Don’t trust money or the polls!

John Edwards Says: Empirically, You Know I’m Strong!

Other Dems ‘not even close’ in terms of general election appeal

Funny, I always see Edwards name towards the bottom on the polls.

“It’s not enough for you to like a candidate,” said the former trial lawyer, tanned and comfortable in his sharp blue suit. “It’s not even enough for you to agree with a candidate. We must—my party, the Democratic Party—we must nominate a candidate who will win the general election.”

And you sir, will not win. Al Gore, whom isn’t even running, has placed higher than you! See this as a sign.

“All the empirical evidence shows that I am the strongest general election candidate,” said Mr. Edwards from a small stage as the Chicago traffic flowed mutedly behind a glass-paneled wall.

What evidence? Your own polls?

“Well, this is not even close—who’s the strongest general election candidate. Every piece of empirical evidence shows you exactly the same thing that your gut will tell you anyway.”

Hmm. My gut tells me you’re a loser. Wanna know what my spleen thinks too?

Mr. Edwards attributed his opponents’ lead in national polls to media coverage, and pleaded with his audience not to be swayed by their impressive fund-raising totals.

Right. Money means nothing in a campaign. Just ask McCain. At least this loser isn’t saying not to trust the polls. That’s a bad sign for sure!

“It’s very important not to be deceived about what you see about a lot of national media attention and national Democratic primary voter polls, which are a direct reflection of whoever is getting publicity at that moment. That’s all they are,”

Oops, there’s your bad sign! Time to throw the towel in. Maybe you and McCain can retire and give someone better a chance.


5 Responses to Don’t trust money or the polls!

  1. Jenn says:

    It’s highly possible he’s ingesting hallucenegenic drugs.

  2. tas says:

    The funny thing about Edwards is that, if he were running in the GOP primary, and given the money that he’s raised, he’d be looked upon as a top candidate to win the nomination. But when you’ve “only” raised $13 million while Barak and Hillary each have $30+ million in tow, it’s tough to compete.

    This also doesn’t bode well for Rudy or Mitt, who are only hovering around $13 million, too. If progressives thought that 2004 was an election that we could have won by nominatingg anybody except a braindead monkey (with good hair, though), then 2008 is shaping up to be 10 times such a scenario. So if the Democrats blow this one…

  3. frznagn says:

    Then something is really wrong or rigged. Even Newt said some negative comments about the GOP hopefuls.

  4. tas says:

    There was a popular sticker going around at CPAC: “No Rudy McRomney.” Those who had a distaste for all three (at the time) major GOP candidates wore those, and like I said, it was a popular sticker. Now, certainly every conservative there didn’t think that way, but if there was one idea at CPAC which the attendees had a consensus on (besides the standard stuff, like hating liberals, etc.) is that Republicans need to stay the f*ck away from Bush and his policies. Seriously.

    Therein lies problems for major candidates like Rudy and Mitt: they are far too close to the policies of the Bush administration; that’s strike one. Strike two is their background for liberal stances: Mitt looks like a flip-flopper on abortion, ditto for Rudy, and Thompson lying about his work for a pro-choice group doesn’t help either. (If anything, in the eyes of many hardcore social conservatives it makes Thompson look like a whore, going to where the money is.) Bush wouldn’t be in the White House if he didn’t receive the support of social conservatives, support that the current crop of major GOP candidates aren’t receiving. So that’s strike two.

    And since these candidates aren’t exciting the GOP base or netting the social conservatives, two strikes may be all that’s needed for an out here. I know I’m a biased viewer, but, trying to see this as objectively as possible, I think Republican presidential hopes are in serious trouble. If the trends we’re seeing now continue, whoever the GOP nominee is will get his clock cleaned come November 08. It’s at the point where I’m going to have to recant on my “Hillary will never win” proclamations.

    So, from what I’ve observed this year, nothing is awry. And the only thing I’m surprised about is that Newt hasn’t jumped in yet to claim the nomination, which he’d easily win.

  5. frznagn says:

    I know more about Newt than the rest, and that isn’t saying a lot. From what I’ve heard from him on talk radio he didn’t sound bad. I hope he can jump in at the right time because I don’t like the others much. Maybe Fred Thompsons wife can run. She looks good. Hehehe.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: