I Absolutely Can't Stand Edwards

not getting media attention.

WHO ALWAYS GET AN S LOAD OF COVERAGE FOR MERELY TYING THEIR SHOES, ETC.!!!!!! :puke:

Nicely done. :D

In his case, it is because the corporate media minus NewsCorp is not about to promote a candidate who is so clearly in the pocket of a single telecommunications giant. They want the FCC to spread its favors equally to all of the bog media corporations.

Looks like having Bill is giving Hillary a boost. The press can not ignore him, so she gets double coverage.

If you look at the attention Ghoul-ianni gets and compare it with his numbers, and then look at Kucinich and the second tier Democratic candidates, you find that the Ghoul gets more media attentiont than he deserves... Or maybe Kucinich got ripped off.

lack of media attention! I'm with ya. I hope it improves real soon! Even with the corporate-elite doing all they can to keep him out of public view.

all over Bush and his cronies. :)

when I think of all the great things he could do with a nomination...and a Presidency. No pill is gonna cure this ill--I needs me a big ol' helping of Dr. Edwards!

:)

and speak out about what they believe in - detailed policies and such.

So BOOOOORING -- I'd rather watch Paris - I mean Hillary and Nicole - er, I mean Obama, duke it out.

So much more entertaining -- from an M$M/brain dead POV.

~~~being treated like a red~headed step~child, he is now on message and on track. I hope Edwards gets more media attention too, he needs to be heard.

:kick: and recommend.

i am so glad that edwards is reaching through to hillary supporters with his sense of humor and dedication to issues of progressive interest. thank you for your encouragement, it is much appreciated :)

You got me. I didn't click on your thread about 5 different times before I finally gave in to read the insanity. lol

Good one. I agree.

Nice opener! :)
K&R

:evilgrin:

:rofl:

And for the record, me too!

unless, of course, you're DLC. Republican-lite, as Molly Ivins described them.

some good coverage on his show tonight. He certainly had plenty of exposure on the recent debate which was the most watched debate in CNN history.

I am disappointed that he seems to be getting mainstreamed of late. He had plenty of coverage of the squabbles, and i was afraid that was all it was going to be - but he DID show Edwards being the adult, and Howard Fineman declared Edwards the big winner of the whole thing.

Supposedly the purveyors of truth, they are showing themselves to be just the opposite. Not so much by what they DO say, but much
more by what they DON'T say, by who they inexplicably ignore, while the nation suffers more and more with each passing day that they
flood our supposedly "public" airwaves with fluff, half-truths, outright lies, missing candidates in supposedly democratic debates ...
..you name it, they're screwing it up .. i.e. screwing the US public royally, so to speak..

And what's really scary is we the people would not be nearly as hip to the charade (at least not like we are) were it not for the
freaking internet.

:evilgrin:

First they eliminated Gravel........

You know how the rest of it goes. What did you THINK would happen?

That's not fair. LOTS Of us did.

In my state, the Edwards volunteers made a concerted effort to call out their candidate.

k&r

:dem:

-Laelth

LOL!

I totally agree.

But John is fighting against two firsts. The first woman and the first African-American. Tough position.

The real key is that John has the best message.

I already voted for him and am encouraging my friends here to do so too.

:kick:

Oh yes they are...

OH John you missed one opening in the debate maybe you can use it next time, look up the words of FDR when he was trying to get one program passed, he said something to these words... I want everyon in the USA covered no matter how little or how much they make, then the program will stick, if we only cover the lower class, then the program will be eventually done a way with, I think it was S.S.

that you needed to be taken back by the wood shed......

:rofl: Thank you for the smile and K&R!

kept ignoring it, and finally clicked, and kicked.

:kick:

On Comcast portal home page, the top three news items are about Edwards.
The "adult wing" quote from Letterman, and video clips from Letterman and Banks interviews.

Then one that says clinton/Obama continue squabble, and Obama distancing himself from some tainted contributor.


Clearly all you have to do to get media attention is get your hair messed up on a talk show. Screw substance! :rofl:

Whatever does it, I'll take it.

If the media whores decide the Hil-Bar feud is yesterday's news and Edwards becomes their new-found love, hey, BRING IT ON!

K & R!!

...any edwards supportrs in here?

you are witnessing the very first cracks in the M$M boycott. it's obvious from reading comments from all over the web that the Letterman interview was a BIG HIT. cool.

-s

I think the Olberman appearance will generate even more interest in what Edwards has to offer.

I have to say that all our Dem candidates have such nice smiles. Seriously! I've noticed that about all of them....

Ha! Good one. You certainly got MY attention.

I almost ignored this thread. Glad I didn't! :-)
:hi::thumbsup:
k&r

:P

:spank:

...he'd be higher in the polls. And if he were higher in the polls, he'd be getting more media attention. (Probably most of it would be negative, but still it would be attention.)

But it's not, and he's not. Anger, even anger the angry person thinks is perfectly justified, turns off the voting public.

So who do you want to win? Hillary or Obama?

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

because he is not a corporatist. Notice how the media doesn't ignor the republican third place finishers though.

While the Republican race is much tighter. But hey, don't let the facts get n the way of a good "corporatist" rant. :eyes:

...when he won SECOND in Iowa! What was the reason for ignoring him then??? :grr:

because he could not get any donations because the press spent almost an entire year pretending that there were only two candidates, Hillary and Obama, even when Edwards was the leader in the Iowa caucuses and a leading candidate. When he beat Hillary in Iowa, the press would not mention it, so he could not get a bump. They only mention when he does badly, and then they say "His campaign is dead. Do not waste any money or votes on him."

However, Edwards has a very devoted following and I doubt that he will give up and it looks like Obama may be going to self destruct unless someone puts a sock in his mouth.

:thumbsup:

and then i saw the rest of your post :rofl:

:P ;)

Butbut I thought you were a a Kung Fu fighter !?! :P

But seriously I had the same reaction when I saw the tittle of

the thread.What a relief.

but when is it going to dawn on you that everything you think you have a say in is a lie.

We don't pick who leads us. We're not even in the equation other than to be dupes for the powers that be that give us the illusion we have a say. Kucinich was way ahead of all so-called "best" candidates and was crushed before he could get started. Edwards with his populace message is now experiencing same. It's just not as blatant because he was once a legitimate VP candidate.

It's a farce. Our whole country is a farce. You're being lied to every minute, every second of the day.

But how can so many so-called educated leaders all be so wrong? Why are their polices seemingly hell-bent on destroying all that is suppose to be good for the people promoted? Why after being elected does nothing change? Does one lose all commonsense and ability to act rationally once they take an oath to office? It would seem so - or is it?

Keep in mind that power corrupts and those in power also have access to information most don't. Legislators are just people with the same survival instincts we all have. So place yourself in their position. What if you where to find out that the world as we know it is going to change dramatically shortly. That all resources to sustain life will become rare, food, water oil, medicine all scarce. Would you shout this from the floor of the House and create panic and be most likely ridiculed or worse? Or would you quietly and secretively put you and your family in a position where you will be among the lucky elite to survive?

This economic collapse was inevitable and calculated. It will not get better. Not next week, not six-months, not ever. While we struggle to survive as wars for dwindling natural resources will expand and about the time oil runs out look for a pandemic to sweep the world of the remaining population where only the chosen few will have to vaccine.

Our so-called representatives aren't as stupid as they seem. they're just trying to survive.

A lot of all these posts are true. The problems, obstacles are multiple and as to which is most deadly it has to be establishment opposition. Edwards never got in front of a movement that would launch his candidacy above that opposition effectively, doesn't have the gubernatorial type of organization that provides good machinery- at least in one state, doesn't have the dough, doesn't have a message that the media wants to touch with a ten foot pole. The people are typically disengaged in way which would dismay you even if there was no conscious media conspiracy to spin our elections.

In order to launch he needed media help, party supports, money and organization big time. The freezer treatment began long ago, even before the rift between himself and progressives in the Senate votes, him and Kerry over 2004, him and the "DLC" wing over opposing Hillary. To be that alone and very known means it is you and the people. Reaching 300,000,000 people completely convinced that the main media horse race is IT means not just winning them over in a way even full internet support(LOL) cannot give you. The final resistance is the dull-witted response: I like him best but he cannot win. KO'd, DK'd and down for the count.

Banking on Iowa meant the big gamble if the horse race kept on between his rivals. It would have meant nothing had he not in effect lead them in more to fight in Iowa with their money and considerable organization. Then he would have forced the media and party issue or if one was badly damaged. He made his point but did not conquer so he is stuck as in 2004, on the sidelines with the clock running out still waiting for a break in the leaders to give him daylight that is simply unattainable.

The media debates give no possibility for a JFK type of surprise anymore, no matter how chaotic or "exciting" they might seem. Winning a debate means nothing without breaking the debate system itself. Not enough people watch and the spin is more important than the viewership who can't even decide for themselves much on what they had seen. The Kerry Bush debates created no landslide for kerry. they should have, but so should the first JFK/Nixon debate. There is simply no venue to gain traction that replaces money IF the field is narrowed like this. In the past mild frontrunners and meltdowns HAVE given room even to relatively meek and mild better organized newbies. It can still happen, but being stuck in mire of future regrets is not uncommon at all either. Bill Clinton had a tough time even in a weak field and with a chunk of party support and gubernatorial connections and smarts.

When you spread you bitterness over toast I can lay it on thicker. The awful reality this year is that our sole remaining democratic choice is now. This is it. After this, the farce in pretending the permitted Bush crony ticket is a legitimate choice and the fraud pre-fix doesn't exist, the short selling of the party, the agenda and the crisis. The big possibility of having three sideways, fairly unrepresentative tickets vying for the "middle" looms disheartenling with the party professionals utterly helpless(as usual for decades) to do anything about it because they largely won't even try. The people, the party, the candidates, miserable self-imposed and GOP imposed constraints, blinders, manipulations ALL set over the inertial forces and the inertial dampers.

If it was all about that odd thing in Iowa where it didn't take much really for money and organization to crush a viable choice out of the running, then it is symbolic of the sadness. How did Vietnam go on for years? How do we keep losing with a monopoly on modest common sense and people issues and liberal treasures like Social Security? If it all boils down to one man and one gamed moment and a prize ring tauntingly raised beyond the grasp of the sleepy people who do or do not value or have democracy, then that scary opportunity has passed. Another may come up. Do we deserve anything more than lazy determinism and the mounting debt of despair and tyranny it produces?

Here in my super delegate state of IL, in my district where all of the super delegates have committed to either Clinton or Obama? There are a few not "super" (and doesn't that make them feel inferior as people that they are not super).

This has been bothering me since I reviewed the ballot. And to go a little more tangential here - be kind it's my first post - it REALLY bothers me as a total manipulation of the DNC. The DNC's stirring the pot is what left me with Roskam for a representative when we would have easily had a wonderful rep in Cegalis (sp) by financing and forcing Duckworth on our district. Duckworth seemed to be a very nice and honest person and appeared to want to do the right thing, but she was not the right person for our district (didn't even live here). The DNC saw a female, wounded vet, with a strong social conscience and effectively said, "Ef the residents of the area. This LOOKS fantastic."

I'm about 200 yards from Roskam's district, in the easternmost tip of the 14th.

Illinois seems a useless place to campaign for the pres nomination; I am working to get a progressive dem in Hastert's old seat. I wish you could vote in 14 for John Laesch!

sponsors, until we get true coverage.

I wish they had to give equal time to all the candidates. Why not let the voters listen to all of them and make up their minds? Oh yeah, that might come back to bite the corporations in the butt, when Edwards is elected.

and it told them that the only DEM with a chance to be pres. is john...what would they do?

my guess...chuck the ball and drive the party into oblivion

that's my third relatively negative post today...time to up my meds?

:thumbsup:

Of course - no trick necessary to get me to agree with you!

Edwards-supporters should stop the pathetic whining that their candidate gets no media attention. He's all over the place, he's in all the debates, yet he "gets no attention".

Yeah right...

thinks he is a kook.

I really wish we could have at least ONE Edwards thread without the inevitable....WHAT ABOUT KUCINICH? comment.

I really wish Edwards-supporters would stop the lie that their candidate gets no media attention. They've got no right to complain.

and Kucinich those "ignorant" people are voters.

Keith Olbermann right now. At least he gets more than Kucinich. I like Edwards a lot but I don't like seeing DU looking like the Edwards Campaign site.

he was very good. watch it on the rerun if you missed it.

I want Edwards as president..I do not hear anyone in the top three even speak about the neocons..Edwards actually uses the word!!! haha..great way to open the thread by the way!

:)

your headline + punchline combo was WU TANG STYLE - i approve :rofl:

with a wheelbarrow fulla moola! Especially now since we know what you look like in the morning.

...really needs to be our next president! He really fucking does.

and if I did not totally respect his wife, Elizabeth...

Sigh. I could really get into that.

:blush:

Or at least in my limited DU experience. I came in here all ready to get pissed...and then

:applause:

I've been trying to ignore this thread, but I finally gave in and opened it.

Glad I did. :thumbsup:

It drives me nuts watching him during the debates

the media will still be treating it as a two-person race.