eyes:

very high poll numbers before voters got a chance to see him. After his debate performances, appearances on TV programs, and his campaigning style, his numbers plummeted. He finished a very disappointing 3rd in NH with 12% after spending all his time and money and having the state to himself. Then he spends all his time in Oklahoma the week leading up to Feb 3, but Edwards still closes strong and comes up 1200 votes shy. But Edwards gets the MO b/c of his big % win in SC after polls had showed it much closer and his strong finish in Oklahoma.

Basically, Edwards was everything Clark wasn't. A great campaigner, amazing on the stump and a very good closer leading up to elections. Clarkies wanted to last longer to go one-on-one with Kerry, but Edwards beat Clark in TN and VA to take that right. So, Clark supporters naturally vilified Edwards, when they weren't complaining about the media. That's my take on it.

In the end, it may be a mutually assured destruction, so I suppose the more vindictive partisans will have their joyous day.

It was sad, though, because Clark improved a lot during the whole thing, and his attacking of Junior's foreign policy was delicious to hear. At the end, of course, Clark erased any emotional appeal by his actions that I mentioned before.

Lying is a light switch, and should be. When a candidate deliberately tells an absolute untruth on a major issue, especially one that's been used and rebutted before, that is a pull the plug act. Dean pissed me off by saying that he was the only Democrat in the house, especially when he was almost the most conservative of the bunch, and he irritated with his fatuous pronouncements, but when he lied deliberately about the tax-cuts, he proved himself not only unelectable, not only reckless, but deeply unprincipled. Add to that moral failing the savagery and incomprehensibility of calling Kerry a Republican, and I really can't understand any who'd not have lost the love by now. Sure, residual affection is to be understood, but undying allegiance? Those who would still stand by a candidate after that are lost in some kind of swirl of denial or equivocation. Beyond that, those who would grant their champion the right to lie are morally suspect themselves.

Sadly, much as the early Clark supporters came in with such fervor and dismissiveness that they even shocked the Dean supporters, many of his gathering supporters--the vast majority, in fact--were very gentle and idealistic types. For them, it must be mystifying to hear this crossfire, not to mention unjustified on our part.

I'm an Edwards supporter and nobody clued me in about any conspiracies.

nm

I have no idea what you are talking about.

ugh...

:crazy:

I've seen no 'conspiracy theories', much less 'conspiracy theories about conspiracy theories'. You're right---something IS delusional, but it's NOT Edwards' supporters...:eyes:

is his crap about trying to portray himself as a washington outsider. And his all of sudden being so against NAFTA. I live in NC. And I can't remember once during his Senate campaign, him running against NAFTA.

come up much. They both agreed on that issue so neither of them could use it to run against the other.

5 years in the Senate qualifies him as much more of an outsider than 19 years in the Senate.

If Edwards doesn't do well, I for one, won't "blame" anybody, or anything. I still have hope, however, b/c Edwards has consistently closed very strong and closed big gaps in places like Iowa, Oklahoma and Wisconsin.

...until it happens, until it slaps you in the fact, duh!

My prediction all of last year: "Dean will not be the nominee. He is not a likeable character, and the more that people see him, the less they will like him." (DU Response: Nonsense, prove it. Go to ****!)

My prediction all of last year: "Wesley Clark will not be the nominee. He is nothing but a resume. If he can't talk about foreign policy matters, what is he going to say? Democrats need to be able to take it to Bush on domestic issues especially, because that is the Democrats' strength. I makes no sense for Clark to even be considered for the nomination, because he relinquishes the domestic agenda advantage in a debate because he can't discuss it even more skillfully than Bush can." (DU Response: Nonsense, prove it.)

My prediction last year: "Neither Dean or Clark will be the nominee, because both are focused on the war, and it's not the main issue for most Americans. Anti-War candidates always lose, because they are BACKWARDS LOOKING INSTEAD OF FORWARD LOOKING, and they are focused on the opponent, instead of their vision. Also, when a country goes to war, the public largely supports it, so for you to say that Bush lied, you are telling the American people that THEY FELL FOR IT, and it's kind of an insult to them." (DU Response: What do you know. DEAN IS WINNING IN THE POLLS.)

My prediction last year: "Polls don't matter. Dean is winning by 30 points now, but it will eventually come down. He has peaked. Al Gore and all of these other establishment figures are only jumping on Dean's boat IN ORDER TO SINK IT. In other words, they are overloading it." (DU response: You are just jealous because Gore didn't endorse your candidate).

9/11 WAS A FREAKING CONSPIRACY THEORY UNTIL IT HAPPENED, duh!

So if you are going to go to Kerry simply because of so-called, "CONSPIRACY THEORIES" then go ahead.

The person involved in the "CONSPIRACY" usually doesn't bring up the "THEORIES."

blablablablablablamillworkerblablablablablablablablamillworker :boring:

That's what people do!

They call what they don't agree with or understand, "CONSPIRACY THEORIES", just like you are doing.

And what I was saying in the last sentence which I thought you could understand, was that "JOHN KERRY" won't bring up any conspiracy theories because he is a part of the conspiracy.

How many names do you use?

I can't understand why - your guy stayed in the race. Why so bitter?

They seem LESS bitter than anyone but the Kerry supporters, IMO...

I'm rather smug in triumph (but I'm just speaking for myself)

Bitter cause Edwards refuses to face the music maybe? No, that gives front runner Kerry more free media time during debates and all day pundit talk about the competition. I give up. :shrug:

I hate John Kerry and George Bush because they are both fakes.

And I don't feel like seeing the Democrats SCREW THE COUNTRY by nominating a loser like John Kerry!

It has nothing to do with "BITTERNESS".

I was against Kerry from the beginning!!!

If it was Edwards v. Graham, or Edwards v. Gephardt, two REAL DEMOCRATS, I wouldn't be up in arms about it.

But for Democrats to be on the verge of nominating a fake, ELITIST (elite secret society member = ELITIST last time I checked) is enough to make me want to SLAP SOMEONE'S HEAD OFF like those Haitians were doing, BWHAHAHAAAHA, LOL!!!

They're behavior has further turned me off Edwards.

The only mean people I have seen here is the Clark people..you are sore loosers and no matter how sore you are it is not going to get Wes Clark the VP spot, he will be the Sec. of State mark my words