Edwards: S.C. Deserves Better Than Clinton-Obama Bickering

I agree with Edwards, the surest way to hand a victory in November to McCain, Romney, or Huckabee, will be to continue the infighting. This doesn’t serve either candidate, the Democratic Party, or the country well. Stick to the issues; forget the personalities.

I have said before that as I long time Clinton supporter I think they will live to regret the very harsh recent rhetoric. This only serves to split the party and will give Republicans more ammunitions. I am especially surprised at Bill Clintons tone. They really need to tone it down and bring their discussion up to a higher level like John Edwards.

Thank you for saying something about John Edwards. Not only is he deserving of more coverage, he’s also the most worthy candidate for the nomination. His poll numbers will continue to go up around the country as more and more people hear his message of real, transformational change…without the undue influence of corporate lobbyists and PACs.

I think that both Obama and Clinton campaigns are showing the true face behind their slogans. Same old politics, dirty tricks, smear campaign tactics and innuendos. They want to win at all cost!
I am tired already of the bickering and nasty stuff coming out from both sides, they are already hurting the party and both candidates are bounded for a match with the Republicans! I’ll vote for Edwards!

Nando-They ALL get federal matching funds. I am sure Obama and Clinton get a lot more of our tax dollars in matching funds then does Edwards. He unfortunately had to give in this time around (he did not take matching funds in 2004) to matching funds because the money being raised for campaigns has gotten out of control and it becomes a matter of whoever has the most money wins the election. It’s a sad statement about the way we elect those who are supposed to represent us.

Nando, the truth is that John Edwards has co-sponsored the Patients Bill of Rights (didn’t pass both houses) and has worked hard to make many bills more progressive with some important modifications or amendments. He has said that his vote to authorize the war in Iraq was wrong (something Hillary Clinton has not been willing to say, by the way), and he’s the most aggressive candidate on getting us out of Iraq. Clinton and Obama each have raised over $100 million, and have opted out of public financing. Personally, I would much rather have worthy, viable candidates receive public financing than from the likes of Enron, ExxonMobil, and Halliburton, et al, ad nauseum. Although I’m very skeptical of politicians in general, I’m certain about the wisdom of supporting John Edwards for president.

Peter – that’s exactly the reaction the Clintons want you to have. That’s why they orchestrated this whole thing to play out like it has. Sure, maybe Obama wins on specific point-by-point analysis, but in the end, its an appearance of two campaigns just going at one another.
Exactly what they want.
Why? Because they know Clinton wouldn’t be seen as anything more anyway. And they know Edwards won’t have the resources to run a national campaign. So to win all they have to do is give the appearance of knocking Obama down to their level, while helping the media to define his candidacy as that of just another African-American who can do well among African-Americans but who can’t win among whites.
Its brilliant, in sort of an evil scientist kinda way.

Ha, Obama and Axelrod should be back to Chicago soon so they can strategize how are they going to deal with all the facts coming out of the Rezko trial. The buzz in Chicago is that the Feds and the Prosecutor Fitzgerald will bring down some big names during the trial. Fasten your seat belts!

You all sound very nice. But you need to read Sam Donaldson piece. It’s not a garden party. It never has been. In fact, before T.V., it was far worse. The papers sensationalized it all, but it was in words. The papers sold like crazy, even though it was ugly. So now it’s on T.V., no where near as ugly as it used to be. But it’s still sensationalized, ’cause ratings count.

Great news, the Edwards campaign announced that in the first 25 days of this quarter, campaign has raised more online than the whole 4th quarter – the vast majority of which will be doubled by federal matching funds!!
Go Edwards!!

I don’t think that Edwards position himself well in this campaign. Fight for middle class means make money from middle class for him. the reason of Hillary and Obama took so much attention this year is that both of them represents so contrasting things before people. new vs old, past vs future, nice vs nasty, heart vs game, truth vs fales,grassroot vs status equo,honesty vs lying. there is no too much room for Edwards.

I just sent an online contribution to John Edwards. I have never in my life contributed to a political campaign. But, I trust this guy, and more than that, his economic and health care plans are fantastic (the latter copied by Clinton). And, he is going to get our guys and gals out of Iraq in his first year in office. I don’t get to vote ’til February 5, but I know he will still be in the race, and my vote will be for JRE.
PS. My health insurance costs $1000 a month. My mother is 87 and now requires care I can’t give her that will take every penny my dad left her and more. Believe me, I have thought hard about who I trust to get us out from under the control of the big insurance companies. John Edwards for President.

Gee, John’s numbers must be going up for us to hear such baseless nonesense like the above comment about haircuts. If anyone is interested, I read that the campaign was reimbursed for two such haircuts. For someone with John’s well-documented wealth, who cares what he spends on a haircut? As long as he sincerely cares about stopping the fleecing of America by powerful monied interests, and I believe he does, who in their right mind gives a rip about this minutia? Edwards 08!!!

This is ridiculous. Thank goodness someone had the decency to stand up and tell Americans “Hey these guys are acting like three-year-olds!” Stop the bickering and the mudslinging and get down to the stuff that really matters!

This is of course, cynical but fair opportunistic politics by John Edwards. Ironically, his campaign complains about the lack of coverage of his candidacy, but in this case, that also means far less scrutiny as well. If the media was scrutinizing the Edwards campaign, it might point out to the voters in S.C. (who may not have viewed previous debates) that it was often Edwards who was the most combative in previous debates, when he thought that strategy suited him best at the moment.