This is Why

Posted by on . 8 comments.

The following video is a perfect example of why I’m actively supporting John Edwards.

The campaign’s going to heat up pretty soon, and I’ll have more on other reasons to support Edwards, but none will be more important than this.

Comments

  1. jamiebeth says:
    August 27, 2007 at 5:43 pm

    can i vote for elizabeth edwards?

  2. matt says:
    August 27, 2007 at 5:44 pm

    by proxy.

  3. mikebee says:
    August 27, 2007 at 6:04 pm

    couldn’t agree more. edwards is definitely getting my vote.

  4. JimC says:
    August 28, 2007 at 12:10 pm

    I’m not trying to stir the pot, but given Edwards’ polling numbers right now, does he have a tough uphill battle to get the nomination or will things turn for him closer to primary time? And why is he polling so low right now?

    Seems like the Democrat field is a lot more solid on who people have in mind as their candidate unlike the Republican side where “undecided” has been leading the pack…

  5. matt says:
    August 28, 2007 at 12:19 pm

    it’s august. past that, i don’t care where he is in the polls because the polls are what other people say. i’ve made up my mind to vote for the candidate who most closely represents my views and priorities, and in this case, it isn’t even close.

    as to why he’s behind in national polls, he hasn’t exactly been on the receiving end of the kind of attention clinton and obama are seeing. he hasn’t run a perfect campaign, but a better one than where his numbers reflect. and when it becomes clear that gore isn’t getting in, he’ll move up.

    undecided, or none of the above? seriously, what a bunch of losers.

  6. JimC says:
    August 28, 2007 at 1:51 pm

    I could be (and probably am) wrong but it seems Edwards doesn’t have the broader appeal that Clinton and Obama are pulling down. Edwards seem to be popular among a niche group amongst the left.

    Also are potential Gore voters really overlapping with Edwards voters? I would expect if Gore entered, that Gore would take voters away from Obama and Clinton not Edwards, which actually would help Edwards.

    As for the Republicans, I liked Mike Huckabee but didn’t think he was electable until he came in second in Iowa. Bill Maher had Huckabee on his show Friday night and touched on Fair Tax idea he is pushing. I like that idea, so I’m keeping an eye on him…

    Freddie still hasn’t entered as a candidate….seems like the FEC should have had roasted Fred by now ;-)

  7. matt says:
    August 28, 2007 at 6:58 pm

    I could be (and probably am) wrong but it seems Edwards doesn’t have the broader appeal that Clinton and Obama are pulling down. Edwards seem to be popular among a niche group amongst the left.

    like i said, this has a lot to do with type and amount of coverage.

    Also are potential Gore voters really overlapping with Edwards voters? I would expect if Gore entered, that Gore would take voters away from Obama and Clinton not Edwards, which actually would help Edwards.

    luckily for us all, you don’t have a job analyzing democratic politics.

    As for the Republicans, I liked Mike Huckabee but didn’t think he was electable until he came in second in Iowa

    you mean after everyone else decided not to contest iowa, right?

    Bill Maher had Huckabee on his show Friday night and touched on Fair Tax idea he is pushing. I like that idea, so I’m keeping an eye on him…

    i saw that. it’s possible that i dislike huckabee the least, but i’m wondering what it is about the “fair tax” you like. i’m guessing you haven’t run the numbers or read those that have.

    you can start here. the writer has impeccable conservative credentials. in short, the “fair tax” is right up there with supply side voodoo, only we don’t have to actually try it to know what kind of rates we would need (57% btw).

    Freddie still hasn’t entered as a candidate….seems like the FEC should have had roasted Fred by now ;-)

    he is facing a formal complaint. the fec doesn’t really “roast” anyone. they slap wrists mostly. doesn’t mean thompson isn’t breaking the law, i can’t see how anyone can make a case defending him at this point given that he’s been in one of the debates and has raised obviously more money than anyone “exploring” a run. he is flouting campaign finance laws he sponsored. now that’s hypocrisy.

    and don’t even get me started on sam “let me wash your feet” brownback. he’s an embarrassment to kansas and the senate.

  8. sarabeth says:
    August 28, 2007 at 11:07 pm

    the fec doesn’t really “roast” anyone. they slap wrists mostly. doesn’t mean thompson isn’t breaking the law

    Oh, Matt, you cynical old bastard! Surely that’s not true? Surely all our fine and noble institutions of government do only what is right and proper and fitting? If Thompson had broken the law, surely they would already have investigated and castigated him? Surely we wouldn’t have needed a “a left-wing blogger” to file a complaint before the wheels of electoral justice started to turn?

    You’re sick, Matt. Sick, sick, sick, sick, sick. Because surely our fine and noble institutions of government couldn’t be?