John Edwards

There are so many reasons why Hillary Clinton will never be Vice-President that the GOP has made us all a favor and put them all together on the first official 2008 Presidential Election attack ad against Barack Obama.

Thanks Hillary and Bill Clinton and idiotic Democrats, y'all super!

John Edwards told us 7 months ago why he would never endorse Hillary Clinton. I had forgotten about this rebuke until I found it looking for a clip of last night's endorsement.

It shows Edwards at the top of his litigation game --brutal yet never a moment emotional lost in the violence of his words. I've watched this now several times and I have to say, it is one of the most breath taking moments in political history.

It is without a doubt what cross many people's minds when the rumor about him getting an Attorney General nod in the Obama administration was floated earlier this year. Rumor or not, I have to say, chalk me in for making it a reality. John Edwards for United States Attorney General would wipe away the tortureful memories of John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales' tenures as USAGs.

Hi John,

This is not one of those letters. I've met Elizabeth and know that even though she is shorter than me, she'd easily kick my butt. Although, in truth, it's not one of those letters because I honestly am a total fan girl of your wife and there's nothing more than I would love than to see her face plastered everywhere as First Lady.

This is a letter that I've been mulling for some time because you've truly exceeded my expectations.

When I was ready to throw my support to you, the blogger fiasco happened and I was taken aback by the way it was all handled. I know, I know. There are no perfect candidates. Yet at that time I wasn't clear as to what you were bringing at the table as a presidential candidate.

Then you started talking about poverty and the state of the "real people's" economy. You evangelized about the two Americas. You demonstrated how there is a tremendous economic and political disconnect in this country. How what you've seen and talked with people in all your travels seems not to affect the people who are supposed to represent them in Washington. You talked about the evil of corporate handouts and the shadow rule by lobbyist.

You are talking about everything that nobody wants to talk about in Washington.

Sugar-coated cheeze with a side-order of pathos : Torn Between Two Lovers.

Interestingly enough, I have no song for Hillary.

John Kerry is known to hold the largest mailing lists of Democratic Party donors in the United States (at last rumors, it's supposed to be 4 million strong). If it has a return rate of even 3-5%, that's right there 150-200,000 active donors.

This endorsement if a major coup for the Senator from Illinois and in some mailing lists it is being described as a smackdown and repudiation of John Edwards.

Harsh.

Following is the text of the email with the links to the fundraising page in bold. It reads like a PBS fundraising event, LOL!

This is a special treat for all the linguists and language philosopher in da houze. It is time to compare and contrast the rhetorical styles of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

Lady's First :

Highlight of the speech it's right there at the beginning :
I come tonight with a very full and I want especially to thank New Hampshire. Over the last week, I listened to you and in the process I found my own voice.

John Edwards is next :

Highlight from the last third of the speech:
I want to be clear to the 99% of Americans who have not yet had the chance to have their voices heard that I am in this race to the condition, that I intend to be the nominee of my party and I am in this race until we have actually restored the American Dream and strengthened and restored the middle class of America.

So I ask all of you here and all of you who can hear the sound of my voice that 99% whose voices have not been heard in this democracy to join us in this grassroots campaign to create the kind of America that all of us believe in.

I believe that Hillary Clinton won for 4 very important reasons :

1. The campaign was able to get as many registered Democrats to vote for her as possible.

2. Since most registered Democrats who came to vote were women, the "tear heard around the world" was successful in getting her the last minute sympathy vote from people who ...

3. would have otherwise voted for John Edwards.

I think it is clear that for Hillary Clinton to stay in the race she needs to beat John Edwards, not Barack Obama. Edwards ran a remarkable game in Iowa. Had he had as much money as Clinton, he probably would have beaten her by more than just 1%. I am not sure though that under the voting trends of Iowa, he would have been able to beat Barack Obama.

4. The Obama campaign has insisted in equating their "I am not a black candidate" campaign with a complete disregard for the colored blogosphere. Yesterday was the day that it showed how much that has cost them.

So let's look at the numbers, courtesy of MSNBC.com :

Well, in Iowa we had a HUGE surprise win for Obama. I had called it for Clinton. New Hampshire I called for Obama. Looks like, barring a sudden turn around, it will go for Clinton. Well, I DID predict they would go different ways and I got THAT part right.

Iowa: Obama, Edwards, Clinton pull delegates (in descending order)

New Hampshire: Clinton, Obama, Edwards pull delegates (probably in that order)

This throws everything back into play, of course. Will this throw South Carolina back to Clinton? I predict it will go Obama. But I do think Nevada may stick with Clinton, though if the Culinary Union really does go Obama (as rumors circulated today). Which all means Feb 5th will be the big day we all expected it to be.

On the (yawn) Republican side, my predicted win for Huckabee in Iowa and McCain in New Hampshire came to pass. I was wrong about Wyoming which went for Romney instead of my predicted Huckabee.

So:

Iowa: Huckabee, Romney, Thompson pull delegates
Wyoming: Romney, Thompson, Hunter pull delegates
New Hampshire: McCain, Romney, Huckabee pull delegates (probably in that order)

So it really looks like both parties won't have a clue who will win until Feb 5th or after. And you know, that is kind of cool.

I predicted Hucakbee would win Iowa. It doesn't mean that much. He will probably win Wyoming and South Carolina as well. I think McCain has a good shot at New Hampshire. Giuliani might just pull off some wins. Romney...well, he may take Michigan. My money is on Huckabee winning the nomination and has been for months. But it remains a three-to-four way race among the sad, sagging Republican race. Remember that Fred Thompson was supposed to save the Republicans from complete lameness. THAT sure didn't work. So lameness it remains, but Huckabee may be the most dangerous of the lame candidates. He trounced Romney tonight and I think that MIGHT spell the end of Romney. If Romney weren't a flip-flopping creep, I wouldn't think it would matter. But given that I didn't really believe he had much of a chance from the start, I think his loss tonight is significant. I think either Huckabee will surge and dominate, or he will find himself in a close heat with either McCain or McCain and Giuliani once Feb. 5th comes around.

On the Dem side I predicted Hillary would win Iowa with Edwards a possible second. Obama pulled it off. I think this means Edwards has very little chance. By no means no chance. But the polls don't look good for him elsewhere, so losing Iowa means no momentum going forward...which bodes ill. He's no fool. He could still pull off a comeback, but I don't consider it likely.

As the primaries are beginning, I am naturally reflecting on the main candidates. I already discussed the chances (in my opinion) each candidate has in the upcoming primaries. Now I want to discuss the actual candidates and my opinions of them. This represents my thoughts on the candidates as individuals and on the issues.

I am facing the Democratic primaries MORE undecided than when I began. From the start I liked our candidates. They are a good bunch! Astonishingly intelligent and capable, even those I don't fully agree with on the issues. At first I figured I'd vote for any of the main candidates in the primary except Hillary, though I know I would be proud to work for her if she wins the nomination. Now I am even LESS decided because I even have entertained the possibility of voting for Hillary in the primary! I honestly don't yet know who I will vote for.

Probably the candidate who most matches my personal values is Kucinich. But I don't think I'd vote for him for two reasons: first, he has no real shot; and second because even if I like his values, I am unconvinced he'd make an effective leader. Carter was possibly our most moral and intelligent President ever, but he fell short as a leader at a time when even an effective leader would have been tested. We need a better leader than I think Kucinich would be in these days of a massive Bush mess.