I find the Edwards mini-groundswell baffling, unless it is directly related tothe Kerry mistress bombshell. For all his shortcomings, Kerry is at least a highly experienced, seasoned public servant. Edwards is a small town trial lawyer who used a portion of his considerable wealth to buy his seat, spending three times what his incumbent opponent spent, and has been a part time Senator for 5 years. He has no experience, no record, no stature and basically has led a rather provincial life. He is young appearing--actually he is in his mid 50's--and smiles a lot, which voters seem to like. His actual campaign message however is as odious and divisive as any candidate in the race, including Sharpton and Kuchinich. His message is a stark appeal to victimology, envy and helplessness. Basically it is the same kind of appeal to prejudice that juries often fall for when you have an appealing plaintiff suing some big company. It is scary to think that a man with this sort of worldview could actually become president, or that a sizeable number of voters prefer him to Kerry.
Bush doesn't have much more experience and he clearly has the inferior intellect. If Bush is electable, then so is Edwards. m
Just saw on CNN - CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll for Feb 16-17 (same dates as in Rasmussen poll) Kerry - 55%, Bush 43% - Kerry leading by 12 points Edwards vs Bush - Edwards leading by 10 points.
Agree AAA, I find the mini-groundswell baffling too. Don't know why but somehow this reminds me of when JFK was running against Nixon and desperately needed to win New York state, his campaign sent out millions of postcards with a big smiling picture of the young and handsome Senator addressed to every woman in the state. The rest, as they say, is history....
It really doesn't mean anything at this point but... http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-02-18-poll_x.htm Kerry well ahead of Bush. So...when do they bring Osama in and when do they stage a crisis? Timing is critical. m
http://www.zogby.com/news/021804.html Based on this it looks like we will see another Bush victory in 2004. When the polls are broken down state by state. Bush has all the red states and Kerry has all the blue states. Nothing has changed.
I would point out that I have mistakenly tuned in to Dan Rather lately and can not believe how obiously biased his framing of the Edwards Kerry race has been. Instead of being neutral (I wish) he is using every trick in the book to make Edwards look good. It is seems so biased to me. His statement about it looking like it is now a two man race a few nights ago as soon as some partial results were in. I mean really? Is public opinion so easily swayed. Look I do not care for either candidate, I just was amazed at how all of a sudden the it seems that the "kingpins" took out Dean, propped up Kerry and now they are making sure they have a backup.
Mav, my man, You know you really can't have much of an effect campaigning here on ET. The people who will vote for Bush will. The people who will vote against Bush will. The disinterested probably won't make the effort to vote. But YOU CAN make a difference. You can take your passion and put it to use. Go work for the Bush campaign. Really. Your cheerleading posts, and your wishful thinking is fine. But it really doesn't accomplish a thing on this forum. Out on the street. Knocking on doors. Stuffing envelopes. That stuff really works. Not what you do here. Unless you believe you have made a single "convert" on ET. Do you? I mean really! Do you think you have changed one person's mind here? Peace, RS
I'm one step ahead of you. Already working on his re-election as well as an Illinois US Senate seat. Thanks for your concern though.