Edwards Didn't Contest Ohio, Hasn't Earned Our Support

2004 ... remember that year?

The Kerry-Edwards campaign didn't contest Ohio ... The Greens did. ( http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1231-02.htm )

The Kerry-Edwards campaign ran on a foundation that 2004 would NOT be a repeat of 2000. There would be legions of lawyers, heads would roll, etc., etc.

Edwards didn't want to concede ( http://www.democracynow.org/2005/11/4/was_the_2004_election_stolen_a ) but what the hell did he do to support the Green Party who contested the results out of Ohio????

What did he do???? NOTHING!

I'm sorry people, it was the Kerry-EDWARDS campaign and while Edwards has great ideas, I do NOT believe he has what it takes to make it to election night without being hit by everything but kitchen sink with little or no reaction. Too scared that he'll look angry, etc.

We still haven't heard WHY he didn't initiate, or at LEAST support, the recount efforts in Ohio.

This is unforgivable and I'm shocked that there are not more Democrats who remember this and aren't speaking up.

This Iowan is caucusing for Obama on Thursday.

Think twice if you believe Edwards is your man, we need a true fighter to be the Democratic nominee to win back the White House.

Neither did Biden or Dodd, or Dennis K.

Throw them all out!

of the Clinton campaign's Rovian tactics...it never ends with these people does it-I may even vote for Bloomberg if they keep it up

He could have used the support from the other presidential candidates to discuss the issue, raise awareness and increase support for his legislation. However none of them seem to want to talk about it.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I wanted to lead, but...

Edwards fought tooth and nail to get Ohio recount, but Kerry - who headed the ticket - said no. Meanwhile, Elizabeth Edwards had just been diagnosed with breast cancer (from which she is dying today).

"Elizabeth Edwards had just been diagnosed with breast cancer (from which she is dying today)."

Wow, and he's still out on the campaign trail!

If he can run for president through her illness, he could have given up his evidence that the election was stolen.

This is not a game so where's the link?

He spoke for the campaign Tuesday night - reading what he was asked to. They did not have a case and both Edwards and Kerry gave concession speeches. He then did not make suppression or fraud an issue for nearly 2 years - he said NOTHING. Both John and Teresa Kerry did speak about it - and were derided because of it.

Then suddenly in mid 2006, there were blogosphere claims that Edwards wanted to challenge it. He has never said so in the MSM and has never said what the basis of his case would be. Channeling the voices of people who wanted to vote but were prevented by long lines, or wrong precinct information or lost registrations just won't work.

To the OP, in defense of Edwards - what do you think he should have used to make his case.

Why didn't he?

It was Kerry's decision to make, and he decided not to contest it.

Can you find a clear statement - issued to MSM by Edwards saying that he would have contested Ohio and what proof he would have used?

It wasn't Edwards' call. Non-issue.

:headbang:
rocknation

He stomped out and told us that every vote would be counted, then did nothing to support the recount.

Where did he go?

It's very much a HUGE issue!!!!

He absolutely supported a recount. Kerry and the Dlc said NO. And no I do not have time to look for old links.

Edwards said nothing at all in all 2005.

and laughable that criticzing Kerry (for something that was the DNC and McAuliffe's job to do ) is fair game while letting the rest of the party off the hook, and then seeing those same people turn around and support candidates that are either silent about this or can't hold a candle on issues that they claim to care about.


Not saying that Kerry or any dem isn't above criticism, but the double standard is here is tiresome.

:applause:

There were people who weren't even on the ticket contesting so how does this not his responsibility, he was only the second banana crap absolve Edwards?

He gave the country to Bush because he felt it wasn't his responsibility to lead, claiming that the leader didn't want him to?

Does he want to lead or push excuses?

It was the Kerry-Edwards campaign.

If they won Edwards would have benefited, but somehow the loss is only Kerry's fault?

They both should have fought tooth and nail, but they didn't.

Both faded into the woodwork.

2004 is soooo four years ago. What Edwards did or didn't do, about election fraud that may or may not have happened, really doesn't mean a good goddamn anymore.

Do we REALLY have the luxury of navel-gazing like this?

Friday, 12/28/07
Thieves nab Nashville voter rolls
Laptop has data on about 337,000 people

By JENNIFER BROOKS
Staff Writer

Thieves broke in to the Davidson County Election Commission offices over the Christmas holiday and made off with computers containing the names and identifying information of every voter in Nashville.
The missing laptop contained names, addresses, phone numbers and the last four digits of about 337,000 voters' Social Security numbers. It's the same information that candidates buy from the county when they're putting together mailing lists, said county Election Administrator Ray Barrett.
"Thank goodness they didn't get the whole Social," he said. "We've had police and everybody in there trying to figure out what happened.
The election offices are in the old Howard School Building at 800 Second Ave. S., which also houses several other county offices. Barrett said the culprit or culprits also broke into nearby offices, including Metro Water Services. There is no estimate yet of the cost of the damage and stolen equipment, he said.
-snip
http://tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071228/NEWS0202/712280408

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/12/26/kansas-gop-chair-sends-email-boasting-of-voter-caging

Kansas GOP Chair Sends Email Boasting of Voter Caging
By: billw on Wednesday, December 26th, 2007 at 6:38 AM - PST


Kris Kobach, a former counsel to then-Attorney General John Ashcroft who is currently the chairman of the Kansas GOP, sent out an email on Thur entitled “Kansas Republican Party Year in Review” in which he brags of voter caging. Blue Tide Rising has the goods:

… Kris Kobach, chairman of the Kansas GOP, sent out a self-congratulatory litany of accomplishments. Among them was one particularly eye-catching item:

“To date, the Kansas GOP has identified and caged more voters in the last 11 months than the previous two years!” <…>

Slate.com has the best comprehensive write-up on how the Republican Party employs caging techniques to suppress the votes of the poor, the deployed, and college students. (You know, likely Democratic voters.)

Did we mention it’s illegal? And that Kris Kobach is proud to be doing it?

Since Kris Kobach can’t expand his own party or force his own Party’s members to support his candidates he’s shamelessly trying to keep Democrats from voting instead. This is the stratagem of a desperate and shrinking party.

Someone needs to ask Kris Kobach which voters he’s caging and how he’s doing it. Someone like a newspaper editor or perhaps a Grand Jury. … (more)

More on Kris Kobach here and here (He apparently suffers from an advanced case of Lou Dobbs disease). Depending on what methods are being used in Kobach’s admitted voter caging scheme, it may very well be illegal, but hardly surprising. Voter suppression through caging lists has become a standard part of the Republican playbook to steal elections for some time now. In Sept McClatchy detailed current Republican voter caging efforts underway in Florida and Ohio to “impede Democratic-leaning minorities from voting in 2008,” and back in July PBS NOW took a look at the Republican Party’s voter caging plan “designed to keep Democrats from voting, allegedly by targeting people based on their race and ethnicity.” Watch that video here.


from the past in Ohio:

Article published Tuesday, October 12, 2004
Lucas County Democratic headquarters burglarized

BLADE STAFF

The Lucas County Democratic Headquarters was burglarized overnight, and three computers, including the party’s main system, were stolen.

The computers contained highly sensitive information, including the party’s financial information, names and personal phone numbers of hundreds of party members, candidates, and volunteers.

The computers also stored e-mails from candidates that included discussion about campaign strategy.
A second computer, belonging to an attorney-volunteer working to ensure voters’ rights, also was taken, officials said. The headquarters on 1817 Madison Avenue does have an alarm system that volunteers believed they set late Monday when they left.



-snip

http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041012/NEWS03/41012016



Watergate Again? Another break-in, more computers stolen at Democratic Headquarters in Ohio
by STEVE EDER and JAMES DREW The Toledo Blade
Entered into the database on Sunday, July 03rd, 2005 @ 14:51:23 MST




COLUMBUS - Thieves targeted the Ohio Democratic Party Headquarters this week, stealing a computer and a high-tech communications gadget belonging to party chairman Denny White.

Police said yesterday one or more burglars appeared to have climbed a wall Monday and crawled through an unlocked second-story window overnight at the party headquarters about three blocks from the Statehouse.

The break-in occurs at a time when the Ohio Republican Party is threatened by one of the largest scandals to hit the state’s government in decades.

Some Democrats also say the break-in is eerily similar to a burglary at the Lucas County Democratic Party Headquarters last fall, in which three computers were stolen.

-snip

http://www.lookingglassnews.org/printerfriendly.php?storyid=1188

:thumbsup:

So far, he's just talk. But, always, "present."

Obama? :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Edwards opposed that decision and in fact was really pissed off about it.

How is it that the Greens contested it but Edwards didn't even issue a damn press release supporting the Greens effort?

Find us the press release.

You need to check your facts twice.

I can't find anything that says Edwards could not have contested on his own.

After the election Edwards was his own man.

Why is it that his efforts toward an '08 run started before clearing this up?

He never cleared it up!

He should have at least supported the Green Party and their efforts to contest Ohio. He didn't.

All talk and no action from Edwards. He rolled over.

No, you haven't checked your facts even once.

Nice try.

Color me dubious. :eyes:

The nasty juvenile hit pieces just keep coming. You aren't changing anyones mind except perhaps, their opinions of you. This goes for all the asshats posting thread after thread of negative shit.

We have got to pay attention during these upcoming primaries!

but the problem is that DK probably won't even win his homestate of Ohio in a Democratic primary. Didn't he come in fourth in Ohio in the '04 primary, so I doubt he will have a chance to contest a general election.

pitch a tent outside the VP office? Publicly call Kerry names? :rofl:

If Edwards said something- they would have had to report on it.

cancer

how does that absolve him?

I don't think his failure to prove the election was stolen had anything to do with Elizabeth's cancer.

what happened in 2004.

So why didn't he? It was the least he could have done for his country!

Are you listening to yourself? Oh, never mind. Don't bother.

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5307

He's just now speaking up?

Russ Feingold and John Kerry Introduce Resolution Urging Backup Plans for Voting Machines

More here.

The breast cancer didn't stop him from being the first candidate to charge into Iowa waving his hands to be the next president.

It didn't stop from tossing his hat back in the ring, and it shouldn't have stopped him from contesting Ohio ... even if it was just for the record books.

He made a conscious decision to leave it alone, to say nothing. It should rightfully bite him in the ass. He was part of what lost the Democratic Party the election.

Don't give me this Kerry shit! It was the Kerry-Edwards campaign and he did nothing after the election about Ohio or voting reform.

Nothing.

His first priority after the election became helping his wife deal with the diagnosis, make choices about her cancer treatment and helping his children and wife cope with the bad news. The most difficult part of the breast cancer journey is in the days and weeks following the diagnosis, having your life turned upside down. It gets easier to deal with later, though its never easy. His decision later on, along with his wife's, to run for office shows strength of character in both.

Let's hope you never end up in that situation with others judging how you should have spent your time.

He even made several international trips. Of course he was dealing with his wife's cancer, but the fact is that when he was available to do things - it is not what he chose to do.

Until you've experience breast cancer in yourself or a loved one, don't even go there.

Nice that you make the assumption that no one close to me has ever experienced anything like breast cancer. It's not true unless you reject many very serious illnesses - many of which have worse prognoses than breast cancer.

but feel free to keep digging yourself deeper.

If he stayed out of sight and engaged on NO political issues, then you would be right. That was not the case, therefore he thought those were more important. Also I am speaking of a year and a half period - into a time when EE was saying she was likely to have beat it.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Uh, huh. And you're calling *me* a moron? :rofl:

:thumbsup:

The Democratic Party FAILED to challenge the election in Ohio, not John Edwards.

Kerry spoke out about the election problems back in 2005 and was ridiculed for it, where was Edwards?

and gone to the press. What the hell do you think Kerry could have done? The point was they did not have enough votes they could claim. This wasn't FL with a deficit of 537 and ballots that were questionable. There were problems with ballots apparently tabulated as for a different precinct than the one the voter's machine was for and votes lost to suppression. (Even RFKjr counted "votes" never cast to make up the difference.) Kerry was likely cheated out of a very hard earned win and he has worked as hard as he can since then.

frazzled (1000+ posts)
Response to Reply #1
13. Actually not: we never know what the popular vote (body count) is in Iowa

At least in the Democratic caucuses. The number of bodies for each candidate (after all the switching for the fifteen-percenters is done) is sent to the state Democratic Party headquarters, where it is put under lock and key. The media never knows or reports those numbers. We never know them. What is reported is the number of delegates assigned to each of the candidates in each of the precincts--based on a weighted formula that is adjusted for the amount of Democratic voter turnout during the last two general elections in that precinct.

It seems to me, there's a lot of room for confusion and hanky panky. Even if not, it is certainly possible that the candidate who got the most popular 'votes' in Iowa may not get the highest percentage of delegates. Those latter percentages are the ones we hear and which are assigned to the "winner," "runner up," etc.

Do you expect the primary vote to be rigged?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2542209

nt

who certainly has NOT learned his lesson about fighting for us. Apparently.

While I believe that Edwards did, and has changed his tune.

Unlike Gore, who claims to not regret what he did in 2000. And won't run again, to try to make things right.

Like Edwards is.

nt

Al Gore fought all the way to the Supreme court.

What did johnnyboy do? NADA!

fighting a different battle.

and leaving the one he should have finished--(excuse me--what was the Supreme Court doing deciding our election? Why didn't SOMEBODY say something about that before they Let It Happen on Purpose? I believe the correct person to speak up was the President of the Senate, a guy who was so polite to his Senate Colleagues that he let the Constitution -- and the People-- go down out of self deprecation--rather than do the right thing, even though it might make him look self serving. Thanks for the sacrffice, Al.

What did Johnny do? faced down corporate criminals for 20 years and beat them at their own game. Sure, he was too polite too.
I believe him when he says he was wrong.

When will Gore admit he got it wrong?

As far as johnnyboy fighting corporate criminals, that was his job! He was a lawyer. Lawyers fight for their clients. That. Is. How. They. Make. Their. Money.

What did johnnyboy do when he had the chance as a senator? How did he fight for American citizens?

...because we haven't seen them in that situation. So it's easy to say "So-and-So would have done this-and-such," but since we can't turn back time, switch out the principle players, and run the movie over again, we actually have no idea how they would have responded.

responsibility not his running mate's to contest Ohio.

recount either. That's why it was left to the Greens, because the Green Party was ALSO an injured party in any vote fraud. For Edwards to pursue it he would be bucking the national party and the presumptive head of the party - which is not a way to garner support for any future runs.

for any future runs."

Wow! He sold out the country for personal gain!

Don't you think if he could prove the election was stolen in 2004, the country would have been better off?

What personal gain?

The entire answer is encapsulated in your last sentence - without the support of his party and the support of the head of the ticket, IOW the entire Democratic establishment, he could NOT prove a fucking thing, and he is good enough a lawyer to recognise that. To pursue it AGAINST the wishes of the entire party would destroy his career.

Of course, if he could have proved it we would all be better off. But the DLC was not going to give him that opporturnity.

Just look at it. Did the Greens PROVE anything? They pursued it, and were obstructed by the Repukes and Dems alike. He'd have fared no better.

To say he didn't follow up for personal gain is nothing less than a slanderous lie.

Yours?

:rofl:

READ THIS ENTIRE PIECE:

Did Carville Tip Bush Off to Kerry Strategy (Woodward)


By M.J. Rosenberg | bio




On page 344, Woodward describes the doings at the White House in the early morning hours of Wednesday, the day after the '04 election.

Apparently, Kerry had decided not to concede. There were 250,000 outstanding ballots in Ohio.

So Kerry decides to fight. In fact, he considers going to Ohio to camp out with his voters until there is a recount. This is the last thing the White House needs, especially after Florida 2000.

-snip

"Carville told her he had some inside news. The Kerry campaign was going to challenge the provisional ballots in Ohio -- perhaps up to 250,000 of them. 'I don't agree with it, Carville said. I'm just telling you that's what they're talking about.'

-snip

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2006/oct/07/did_carville_tip_bush_off_to_kerry_strategy_woodward

They were all counted and that led to Kerry still being about 60,000 short. They were all counted.

That story implies that somehow 100,000 ballots were disappeared - yet if the ratio of net votes changed were the same even if they had existed - they would likely be too few.

The bigger issue with that story was the question of what else - at earlier times - Carville, who disliked Kerry - passed to his wife.

How They Stole Ohio
The GOP 4-step Recipe to 'Blackwell' the USA in 2008
Abracadabra: Three Million Votes Vanish

AN EXCLUSIVE BUZZFLASH GUEST CONTRIBUTION
by Greg Palast

Heads up! Catch Robert Kennedy Jr., Mike Papantonio and Greg Palast this next Saturday, June 10th, on Air America's 'Ring of Fire' on the shoplifting of the last election & and the next one.

This is a fact: On November 2, 2004, in the State of Ohio, 239,127 votes for President of the United States were dumped, rejected, blocked, lost and left to rot uncounted.

And not just anyone's vote. Dive into the electoral dumpster and these "spoiled" votes have a very dark color indeed.

In another life, I taught statistics. And these statistics stank: the raw data tells us that if you are a Black voter, the chance of you losing your vote to technical errors in voting machinery is 900% higher than if you were a white voter.

Any guesses as to whom those African-Americans chose for president on those junked ballots? Check Ohio's racial demographics, do the numbers, and there it is: Kerry won Ohio. And that, too, is a fact. A fact that could not get reported in the USA.

-snip

http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/06/06/con06219.html

1) The spoiled ballots can not be counted - just as they couldn't be counted in Fl in 2000. It was actually worse than 2000 - look at the list - a punch card with no punches - how do you count that? touch screens that fail to register - how do you count that? I get his statistics and understand that the votes lost were disproportionately from populations likely to have wanted to vote for Kerry. The problem is that there is no precedent for using statistics to challenge the results. Remember FL 2000 - no one pushed for estimating the votes lost to the butterfly ballot. If accuracy was the issue, you could have easily gone to every voter in the 2000 election in Palm Beach county where it was known that the ballot was dysfunctional and asked them to fill in a simple paper ballot just for President. We both know that the number of Jews for Buchanan was around zero.

2)Provisional ballots - in Ohio those found to be from valid voters were counted and they did decrease the deficit Kerry had. It is to be expected that some provisional ballots will end up being from people who are not registered. Kerry/Edwards fought many Blackwell rules - and won on some.

3) Absentee votes not counted - I have never heard of this. I think it is legally required that it happen. It was never mentioned in Ohio in anything I saw.

4) The votes that never happened - You can't count these.

What all these things have in common is that they can't be addressed with a simple recount - as none can be seen that way. This is something that the party has to address and fix at a state level before the election to ensure the election will be fair. How can you resolve anything that does not lend itself to a simple recount in the 2 month window between the election and the Congressional vote?

In 2002, the Republicans hampered the GOTV in NH - it was proven and some people have even gone to jail, but that happened in 2007 - around 4 years later! Sununu is still Senator. There they had proof. They had phone records that showed that they jammed the phones. There is still no proof that shows anyone to have been responsible for the problems described here and as in NH proving there was cheating will not prove that Kerry won, though it may show it was highly likely he did. Even this will not put Kerry in office - the vote on January 6, 2005 was final. (I guess if Bush and Cheney were themselves conclusively connected they could be impeached - but that leads to the speaker of the house (or a new VP))

spending your time trashing other candidates like this.

This is not gonna help you or Obama, IMO.

Do you care about that part or was that your point?







And are you seriously saying the green party should be held in higher esteem than Kerry/Edwards because of their actions AFTER they diverted democratic votes with their shenanigans and helped to put Bush in office?

... this green party?

"2007-12-14 Washington, DC -- Green Party leaders urged national attention and support for legal efforts by Ralph Nader and Carl Romanelli to ensure fair elections in the face of patently unfair election rules and underhanded tactics by Democratic Party operatives to block Green, other third party, and independent candidates."

http://www.gp.org/index.php

I care about my party putting the best candidate forward.

I cared in '04 and stood for Kerry, when I should have stood for the candidate who was the best fighter to make it to the general election.

I feel Obama is that candidate and that Edwards has not absolved himself from election night '04.

At the very least he could talk about it. He chooses not to because he's afraid, but hiding from the issue won't help him.

After the 2000 election the lasting image of Gore was seen by all Americans when he was shuffling around in a beard and looked like a loser. By 2004 he had not redeemed himself and rightfully didn't run for president.

The lasting image I believe a lot of people have on Edwards is his rebuke of the Ohio count on election night. Tough talk that didn't go anywhere.

Since that rebuke I haven't heard him say anything publicly. He never really addressed the issue. He has not redeemed himself.

If he didn't want to be associated with it then he should not have come out in place of Kerry on election night '04. He did associate himself with it and left it to lay.

Edwards ... either pick it up and say something, or don't count on everyone's support to represent our party.

Can someone tell me where to find the eye rolling smilie?

Yep, still unforgivable. That's my reaction to this nonsensical rant, and you're still trashing the other Democrats as an argument to vote for your choice. It's. Not. Working.

Nice to hear from the official representative of DU.

Good to know you speak for everyone.

Sure you're not a White House representative or a Fox News pun?

Don't try to Fox News us around here.

... sure, whatever you say.

And I have lurked for years.

I am relatively new to posting here and was looking around the posting box when I typed that.

You didn't offer any help but I've found them. :D

I called John Conyers simply because of a thread I read on DU months ago and he answered the phone himself and not only did I request that he hold Karl Rove accountable, I wrote a response (not hundreds) in that thread I was so excited. If you knew that would you still have this attitude?

IS THERE A LOT OF THAT GOING AROUND these days?


I get that post counts or dates people sign up here or some proof you think you are owed is more important to you, from your response to me. Got that. I still maintain that trashing the other Democrats as an argument to vote for someone's particular choice isn't going to work.

Have a nice weekend.

Heck, I seldom even go a DAY without posting! :)

Anyway, as long as you're posting now: Welcome to DU! :hi:

What part of Kerry-Edwards campaign don't you understand?!

The freakin' Green Party contested the recount ... you're telling me Edwards didn't have the ability?

He could at LEAST have issued a statement.

nt

I knew you could!

He is extremely likely to be re-elected in 2008 and will continue to be the Chair of the Small Business Committee, the chair of the SFRC subcommittee covering the middle east and near east, the chair of the Finance committee's subcommittees that deal with pensions(SS) and Health care, and the Commerce Committee's subcommittee on Science, technology and innovation. These are very good assignments that especially with a bigger Democratic majority and a Democratic President could lead to him being a very important legislator.

Edwards is in a stranger position.The two most likely scenarios are that he could win the Presidency OR he will go into political obscurity. It is highly unlikely that he will be picked as VP, especially given 2004 where he refused to use the campaign's slogan.

Kerry has a background as an excellent prosecutor. He agreed with the Democratic lawyers who said there was no case to be made. He has also been FAR more outspoken than Edwards on the fact that there were problems and there was voter suppression. In his case, he spoke in the MSM and the Senate about this. The Democratic party did not back a challenge, Kerry would have been as isolated as Edwards would have been. It likely would have hurt the Democratic party and Kerry would not have been able to do the work he did from 2004 to 2006 to help people like Dean.

But Dennis would be better than almost all of them.

posturing on a nonissue that you haven't even got asll the facts on. Surely you are better than this.

Edwards is twice the fighter Obama is.
Good luck caucusing for Mr. Unelectable.

Specifically.

Read Four Trials.
I would say that makes him FOUR times the fighter than Obama.

If you are challenged, just read some of the reviews.
Here is one for a starter.





NOW,
Put up or Shut Up.

and that proves he's a fighter for all American citizens?

For gods' sake, he was doing his job. A job of a lawyer. Lawyers get money for representing clients.

That is truly lame and laughable.

because you just made an ass out of yourself by assuming too much. Sorry.

but you might look at the arena where he chose to fight, which cases he chose, and the internal motivation that moved him in that direction.
Now, this step requires some elementary abstraction, but it is possible for most of us to to see that this is completely consistent with his message for America and his campaign platform.


NOW,
list your candidates victories for Americans.
"Specifically"!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Thought so.
Maybe he needs to "reach out to Republicans", and "work across the aisle" a little more.




"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans. I want us to compete for that great mass of voters that want a party that will stand up for working Americans, family farmers, and people who haven't felt the benefits of the economic upturn."---Paul Wellstone

about Obama and Clinton in your response about johnnyboy?

The arena he chose to fight? A court room? lol

He had a chance to fight from 1999 to 2004 when he was in the senate. What did he fight for? What did he do to fight for American citizens? (Besides co-sponsoring and voting for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of human beings.)

Obama supporter unable to respond to direct challenge.

Edwards-4
Obama-0

Why did you think that?

Apply basic rules of logic.

So, if I had instead, asked how has he shown that is is twice the fighter Clinton is, then that would make me a Clinton supporter?

Those are your basic laws of logic?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Btw, let me say now (due to your basic lol laws of logic) that I am NOT a Clinton supporter.

Then I must give you more credit.
I take back my comment that you are cognitively impaired.
:hi:


The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

And it was more important than a decision he couldn't make in the first place.

Well, that's it for him then. Hmmm, that leaves no candidate left. Guess I'll stay home.

is the best way to win votes? That should help their causes. How fun and productive.




No wonder I don't have a candidate yet.

whom continue to get free passes while the nominee continues to get demonized here, more than the 08 candidates.

Its obvious flamebait.

Really awful, isn't it?

Period!!

Kerry said: 'They will say we are sore losers'.

Edwards: 'So what."

Kerry: 'We are going to concede.'

Edwards: "You sent me out there only four hours ago to tell them that we would count every vote. I told them that. Now you want to concede?"

Kerry: "We are conceding now."


This is an approximate version of the conversation the morning after at 8 am.

This is how it happened. Fact. Not opinion. Fact.

Where did that conversation come from? It is not consistent with what the people in the room with the various lawyers, including Deval Patrick and the lawyers that told Gore he had a case. I have heard many reasons given by Senator Kerry and they are NOT that they would be "sore losers". They all were that they did not have proof and that for something as important as the presidency, you need clear cut proof.

This sounds like an "Edwards" story - that would of course show Edwards in the better light.

I have yet to see a serious Edwards article in a MSM media source where he articulates how he would challenge the election. Ohio could not be gained via a recount. What would he have done before January 6, 2005 to prove not just that there was fraud but that Kerry won Ohio? (In a Republican Ohio court.) This was not FL 2000 where there were ballots possibly miscounted.

It was Kerry

Kerry spoke about it back in 2005 and caught flack for doing so. I also noticed that you seem to let a non-supportative Democratic Party and an inept DNC Chairman off the hook.

LIKE THE DAY AFTER THE ELECTION.

KERRY CONCEDED. HIS CAMPAIGN WAS RUNNING IT.

OH MY FUCKING GOD THE SHIT I SEE HERE LATELY.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/vote2004/2004-11-04-edwards-cancer_x.htm

coming in DU shortly after the election and talking about these matters.
Anybody else remember those days?

to contest any state. The margin of victory for John Edwards will be overwhelming!

Not one person has told me why Edwards stayed silent since 2004 on contesting Ohio.

Many feeble, "it was Kerry's job."

When Edwards walked out on that stage and told us that every vote was going to be counted that made him the person who drew the line in the sand. Period.

Kerry was worthless after that. Nothing left but his tearful concession.

Edwards may have disagreed with Kerry, maybe they got in a fucking fist fight and Edwards hates fucking Kerry to this day. But where the fuck was he when the fucking Green Party was contesting the Ohio recount?

Was there a statement? A press release? Anything?

Don't give me sob stories about cancer. It's terrible his wife was diagnosed with cancer, but he could have said something people.

He drew the line. He showed us that he had some teeth. Then nothing.

I was pissed off then and I'm pissed off now.

Is Obama the answer to everyone's prayers? No. But he hasn't taken PAC $$$ and he isn't in the back pocket of lobbists.

My personal opinion is that if elected he will give us back government for, of, and by the people.

That is why I'm caucusing for him.

I also believe that he IS more electable than Edwards and that people WILL remember the line Edwards drew on election night '04 and remain disappointed that he faded into the night.

If Edwards never drew the line then the statement from the Kerry/Edwards campaign would have to suffice. But he drew the line, left, and didn't fucking address the issue after that.

Today isn't too late.

Common Edwards ... tell us why you didn't support the Green Party effort to contest the Ohio?

Tell us!

Silence.

Nothing.

... 'it was Kerry's job. His wife had cancer.

So be it.

Weak Democrats just like Reid. Go vote or caucus for Edwards.

If he wins then so be it. You can bet I'll fight hard to make sure he wins over any of the nit wits on the rethug side. I'll over look the 2004 line in the sand, but it's not the general election yet.

It is refreshing to know that our side cares enough to engage in such hardcore discussion because we truly care about having the best candidate to represent our party.

For me I've come to the conclusion that Barack Obama will give us an administration that represents the progressive needs of this country and will give us a government for, of, and by the people.

That's my take. I'm nobody, just another Iowan. I don't have 1,000+ posts here, but from time to time I like to weigh in.

This is a great forum.

Go Obama.

Peace.

You may think so, but you aren't helping Obama's cause by tearing him Kerry down and promoting him. That goes with other candidates supporters also.


If you want to make the case for Obama, make it without bring Dems who aren't running or tearing others down to promote him.

up with the bashing of John Edwards, he's getting more popular everyday!

Not Edwards'. Kerry was the one that chose not to contest Ohio. JE was supposedly furious about it.

about it in 2005.

So ...

If Edwards isn't ready and willing to get slammed then why is he in politics.

Are you trying to say that he made the right move to say nothing?

Are those who continue to say it was Kerry's place, not Edwards, condoning Edwards' position of saying nothing?

Even if Edwards thought it best not to actually do what the Green Party did, couldn't Edwards have put out a statement supporting the Green Party's efforts?

Could he have been anything but silent?

Geez, people ... I guess you don't believe Edwards owed anyone anything after drawing the line in the sand and spinning everyone up. Nothing.

I disagree.

My comments against Kerry are thrown at him for his campaign in 2004. Not his service as the junior senator in Mass.

I commend Kerry's service, his actions after his service, his testimony to Congress, his actions that helped end the conflict in Vietnam, and everything else he has done for our country and the Democratic party as a senator.

I believe he should have contested Ohio because of the unending accounts of wrong doing which took place in the state on election night 2004.

I do NOT understand why it took the Green Party to contest Ohio and Kerry/Edwards just faded into the night.

I can kind of understand Kerry in a very small way because he represented the party as he was the nominee. I believe that's why it was Edwards who came out from the curtain and onto the stage on election night to tell us that every vote would be counted. That statement made a statement ... it said that every vote might not be counted if nothing is done. It told us that monkey business is suspect. It told us that it would not be another 2000.

I don't believe Kerry was there to make that statement because the DNC would not want its nominee to be "crying wolf" or to be making speculation that dirty tactics are afoot. In essence, laying the ground for a conspiracy theory.

So ... Edwards (not the nominee) made the indirect assertion. BUT HE NEVER FOLLOWED IT UP!

Kerry was the nominee, the represent of the DNC, basically the official voice Democratic Party at that time period. The DNC didn't want to throw sour grapes around. But Edwards drew the line, it was his limelight to show that the next election he had the gonads to step up w/o fear and contest.

Guess he lost his gonads.

These are my thoughts, my take. Nothing else, just the way I see it.

If you believe it was Kerry sole responsibility then so be it. I'm not changing your mind, just giving you insight into my thoughts and where I'm coming from.

Go Obama!

Peace.

fight Kerry . Kerry refused to fight back.

The depths of cluelessness here at DU can be a thing to marvel at sometimes.

Julie

If a bit ignorant of the facts.

:eyes: