The official kickoff to the 2008 Edwards for President Campaign! - Page 9 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-16-2004, 06:20 AM   #121
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,140
Local Time: 08:47 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by verte76
After reading the article about Elizabeth Edwards in People magazine, I'm not sure her husband has any more politics scheduled. They're moving back to North Carolina, and will build a house on some land they bought and raise horses. They've worked really hard and maybe they are ready to smell some roses.
I agree. I think I'll jump on the Warner in 2008 bandwagon.
__________________

__________________
U2democrat is offline  
Old 11-16-2004, 06:33 AM   #122
The Fly
 
clipper699's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Under a Carolina blue sky.
Posts: 229
Local Time: 03:47 PM
I am from North Carolina, and the grim reality is that Edwards is not likely to carry his own State, much less the South. Indeed, I believe the South is something of a lost cause (at least temporarily). In order for the dems to win, the paradigm must change. Look west (Vilsak, Richardson), consolidate the base, reach out to moderates including those fiscal conservatives who are less interested in religious affiliation/intervention, and are instead more interested in small, more effective government. Remember, Clinton is the one who declared that the era of big government is over. The current admisinstration has expanded government to its largest ever size, which has many true republicans grumbling. As an aside, Richardson appeals to the hispanic voter, and the southwestern states are beginning to drift from their strict conservative ideology.
__________________

__________________
clipper699 is offline  
Old 11-16-2004, 06:36 AM   #123
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 08:47 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by clipper699
I am from North Carolina, and the grim reality is that Edwards is not likely to carry his own State, much less the South. Indeed, I believe the South is something of a lost cause (at least temporarily). In order for the dems to win, the paradigm must change. Look west (Vilsak, Richardson), consolidate the base, reach out to moderates including those fiscal conservatives who are less interested in religious affiliation/intervention, and are instead more interested in small, more effective government. Remember, Clinton is the one who declared that the era of big government is over. The current admisinstration has expanded government to its largest ever size, which has many true republicans grumbling. As an aside, Richardson appeals to the hispanic voter, and the southwestern states are beginning to drift from their strict conservative ideology.
Being from North Carolina you'd know. Vilsak and Richardson are real possibilities as well. They're not really big names now and they're not well known outside their states, but that could really change. Yes, Clinton declared the era of "big government" over. It's a little ironic that the so-called "progressive" wing of the Party could turn into the most old-fashioned and inflexible wing of the party.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 11-16-2004, 11:31 PM   #124
The Fly
 
Stonewall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Manhattan, N.Y.
Posts: 152
Local Time: 03:47 PM
Forget about the fourth tier!

Richardson? No! Vilsack? No!

It's significant to post that neither of those Democrat governors could even carry their own "blue" states for their Dem prez candidate. In fact, Vilsak Who? lost Iowa and Richardson What? lost New Mexico -- and both of their "blue" states in 2000 w/ Gore are now "red" states which went for BUSH! They (R&V) are 2 of the many big losers in the recent political election process.

Girlz (U-2 Dem, Verte, Pax, et al.), don't worry -- HILLARY will be the nominee, barring anything out of the ordinary. Aren't U all excited and proud that the likely nominee -- ahead in all of the polls now -- will also be a WOMAN? Hello! Also, why are U all acting like "desperate wives" searching for a new Dem nominee?
__________________
Stonewall is offline  
Old 11-17-2004, 05:33 AM   #125
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 08:47 PM
In case you can't tell, Stonewall, I do not want Hillary as the nominee. I don't give a damn that she's female. That's just a circumstance of birth that shouldn't be a determining factor. The fact is that Vilsak and Richardson are from more conservative states, and they were both elected governor. I don't give a damn that they couldn't deliver their states for a liberal from Massachusetts. That hardly means that they can't carry their own damn states should they be the nominee. When we cast our votes for the Democratic nominee, I'll bet serious bucks that if either one of these guys run they'll beat the pants off of Hillary. They're not likely to ever become as controversial and divisive as she is. They're not big names now, thus they're not doing so great in the polls. Hillary is doing well right now mainly because of name recognition. Change the name recognition scenario and it's a whole different ballgame.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 11-17-2004, 05:42 AM   #126
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,140
Local Time: 08:47 PM
It's not a matter of her being a woman, it's a matter of whether or not she would be a good president. I don't think she would. Verte's right, it's ALL about name recognition. If a pollster calls you and asks you who support and you recognize 1 out of 5 names or so, you're going to say that 1 name. We've got 4 years to regroup. Time will tell who is emerging as a favorite, and as we saw in the last primaries, the favorite (Dean) isn't always the winner.
__________________
U2democrat is offline  
Old 11-17-2004, 06:36 AM   #127
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 08:47 PM
Yes, and also consider that governors have a better track record at winning elections than Senators do. OK, Hillary is no ordinary Senator in that she is also a former First Lady. Since when did marriage to anyone, I don't care who it is, make someone qualified? It'll give name recognition and media recognition, but it hardly qualifies as experience for the presidency itself.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 11-18-2004, 12:10 AM   #128
The Fly
 
Stonewall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Manhattan, N.Y.
Posts: 152
Local Time: 03:47 PM
Hillary & The U-2-ettes???

One thing's 4 sure: The U-2-ettes will not be singing background on any Hillary songs!

Girlz, it is not E/Z, however, for the reader to get the drift of your major complaint against HRC. Anyone who stated several years ago that the then-First Lady did not have enough experience for them can no longer make that claim. She's very experienced now and very successful at it. She's been complimented frombioth sides of the aisle -- plus independents! And, for example, Sen. HILLARY is frequently and wrongly painted as being too liberal. She has many proven political positions -- especially with the war on terror and national defense -- that are clearly "conservative". So, what gives? Pax is unusually quiet on this one....

Meanwhile, Johnny Boi Edwards is on his way out of the U.S. Senate where HRC excels and J.E. is strictly "standing in the shadows" of Hillary!


Visit the 2004 NYC Gay Pride Parade:
www.STONEWALLvets.org/parade/SW-35.htm
How do U like that blue 1969 Cadillac convertible?
__________________
Stonewall is offline  
Old 11-18-2004, 05:22 AM   #129
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 08:47 PM
Stonewall, I'm shocked that any conservative likes Hillary Clinton. I actually like her OK, but I don't want her as my party's nominee. Sure she's doing well in the Senate, which is a cakewalk after what she went through in the White House. But I'd rather have a governor as the candidate. Governors are more successful, historically. As for John Edwards, I'm not at all sure he even plans to run in any more political races. He and his family are leaving Washington and moving back to North Carolina to raise horses. Who knows, his next competitive venture just might be the Kentucky Derby.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 11-18-2004, 05:48 AM   #130
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,140
Local Time: 08:47 PM
I miss John Edwards He's on the Today show this morning. I'm recording it as I type! he'll always be a hottie in my eyes.
__________________
U2democrat is offline  
Old 11-18-2004, 11:41 PM   #131
The Fly
 
Stonewall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Manhattan, N.Y.
Posts: 152
Local Time: 03:47 PM
wink HILLARY appeals across the board!

Remember... HILLARY Rodham was born into a Republican family, was President of the Young Republicans (and fought off 3 guys to win it), was a proud "Goldwater Girl", switched to Democrat only years after marrying Clinton, consistently (unlike Kerry) supports the Bush Administration's approach on Iraq, etc. -- and U wonder how could any conservative can even be "comfortable "with her?

By the way, who was with Hillary today -- and performed -- BONO!
Hello! Our U-2 Board Chairman was not there with The Clintons because he doesn't want her as Prez. Think about it!
__________________
Stonewall is offline  
Old 11-19-2004, 05:17 AM   #132
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,140
Local Time: 08:47 PM
Dude he was there to support BILL, it was all about BILL clinton not hillary. duh. Bono and Clinton have been chums since the '92 election. Clinton did so much for AIDs in Africa, another reason for Bono to be there for him. Their performance at the library had nothing to do with Hillary.

It was a sweet performance though!!!
__________________
U2democrat is offline  
Old 11-19-2004, 05:29 AM   #133
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 08:47 PM
That's right, it was Bill Clinton's presidential library. Of course Hillary was there as his wife. But it had nothing to do with her. Like U2dem pointed out Bono and Clinton have been good friends since 1992. That's why Bono was at the opening. I have no objections if you really like Hillary, I like her OK myself. It's just shocking to find a conservative who likes her.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 11-19-2004, 10:28 AM   #134
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,140
Local Time: 08:47 PM
a conservative liking hillary is like a liberal liking bush.
__________________
U2democrat is offline  
Old 11-19-2004, 11:55 AM   #135
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 08:47 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2democrat
a conservative liking hillary is like a liberal liking bush.
I agree. It's pretty unusual. There's nothing *wrong* with this, it's just surprising.
__________________

__________________
verte76 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com