Post-Debate: Undecided GOP Voter Leaning Towards Edwards
During the post-debate show last night, CNN's Erica Hill asked her room full of undecided Republican voters for a show of hands to see if any had settled on a candidate and there was a lot of shaking heads but not one hand raised.
Download | play 
Download | play
But what really made the moment special was one undecided Republican voter who thought she 'may' have finally decided:
Sharon: "I think if the Democrats have John Edwards, I'd vote for John Edwards." ... "I had thought about Giuliani, I had thought about Mitt Romney, also Fred Thompson. I don't care for his TV shows but you know, I thought maybe him being an actor that was just a persona and it's not."
I'll take a wild guess that wasn't exactly the answer any of the GOP contenders wanted to have broadcast to the masses, especially not Frederick of Hollywood.
I haven't quite let go of the possibility of Gore throwing in his hat, and have been warming to Obama lately, but there's no doubt that John Edwards would be an extremely formidable candidate in the general election. And the clip shows exactly why. In many ways he's the Republicans worst nightmare
Wonder if they cooked her and ate her yet?
Yeah, me love some of that "Giulian-o."
thank you dear;
May I have a slice of your apple pie?
I love real americans.
I think Edwards' chances may be better than some folks realize
My vote is going to depend on the first few early primaries. Whoever beats Hillary, I'll be giving them my primary vote.
Not to be overly cynical.....but any chance she was an Edwards "plant"?
Edwards rocks on trade
I think that woman may be one of the most damning arguments against Democracy I've heard in a long, long time.
this is killing me, Kucinich is the man but i can't support him, which defaults me to Edwards. i am no racist but the USA is not going to have a black prez. i'm sorry. it ain't gonna happen. and Hillary, forget it.
I'd vote Ron Paul if Edwards doesn't make it, and I am a socialist!!! But better we shrink this evil government than let it eat us up. He can't keep us from helping one another, but he might get us to defund the military industrial complex.
No IRS.....yesssss!!!
My immediate reaction exactly.
We're doomed.
In the words of the immortal Nelson from the Simpsons...HaaHAAAA!
Time for Secret Agent Malkin to rev up the old minivan again...that woman needs to be investigated!
I have a hard time believing that any on-air event involving a room full of Republicans or Democrats for that matter wasn't staged.
Stevenovitch @ 7:
Damning argument against democracy...not so much...damning evidence of the -2 watt brain activity of the GOP base...oh my yes.
Guess she wasn't from Virginia.. So much for loyalty oaths...JD
She thought about "Guiliano" and Mitt Romney. Maybe some Fred Thompson, but wait, she doesn't like his television shows so she can't vote for him. Funny, I am beginning to think the 60% of Americans that don't vote are the smart ones.
I saw her last night - missed the Edwards comment but overall she just succeeded in depressing me about the state of the electorate.
She's "thought about" the media-nominated GOP frontrunners, but she can't even pronounce Giuliani? The deciding factor on Thompson is something about a TV show? What was it that attracted her to Edwards? I'm guessing "progressive, thought-out approaches to poverty and health care" ranked somewhere on the list below "nice hair" and "winning smile". (Saying this as an Edwards supporter myself, mind you).
This kind of voter is why I'm terrified of Mike Huckabee.
My first thought was, "Damn, so those are what those morons look like." Not an impressive bunch I have to say. So damn shallow... No wonder they are such easy sheep for the big Gov/Media to pick off.
Question Blog @ 8:
Two pea-in-a-pod bumperstickers here:GIULIANI? NO! and HILLARY? FORGET IT!!
Alternet Ron Paul Article
lewisnclark @ 1:
You should - he's not running. Why can't people get that?
...Fred Thompson. I don’t care for his TV shows but...
Do the math: What would she have said had she really liked his TV shows?
Jesus, this is the average US American, world.
"Bin Laden" just released a new tape, just in time to knock the republican debate off the hot topic list. What a coincidence!
I was watching this with my girl friend and she said "Where did they find these people? Did they clean up some homeless people out behind CNN's studio and put them in this panel?"
Chris H. @ 17:
I feel like I've been snookered into voting all these years.
DocG @ 22:
Because we really like him! (Sigh.)
carsick @ 13:
Too late she's already screaming that the woman was a plant. She's even getting top of the page listing on Drudge. The cheerleader is livid.
Mark @ 25:
$%^& you Mark!
Homeless people are either crazy, drug dependent, extremely anti-social or all of the above.
The sheep you saw last night have mortgages, and kids in school, and an addiction to MsM and a fear of thought. The sheep you saw last night ARE the USA.
These are the people who's hometown factory has closed down, yet they vote Republican.
Their kids are coming home in plastic bags yet they vote republican.
They wave the flag of freedom but use the "N" word freely.
They are proud of their Irish, German, Italian, Polish, Czech or whatever heritage...but keep those damn wetbacks out of their county at all costs.
mark that was a thoughtless comment, please realign your brain.
C. Montgomery Burns @ 27:
why??
because he rolled over when it counted?
because he was all about NAFTA?
because he won a Nobel Prize? (I like that!!)
because he is against the war? (I bet if he had been Presisdent after 9/11 he would have attacked Iran as well!!)(when he was VP him and Bill bombed the FUCK out of Serbia!!)
You ought to have to take a test on current events to be allowed to vote.
-Juliano
*Iraq...sorry!! I was excited!!
Question Blog @ 29:
This post speaks the truth.
Mark @ 25:
It's the Universal Law of TV News: When a non-pundit is interviewed, they will interview the stupidest person in the area.
This isn't exactly accidental, either. They do it to be sure the person doesn't use anything over a fifth-grade vocabulary to keep people from hurting their heads from thinking too hard and changing the channel before the commercials come on.
I wouldn't expect anything more from CNN, a channel that thinks WTO and FTAA protestors "just hate capitalism."
Question Blog @ 10:
I'm also a socialist, and I see Ron Paul as the antithesis of what I stand for. Socialism is ultimately about enhancing the level of public participation in the decision-making process, and Ron Paul wants to snatch the tiny shred of democracy that we currently have in government, and destroy it. He will willingly give predatory corporations even more power then they already do, while eliminating all of the rights and protections that we have worked so hard to achieve. Last time I checked, the public has NO direct democratic control over big business.
Ron Paul is a dangerous man. I would think twice before voting for him.
C. Montgomery Burns @ 27:
What's changed me about Gore is that he is not creating an impression that he wants the presidency or that he would run hard if "begged" to. I have to sit on the sidelines during the primary because non-affiliated voters can't vote in my state, but I will go for either Obama or Edwards if one of them wins the Democratic nomination. I favor Edwards a bit because his current status is an outsider to the Democratic establishment.
hey, hollywood fred, what did the 5 fingers say to the face? s-lap!!
and, might i add, that a ron paul administration would be greatly appreciated by corporations. with the government castrated, they could further their strangle hold on the world. cutting all of the regulatory agencies and govt oversight is, to me, one of the worst ideas since loafed bread. ron paul, nice guy, but his policy ideas send a chill down my spine.
Phantom,
I agree....but I see him as a useful tonic. He still has to work with Congress. But look at his voting record. It's as bad as it is good!!
Alternet Ron Paul Article
This says it all!!
He's not my first choice, but I'll take him over Clinton!!
I live in Dick Gephardt's old district. I got an email from him today asking me to support Clinton...MY ASS!!!
It is a mystery why the people, who are feeling the worst of what the bush administration has done to them, do seem to be the very ones who will most likely vote for one of these republican candidates in 08. I'm hoping that once that voting booth curtain has closed some of them may well vote for a democrat. They may tell their friends and polls they will vote repub, but in the privacy of that booth, it may be different. Let's hope.
greyhawk @ 28:
Okay, maybe she is a plant, but (gri)malkin is a vegetable.
Just like all the rest of the people who asked questions at CNN's farce of a debate last night, this lady had to be a Democrat plant too.
I mean, c'mon, she was the first one to start blabbing. She had her hand up in the air before the CNN person even finished asking the question. Way too obvious.
Ron Paul is not pro choice folks.. That is a huge issue for a lot of people - WOMEN.
Actually, there are more independents than partisans now anyway. Partisans have crossed lines to vote for Kennedy, and others to vote for Ray Gun.
Dismissing questions as plants behooves no one, but maybe Mr. Ed.
“I think if the Democrats have John Edwards, I’d vote for John Edwards.”
BINGO.
>> This is only good under the "I'll take what I can get department."
Republicans seem to flock to strong leaders, because the world is scary and without lots of guns and laws, people are wicked and they will take your stuff and sleep with your dog. Anyone NOT agreeing with that view needs to stay after class.
Now, this pool of voters, vote for people who don't really like popular voting, and do what they can to discourage voters -- which tends to help Republicans win elections. The elite have some sort of image of a meritocracy, where only those who should vote, are allowed to -- because not everyone should be voting (probably, anyone below VP in a business in their minds). Yet, here we have an example of a voting Republican, who probably justifies their world view of not everyone is capable of making good decisions when they vote. If it weren't for people not educated enough to function in a Democracy, there wouldn't BE a Republican party. Democrats do great in states with good education and functioning cities -- can you figure out any possible explanation for Mississippi re-electing their Senator, who is retiring early to spend more time with his lobbyists money/handsome boy-toy?
This lady was thinking about Fred Thompson -- but his character acting, seemed to bleed over into who he was... what? I think I need to try some peyote before I could follow this...
Thanks forever, lady, for mentioning that Edwards looked better than any Republican, but please, keep quiet about how you came to that decision. I expect it probably has more to do with hair care products than how he plans to insure more Americans with Medicare.
Overall, I think that this Republican "debate" -- more of a beauty contest for paid-to-play Business executives, was what the term "LOL" was invented for. "Yes, Repubs, Am in UR Base, stealing UR Voterz."
I'm a forward looking person. And I have to thank the NeoCons and their Republican dupes for the past entertaining two decades. I was worried America was running out of things to feel really strongly about, and really dumb things to make fun of. This string of corrupt, not-gay, preening and arrogant know-nothings that they are trying to rule the world with, or at least feather a nest, are going to provide decades of comic relief. The only question is, who is going to play Colonel Klink and who will be Schulze (Alberto Gonzales) characters.
Stevenovitch @ 9:
Agreed, Americans are pathetic people. Fat, stupid and dumpy looking. This is not a left right issue. America as we knew her is done. If dumpy fat people like her are used to persuade other dumpy fat americans we haven't a chance. I am moving if Ron Paul does not get elected. I don't want to be around during the death throws of this bloated carcass formerly known as the Republic of the United States of America. Ain't Democracy grand? Pathetic.
pissed off patricia @ 39:
Patricia,
It's a mystery to me why anyone struggling right now would believe that any of the Democrat candidates are going to do anything better for them. We're already seeing how hollow their promises were from one year ago.
Dennis @ 41:
>> What are the chances of having 10 Republicans off the street, and one considering voting Democratic? Pretty high, actually. It isn't the softball questions that are the problem is it? Are there so many Republican voters, who are standing in line, dying to speak to a candidate and ask him; "How did you get to be so wonderful and tough on crime?" "What's your favorite passage from the bible?" "How will you stop Democrats from taxing us more?"
It's supposed to be a challenge to the candidates -- not an exercise in cheerleading. I think they must have done a great job screening out people with common sense to get the softball audience that the Republicans have received so far.
Anyone who threatens to move, because their candidate who doesn't have the brains of a walnut fails to win, I say good riddance.
“I think if the Democrats have John Edwards, I’d vote for John Edwards.”
Can it be any clearer? Helloooo???
She thought about Giulian-o, Romney and Thompson but now leans Edwards. Okay, she's not thinking, she's not reading, she needs to go back to watching tv and stay home on election day. This is not about choosing a date or who you might want to marry.
I refuse to believe that any one of the Dem. candidates would be as bad as this bush administration has been. If they were that kind of person, they would most likely be Republicans.
jmac @ 50:
You just don't get it do you, jmac???...Jeez. "This is not about choosing a date or who you might want to marry." That's exactly what its about for most Americans. We just need to put up the right "date". (hint: She wouldn't "date" a black, a woman or a short friend of Shirley McLane...Hmmmm.)
Said it before, I'll say it again: Edwards is the only one who can win.
13 carsick
Have you been strapped to the roof of Romney's car too?
ysbaddaden @ 48:
That is not a threat. I sincerely feel that way. I am already making plans my friend. This is a very dangerous situation and these types of people are held up to convince other stupid people that it's OK to be stupid. Sheep to the slaughter. Some people really should not be allowed to vote. Most women in fact. It's pretty simple actually. We can't all be super models on the cover of Vogue. Perhaps it is time to consider the idea that some people just don't have what it takes to process critical life changing information. why should i have to submit myself to unthinking people like the woman in this video. It's simply wrong and I am tired of paying for it. And before you snipe back at me...how much do you pay in taxes? Perhpas you are jsut lke this woman. Perhaps you should not even be allowed to make comments? :)
ellobo @ 56:
Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out...Buh Bye.
when the media is asking questions like which candidate would you like to have a beer with, some people see the election as a popularity contest rather than take it as seriously as it should be taken.
Edwards is good. I would like to see if he has a broad appeal to other Republicans. I also wonder why the woman likes Edwards. Democrats should be looking at that.
lewisnclark @ 1:
Obama wants to EXPAND the unConstitutional "Faith-Based Initiative." He's a worse DLCer than Hillary.
#56 "Some people really should not be allowed to vote. Most women in fact."
Speechless over that remark
Johnny2Bad @ 57:
Folks, if you want to get a good glimpse of the American electorate, ride public transportation in any big city for 45 min. You'll get off thinking maybe there should be some qualifications for voting.
The Global Strategy Group has been saying that, poll after poll, month after month, show that head-to-head -- Dem vs. GOP -- Edwards beats everyone. Both parties.
linky to the data
Actually, we need women like this. The progressives lost them during Ray Gun's union busting, and the old hippy days spooked them.
However, if they're former Dixiecrats I don't want them back.
She was never going to vote Republican. If she was, and decided to vote Dem, she'd go with someone closer to the middle, i.e. Hillary, Biden, etc....
Johnny2bad At 53 I am not triangulated my vote for a candiate based on who I think some idiot might vote for. I suspect you're not either.
Actually, we need men like this too.
The idea that they're too old or too ugly or too ignorant to vote reminds me of how the reichwingers made fun of the elderly duriing the 2000 election aftermath, because they were thrown by the Floridian butterfly ballots.
ellobo @ 62:
Blah blah..."Ron Paul"...Blah blah..."Pay my taxes"...Blah blah, "Hard working American"...Blah Blah, F*ckin Blah.
Why are you still here??? Thought you left...If you're going to go...Go, already.
It's amazing that so many people are taking this upcoming election so seriously, and nit-picking to death the miniscule 'differences' they imagine between tweedle-dum and tweedle-dee.
There are only two important thing to remember about this election:
1. Something other than a republican must be elected.
2. Other than that, nothing matters.
jmac @ 67:
Vote away, pal...The point is we want a lot of those "idiots" to vote Democratic. Duh.
If Clinton fails to ignite and drops out Edwards can claim all the momentum and name his VP before the convention, tough times require bold action after all. He can further name his proposed cabinet, let the right wingnuts cum all over themselves failing to look 1/4 as attractive as a young smart man with a plan and answers. Then the fundies can go spit, right?
I heard that Ruth Bader Ginsburg may retire after the next election, and possibly one other liberal justice. I'm not sure who, maybe Kennedy.
So whoever wins the next election may get a chance to fill two seats on the Supreme Court.
kaT @ 63:
Funny, after having ridden NYC's subway, DC's Metro, St Louis' MetroLink and the HRT bus system in VA about a gazillion times each I've come away with the complete opposite opinion.
ysbaddaden @ 65:
Wah? Huh? Who gives a sh*t?? Votes, Brotha...Votes!
pissed off patricia @ 61:
Ditto.
The 2008 presidential election is the Democrat's to lose. If they nominate Obama or Hillary over Edwards they will fulfill their destiny.
Hillary 08!
Beyond that, WHOMEVER WINS THE DEM NOM, GETS MY VOTE, period.
Why's everyone ignoring Hillary's actual "liberal" voting record? Why is everyone ignoring that it's identical to Obama's? Isn't a voting record as a whole main evidence in how a person will vote?
Question Blog @ 10:
Every time someone begins a statement with I'm no racist but.....what follows is a racist statement.
Actually the reichwingers are probably afraid there are more voters like this one, so the loyalty oaths their trying to start in Virginia will spread.
But if Virginia spreads, won't she not be a virgin anymore?
71 says "The point is we want a lot of those "idiots" to vote Democratic. Duh."
And just who do you think those idiots will vote for? You don't know - they're idiots. I'm voting for Hillary but supporting any Democratic candidate that gets the nomination. And don't come back that Hillary can't win. She won over the conservative upstate NY farmer, she won over bubba in Arkansas, she's got the respect of people like Tom Delay and Newt and the right is scared silly she will win the nomination. They're not scared silly because they think they can beat her.
Freedomboy @ 72:
"Freedomboy" should win a prize for getting these phrases into one comment: "Cum all over", "attractive young man" and "go spit".
Nice work, Fb.
I like Edwards...but I don't get the lack of appeal to the rest of America.
I wouldn't put a 'GOP voter leaning toward Edwards' in the 'undecided' column.
I'd move her from 'republican', to 'sane'.
jmac @ 81:
That's funny...so do I.
jmac @ 81:
That's funny...so do I.
(Hope that looks bettah.)
Edwards/Obama '08! (and '12!)
For the "might be a plant" people. My local newspaper prints a few letters each month from people who claim to be life-long republicans, but have HAD ENOUGH. Plant or no plant, that woman's sentiments are a lot more common then people realize.
adama7 @ 79:
And anyone who would consider voting for Ron Paul and dreams of not having to pay taxes needs to quit calling himself a 'socialist' Because you give socialism a bad bad name. Undeservedly so. And too many people are too stupid to realise a self-proclaimed ANYTHING isn't necessarily believing their OWN hype.
Preacher Boob @ 84:
What the clip didn't show was her spitting out the Kool-Aid.
Fusterblictok @ 54:
I like Edwards -- for me, he is at the top of the list. But many Dems could win. Biden, Obama, and even Kucinich (who is my favorite -- as long as that Ron Paul VP idea is a joke).
justabill @ 76:
Women should be allowed to vote as soon as they learn to think like men.
First we'll have to graft dicks on them.
Jay @ 66:
What, you read minds? You are assuming that she cares about policies -- I think that's a stretch. She TALKED about the character that Thomspon plays on TV -- what does that tell you about this voter? She votes based upon who she would want at the dinner table.
Here is a secret way to figure out who will win the election. Go to a grocery store, look at the tabloids. Whomever they show calmly walking with an alien on Weekly World News, and whomever is on the cover of the National Enquirer is the next president. Works every time.
kaT @ 63:
i live in philly and ride the train to work everyday. so, i take your comment as a direct insult.
you might find inner city americans undesirable, but fucking come to south philly and spew your asisine bullshit.
grrrrrr, why must i suffer such fools.
VitriolAndAngst @ 93:
So I guess that would be Oprah, Brittney, Madonna, Angelina, or Brad?
pissed off patricia @ 52:
That is a certainty. Today's republicans are the most deadly, cancerous lot to infect this nation in my lifetime (and I'm older than you).
People here can dissect the actions of Dems all they want, but the republicans will never, ever stand up for the little people, they hate our Constitution, they love the military/industrial complex, and they wear their phony religious bullcrap on their lapels and in your face. They're trying to privatize the United States, which will have disastrous results for all of us. We're already feeling it.
Any Democrat running is better than all of the repubs combined. repubs are just a bunch of empty male suits who have an obsession with man-sex.
This is more than likely the worse collection of candidates any party has ever put together in U.S. history. Would someone please tell Fred Thompson he's dead. McCain clearly is still suffering from the years at Hanoi Hilton. Shitt Romney will say anything to get you to buy that used car. Guiliani is the only man who could out-whore Bill Clinton and fuck the world up worse than Bush at the same time. Ron Paul (who looks like Dracula's servant) is simply the best looking piece of shit in the pile of shit. Rev. Bubba Huckleby appeals to the Jethroe's and Ellie may's down south. Those other fools were just security that CNN put at the remaining poduims to fill in space.
Question Blog @ 10:
Pffffffffffffffttt! Next please!
Ruthless People @ 90:
Why would she spit it out???
This election crap is all smoke and mirrors. The neocons are busy destroying this country behind the scenes and none of us are paying attention. There will be no election in 2008, the neocons have worked too hard to steal all the power that they have to give it up in a few months.
Bryan Caplan is right!
Wow, that woman might be the dumbest person in the world. Her choices were Giuliano, Romney, and Thompson at first. Then she went with Hunter. She's exactly the kind of person the GOP loves. All it takes is a few appeals from "Giuliano" about 9-11 or fearmongering from Romney about the illegals and she'll be back on the GOP side in a jiffy.
Preacher Boob @ 92:
I think you have to go to Sweden to get a strapadictomy.
ExxonMobil4prez @ 42:
On the other hand, if Bush couldn't roll that back, what makes you think RP could? We've had rabidly anti abortion presidents for most of the last 40 years.
Left&Left @ 97:
you left out Tom Tornado, whirlwind of christo-facist xenophobic horror
I love these liberal lefty socialist websites. Ha. Ha. You all think Edwards and any of the other socialist idiots are going to save your ass? No way Man. And the republicans are worse! America is sick and dying. We either go back to what made us great or we become a 3rd world nation. Frankly, there is nothing wrong with 3rd world nations. In fact, in some cases they are better than the U.S. But, and a big but, you have to have money. Then build a wall around your house to keep the proletariat out. Of course, you will need workable gates to let the help in to clean your windows and floors. Don't believe me? This is the way it is in Mexico, Brazil, Argentina and Chile. Still don't believe me? Just go to Southern California baby! They already have their gated communities and whitey is ready in the OC for what is coming down. i.e. Laguna Beach. They have nice high fences and private security to keep the riff raff out. It's just like South America. Remember, what happens in California typically spreads to the rest of the nation. Save your money and get a good job so that you wont be on the wrong side of the fence. We are in for some interesting times. Fat, stupid, dumpy Americans like this Pig in the video are the problem. So are some of the commenters on this board.
I have my money and I am not worried about it. I just have compassion for my fellow man and don't want to see half of the people on this board cleaning my toilets. Most importantly i hate to see my country destroyed by socialism. Is that not what our grandparents fought against in WWII? It's alive and well here in AMRIKA! Buckle down this is going to be one fun ride.
GO HILLARY 2008!! Stupid pathetic fat American assclowns. You make me sick.
Question Blog @ 30:
Take a deep breath, Q-Blog. You don't seriously believe that Al Gore would've invaded Iraq, do you?
Nobody, not even Ronald Reagan at his most rabid Contra-pimping, or Richard Nixon at his most paranoic, NO President except this one would've tried to march into Bagdad and then occupy a Muslim nation of this size. C'mon, even George Bush (the first) knew better.
Only a bat-shit crazy Neo Con is myopic and delusional enough to attempt what the current batch of dimwits is doing.
ellobo @ 106:
Actually , ellobo, it was our grandparents who instituted Social Security, Medicare, the United Nations, and other of what I'm sure you'd label "socialist" reforms to the American economy and our perspective.
They did so because, in the aftermath of the the distasters of the Great Depression and World War II, they were keenly aware of the need to create a more fair and stable society and economy.
It was the next generation of rapacious, short sighted big business, mostly Republicans, that's been working overtime to roll back those, consequently destabilizing the economy and the American society as a whole.
And they've done a pretty damn good job of it!
Yeah, I agree; America is sick. Maybe it's even dying like you say, and I find it pretty ironic that in just six years the current "administration" of Neo Cons has done far more to undermine the American military, sink the American economy and to generally destabilize the body politic than any of the New Left radicals of the late '60's could have hoped for in their wildest dreams.
It's totally laughable to say that "socialism" is destroying the United States. What... you think John Edwards is a Marxist or something? Maybe get out from behind the walls of your gated community and study some history.
Jay @ 66:
For whatever reason John Edwards is considered more of a centrist than HRC and Obama, who have staked out positions that are calculated to appeal to the Broder centrists.
I suspect this is b/c Edwards is a Southern "White" male.
The polling linked by noodles is pretty hard hitting.
Noodles @ 64:
If the polling is accurate, Edwards puts the Dems in the ballgame in Oklhoma and Virginia as well as the usual swing states.
If I'm in the right mood, I see Obama as being a particularly good decision maker. But Edwards is pretty good on policy issues and he's a helluva campaigner.
Back to the polling, I'd be curious to see how Edwards and Huckabee match up in Iowa. It seems like Iowa is a pretty good test state b/c the voters there are pretty familiar with the candidates and its a swing state. Would Edwards put up the dominating poll numbers against Huckabee he does against Giuliani, Romney and Thompson?
ellobo @ 106:
IIRC the allies fought against fascism in WWII. Fascism emphasized close links between industry and gov't and embraced traditional culture, racism and religiosity.
The allies included a major communist state (USSR) and the market economies of UK and USA. In both the UK and USA some policies associated with socialism had been adopted to protect against the excesses of the market economies.
Of COURSE Republicans would vote for Edwards. It would be a bigger landslide general election than Reagan.
That is why the Dems will obviously nominate Hillary or Obama. Because if you are a Democrat, it means you'd rather lose and bitch about it, than win. It's a lot harder to play the victim when you win.
Carl Nyberg @ 110:
Carl Nyberg - good point. We fought against fascism which in my mind is a form of right wing socialism. So, I believe it is still socialism. I don't want either. With the left in Amrika we get socialism. with the right we get fascism. They are both wrong and they are both group ideologies. I wish people would wake up. Edwards will not fix the problem. he is a huge part of the problem. We need to kill the system and start anew. I can assure you it will be painful but more people are going to get hurt in the next 20-30 years under what is coming than if we dismantle the system ourselves. Save your money. Stay close to your family and friends. We are Americans and we don't need Edwards, Hillary, or any of them. We need to get back to basics. The constitution and the Bill of rights. And yes, i have a right to the fruits of my labor. sorry, but you cant have it both ways.
lewisnclark @ 108:
I am not behind any walls yet but i am getting ready. And I agree with everything you wrote. I already said the Republicans are worse than the socialists. Yes, very ironic and I would never have thought it either. Here is my post to Carl.
- good point. We fought against fascism which in my mind is a form of right wing socialism. So, I believe it is still socialism. I don't want either. With the left in Amrika we get socialism. with the right we get fascism. They are both wrong and they are both group ideologies. I wish people would wake up. Edwards will not fix the problem. he is a huge part of the problem. We need to kill the system and start anew. I can assure you it will be painful but more people are going to get hurt in the next 20-30 years under what is coming than if we dismantle the system ourselves. Save your money. Stay close to your family and friends. We are Americans and we don't need Edwards, Hillary, or any of them. We need to get back to basics. The constitution and the Bill of rights. And yes, i have a right to the fruits of my labor. sorry, but you cant have it both ways.
What Edwards and Obama policy proposals to you consider to be too much like socialism? And what harm do you see these policies doing if enacted?
Carl Nyberg @ 114:
It’s not so much that I am picking on Edwards or Obama. It's the fact that they support the status quo. It's not working and we need to accept it and get a plan in place to take care of ourselves. Somebody told me earlier to read some history. I do and of course i need to read more. But, i also encourage anybody reading this to also look at history and pay special attention to everything in your daily life that makes the world go round. All of the technological break throughs...electricity, communication and so many things I can't even think about or know about. What i can tell you is this; History progressed for thousands of years on pretty much a straight path...think a flat line on a graph going from left to right. FLAT!...until guess what year. That's right...right around 1780 all of the technological advances that we enjoy today started to develop and have been evolving ever since. What happened in 1780? Think more exactly 1776. Man was free at last.
Man is so much greater when left up to his own to pursue his dreams unencumbered by tyrannical rules and taxes. Our country proves this case in point. The world has never seen such success and we owe it all to America’s founders and all of the brilliant scholars they read that had been formulating their ideas since the Magna Carta.
So, to answer your question. All of their policies. I don't even have to know their plans to tell you I oppose them because i know that all of their policies will involve forcing people to do things they probably don't want to do. They use the force of the govt. (THINK GUNS or JAIL) to coerce people like me to behave a certain way. We need freedom for the individual not group healthcare policies and group retirement packages and group govt. funded day care and schools. All of it is coercion and involves force to get the results some bureaucrat desires.
Freedom is the answer just like it was outlined in the late 18th century. Freedom to be a dumb ass, freedom to hurt yourself, and freedom to have the chance that you might end up on skid row if you don't use your head and make good decisions. But, guess what you get in return. Freedom to associate with anybody you want. Freedom to do what you want with your body and say what you want. Freedom to build flying machines without some nanny state mother asking if you have helmets before you try out your new flying machine. Think about that. There is a good chance that if we had all of these socialist concerned mothers running around North Carolina in 1903 the Wright Brothers probably would have been ticketed and shut down for not wearing the proper head gear. All of it. it needs to stop. The nanny state. Everything. Freedom is the answer. Yes, it can be risky for some but it can be exhilarating too. Freedom will bring so much more great things to this world than Hillary and Edwards healthcare could ever imagine possible. I am wound up now as you can see so i bid you a good night and thank you for reading.
Would you consider yourself free of coercion if you and your family could lose your health care on the say so of your boss?
Citizens aren't terribly free if they have to ingratiate themselves to their bosses to keep their children physically safe.
Carl Nyberg @ 114:
I've had three hardcore Bushivek friends who voted for him in 2004 come out and say that Bush and Cheney are pure evil and... that they liked John Edwards. This is in the last 30 days and its pretty amazing the turn around that is happening.
The posters who are mouthing the "socialist" nonsense are GOoper trolls and not worth reading. The wingnuts love Hillary because they think they can beat her or buy her, but they fear Edwards... he is their worst nightmare.
ellobo @ 115:
Like I said Carl...
When it comes right down to it... he doesn't even know what their plans are or what they have said. Just another uniformed GOoper or Libertarian troll spouting BS!
The thing is Ellobo, just because the Nazi's labeled themselves "National Socialists" doesn't mean that their belief system or policies had anything to do with socialism of the sort you seem to be concerned about.
As Carl Nyberg points out, fascism per se (and certainly in the form of Naziism) requires a militaristic authoritarian state working hand in glove with industrial capitalism. That has nothing to do with socialism as envisioned by Marx in the 19th century.
As for having it both ways; yes, of course you have a right to the fruit of your labors. But by the same token, modern liberal democracy is based on the premise of the social contract. (You know, John Locke and Rosseau and all that?) That is, recognizing the fact that we all participate in a society with our fellow citizens in which there are certain responsibilities as well as rights.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract
The fruits of your labor don't grow in a vacuum, and your ability to benefit from them is derived to some degree by the society around you. For example, you drive to work on public roads and freeways that are maintained for the common good. Most people are educated in public schools, and most scientific and technological research in universities is publicly funded. (In fact, right now we're participating in a discussion on the internet, which was initially developed by public funds). Citizens are protected by commonly agreed to laws and have legal recourse in public courtrooms, and so on...
I agree things have gone waaaay off kilter, but like I said, that has pretty much zilch to do with socialism. I also certainly agree that neither John Edwards nor any other politician can save us from our own ignorance and sense of entitlement.
You say we need to kill the system and start anew. I wonder what you have in mind?
ellobo @ 46:
Get out of here now, then. We don't need people who run at the thought that they need to do more than cast a ballot to help a country.
that @ 120:
group think here boys. Enjoy your grave.
HA HA HA Hillary Clinton is tainted goods & CNN is trying to pull a fast one.
Edwards is obviously the strongest candidate & the only one speaking out about this crisis America is in right now.
We have Terrorist groups trying to destroy America & little cowboy George as the fucked up decider.
lewisnclark @ 119:
Nothing violent to be sure. The great thing about being an American is our heritage. We don't have much in history in terms of years. But, what we have is the best the world has ever seen. Our heritage is individual liberty. Basic stuff and you can read all about in the bill of rights and constitution. Or if you wanna go crazy go ready some Thomas Paine. All written by fine Americans. Although, i think Tom might have been an immigrant. Weclome the immigrants too! Just don't give em any free shit.
Rasputin @ 118:
Hey Rasputin - you're not far from wrong. In fact i always considered myself a Republican but once i took a break from work and traveled the world i just cant get on board with the idea of lusting to kill ayyyrabs. So, i am homeless yes. Not a troll thouhg. I i read this site b/c Amato(sp) likes to keep the Republicans in check. I can appreciate that. But, i have to hold my nose on this site for everybody's love affair with the left. As if the left is any better. I have never posted before and then this video this afternoon just set me off. So, take it easy my friend. I try to learn from all of you perhaps you could learn somthing from me too? no?
ellobo @ 113:
Facism isn't really anything written in stone either capitalist or socialist, usually it's a bit of both. Facism is the apotheosis of the state, of authority, of the nation - it seeks to unite all these things. Since it is almost entirely emotional, there's never been any solid "ideology" behind facism; they don't really care for anything but unity and destroying all dissent. Facists don't have much use for political theory other than control mechanisms. Neocons are indeed facistic, but they are also very capitalist, or corporatist, much more so than say, Franco or Mussolini. Socialism really doesn't have anything to do with authoritarianism (a common misconception in American thinking), anarchists, after all, are socialists. Calling people like Clinton 'communists' is just ludicrous, they're pretty firmly in the crony capitalist camp. I would be shocked if she knew anything about Marxist theory.
Jay @ 66:
Keep fooling yourself. Voters like her aren't focusing on the issues, they are going by their "gut" and who they feel comfortable with.
She "likes" Edwards, and that's why should would vote for him. She probably can't stand Hillary Clinton's guts.
Ruthless People @ 77:
Hello intelligent person with a brain. I wish there were more like you. More like you.
Carl Nyberg @ 109:
For some reason?
Republican strategists always point out that the "southern accent" is a moderating force for Democrats.
If the most liberal member of Congress has a southern accent, people will perceive him as a moderate.
That's one reason why the Republicans don't want to run against John Edwards.
The guy running on the most progressive platform of the top 3 Dems is also the most electable.
swarmofkillermonkeys @ 111:
Hello, smart person. You are very intelligent, and apparently you get it. Democrats always snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, or either run the weakest candidate and set themselves up for a loss.
But hey, the media is subliminally telling them to go with Clinton and Obama and using the media coverage and its subsequent polls to present the "image" that Clinton and Obama would be stronger General Election candidates than they really would be, so they are leaning that way right now.
Hopefully, Iowa will wake up before it's too late.
ellobo @ 124:
Funny... there was a libertarian troll in the Navy who used to come on here and post the same type of rhetorical drivel using the moniker "Private Freedom." His posts were just as useless.
ellobo @ 124:
Uh...no.
ellobo @ 112:
YOU FEAR EDWARDS HE WILL TEAR DOWN YOUR ONE SIDED FENCE & YOUR DISTORTED PERCEPTIONS OF SOCIALISM DEMOCRACY & EVERYTHING ELS YOU SPEW IN SUPPORT ClintoNN
miss_kitty @ 89:
A bad bad name indeed.
I wonder how they plan on implementing all those "socialist" programs to benefit the people, without the power of the IRS (and goverment oversight) to collect revenue?
Do they think those rich Bushy types (along with the corporate entities) are simply going to willingly share their wealth? Good luck with that.
One thing we should have learned from the nightmare of these last seven years, is that left to their own devices (unregulated and under-taxed), the wealthy will devour the middle class in the blink of an eye.
Funny, that you should choose the late 18th century as your ideal and bash a way at Edwards and his health care plans to insure all Americans. His “Two Americas” theme and economic populism does scare the crap out of corporatists like yourself.
The late 18th century was the “Gilded Age”, the age of “Robber Baron” unregulated capitalism. Oh people were free alright… free to work 18 to 20 hours a day in the coal mines of Pennsylvania while the trust sold them the tools and food at prices calculated to leave them nothing at the end of the week.
This began to change under Teddy Roosevelt in 1902 when he became President and those coal miners went on strike and he became the first President to ever side with labor by calling out Federal troops to protect the miners from the hired thugs of Mine owners… the Pinkertons.
The real Golden age of Capitalism didn’t come until after WWII. As economist Paul Krugman points out in his new book “Conscience of a Liberal.”:
Excerpt:
The Long Gilded Age: Historians generally say that the Gilded Age gave way to the Progressive Era around 1900. In many important ways, though, the Gilded Age continued right through to the New Deal. As far as we can tell, income remained about as unequally distributed as it had been the late 19th century – or as it is today. Public policy did little to limit extremes of wealth and poverty, mainly because the political dominance of the elite remained intact; the politics of the era, in which working Americans were divided by racial, religious, and cultural issues, have recognizable parallels with modern politics.
The Great Compression: The middle-class society I grew up in didn’t evolve gradually or automatically. It was created, in a remarkably short period of time, by FDR and the New Deal. As the chart shows, income inequality declined drastically from the late 1930s to the mid 1940s, with the rich losing ground while working Americans saw unprecedented gains. Economic historians call what happened the Great Compression, and it’s a seminal episode in American history.
Middle class America: That’s the country I grew up in. It was a society without extremes of wealth or poverty, a society of broadly shared prosperity, partly because strong unions, a high minimum wage, and a progressive tax system helped limit inequality. It was also a society in which political bipartisanship meant something: in spite of all the turmoil of Vietnam and the civil rights movement, in spite of the sinister machinations of Nixon and his henchmen, it was an era in which Democrats and Republicans agreed on basic values and could cooperate across party lines.
The great divergence: Since the late 1970s the America I knew has unraveled. We’re no longer a middle-class society, in which the benefits of economic growth are widely shared: between 1979 and 2005 the real income of the median household rose only 13 percent, but the income of the richest 0.1% of Americans rose 296 percent.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/09/18/introducing-this-blog/
Postwar Prosperity: 1945-1973
The end of World War II to the late 1960s was a golden era of American capitalism.
The Council of Economic Advisors was established by the Employment Act of 1946 to provide objective economic analysis and advice on the development and implementation of a wide range of domestic and international economic policy issues. In its first 7 years the CEA made five technical advances in policy making:
1. the replacement of a "cyclical model" of the economy by a "growth model,"
2. the setting of quantitative targets for the economy,
3. use of the theories of fiscal drag and full-employment budget,
4. recognition of the need for greater flexibility in taxation, and
5. replacement of the notion of unemployment as a structural problem by a realization of a low aggregate demand.
SNIP!
President John F. Kennedy passed the largest tax cut in history upon entering office in 1961. $200 billion in war bonds matured, and the G.I. Bill financed a well-educated work force. The middle class swelled, as did GDP and productivity. The U.S. underwent a kind of golden age of economic growth. This growth was distributed fairly evenly across the economic classes, which some attribute to the strength of labor unions in this period - labor union membership peaked historically in the U.S. during the 1950s, in the midst of this massive economic growth. President Lyndon B. Johnson (1963-69) dreamed of creating a "Great Society", and began many new social programs to that end, such as Medicaid and Medicare. The government financed some of private industry's research and development throughout these decades, most notably ARPANET (which would become the Internet) in the late 1960s. In 1968 and 1969, productivity growth climbed near the levels it had reached earlier in the decade, but this would not last.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_the_United_States
So either you don't know your history or economics Private Elbo... or you're a Grover Norquist wannabe!
Jesus! When I saw that woman I threw my hands up to protect my face. I said, "Get away from me you ugly fat bitch."
Johan @ 135:
Kill the messenger eh? ACK, ACK, ACK, ACK ACK! ;-)
Ras....couldn't have said it better myself.
Thanks for dispatching the libertarian 'taxes suck cause I don't have the 1st clue what they pay for my ignorant ass to do every single day' troll....
115 ellobo Says: Carl Nyberg @ 114:
So, to answer your question. All of their policies. I don’t even have to know their plans to tell you I oppose them because i know that all of their policies will involve forcing people to do things they probably don’t want to do. They use the force of the govt. (THINK GUNS or JAIL) to coerce people like me to behave a certain way. We need freedom for the individual not group healthcare policies and group retirement packages and group govt. funded day care and schools. All of it is coercion and involves force to get the results some bureaucrat desires.
The Patriot Act, illegal spying on Americans and NSL's were all created by Democrats?
Responding to posts on the subject of voter ignorance: I've been astounded by the number of civics-challenged people in my life. Bright people. Have had three say they are in favor of Edwards (my first choice) but wonder whether they will "waste their vote" if opting for him in the Primary. After giving this some thought, I realize that many otherwise competent humans just don't understand/remember how the political process works. These are people who educate me on health and nutrition and other things of significance in my life. Not everyone has a passion for politics. Instead of criticizing, I'm realizing there's an opportunity for me to help educate them and hopefully bring more voters on board. There's no time to waste if we Democrats don't want to be "victims" again. We all know this country and the world can't afford another Republican "leader." Let's get busy. Actions speak louder...
Comments are closed on this entry