Is Bush terrified of John Edwards?

[Wetzelbill]

The new big pundit buzz that I've been hearing is John Edwards is the man Bush and Karl Rove fear the most. Mainly, because when he goes mano y mano with a single opponent he outshines them and because he is so good at arousing crowds. I heard his forays in Iowa, SC and NH had a rock star like atmosphere. People warm up to Edwards. Bush comes off as a special interest stool pigeon, and nearly half of the country considers the guy a lying toad. Edwards comes off as boyish, charming and articulate. Messages from his populist speeches are now staples of John Kerry. In fact, if you listen to all the candidates the sound a lot like John Edwards - or even Kucinich somewhat - did 7 months ago.

I think Edwards - who I am not voting for in the AZ primary this week, btw - is definitely someone Bush would rather not have to debate and campaign against one on one. He has a certain appeal and charisma that's for sure. He's had some trouble standing out in a pack of crowded Dems, but against Bush he is a clear opposite.

Outpacing Kerry won't be easy, beating Clark handily in the South and cutting into the Dean Movement or enveloping the stray DK voters will be a tough chore for him though. He's going to need to do some or all to get the nomination.

Remains to be seen.

[DemNoir]

1. They should fear him

I think if you put Edwards and Bush on the same stage, Bush will be destroyed. Imagine Edwards positive well delivered message against Bush's fear mongering.

[Ninga]

5. Let's think about this,

if Bush didn't "fear" John McCain, and the Gop didn't "fear" former Ga. Senator Max Cleland, why do you think the Rove/Bush/Gop machine will "fear" Edwards. Other than Edwards stage presence, what do you base it on?

[DemNoir]

6. Whatever

They would be smart to be concerned, but I have confidence they are dumb enough not to be.

[spooky3]

13. it's not "stage presence"; it's the ability to connect with voters and get

them out to vote that should concern Republicans. They sElected someone that has values that polls show are completely incongruent with those of the majority of the people in 2000, yet enough of them "liked" him (besides the 5 on the SCOTUS) to get him in.

I believe all of our remaining top candidates have the ability to lead this country in a direction that I would be pleased with, regardless of differences on some specific issues. The Congress controls the fate of a lot of what is on the candidates' platforms, anyway, though the President exercises influence.

I believe that once more people hear about Edwards, the more fired up they will be. He has substance, a comprehensive, rational platform, and he is brilliant--and the charm will appeal to the person who is uninterested in politics but votes for who he/she likes.

[bearfartinthewoods]

27. HIS BACK YARD...

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

2. never listen to pundits

Too many are neo cons and tell you want they want people to hear.

[Must_B_Free]

3. He seems honest and heartfelt to me

when I saw him speak - he was religiously giving it his all.
gotta love that,

[girl gone mad]

4. Yes.

I do think they would be more afraid of Edwards than Kerry. Kerry is Dean without the passion or rough edges.

[DemNoir]

8. Edwards is the best campaigner of the group by far

He is Bill Clinton without the drawbacks.

[cjbuchanan]

7. Edwards is a good pick, but I do worry

He has accepted spending limits, so at some point (probably around March) he will be out of money until the convention. Bush & Co. will just hammer him with negative ads till then.

Still, he is a great speaker and he seems to be reaching for his inner populace. I think Edwards can beat Bush, but I think any of the other 4 could also.

Bush has lots to fear and that is good.

[spooky3]

16. Does anyone know whether you can reverse a decision to accept the limits?

Let's say I have received $5 million in matching funds. If I get $100 million in new contributions, can I pay back the $5 and then not have to accept the limits going forward?

[mourningdove92]

9. I am an Edwards supporter, and I would love to believe that

Bush & Co are scared of him. However, considering the nature of this current administration, I would have to wonder, if they are indeed eyeballing him like a cobra would eyeball a mongoose, why aren't they attacking him? You would think they would launch a few "preemptive" strikes on him, to just take him out now, rather than to watch his campaign continue to gather momentum.

or do you think that maybe I have my tinfoil hat on a little too tight?
:tinfoilhat:

[Wetzelbill]

18. I think they would rather not bring attention to him unless they have to

[bearfartinthewoods]

28. attacking him would raise his stature

they aren't attacking anyone...wouldn't be prudent...not gonna do it...yet.

[Killarney]

10. Yes, they fear him the most

They have nothing on him. Nothing.

He doesn't have enough years in the senate for them to find incriminating votes to run in ads. With Kerry, they have 20 years of votes. Their ads write themselves. They will say, "Kerry voted X number of times for tax increases." (even though he also voted for tax decreases, but they won't state that).

Also, he's young, charismatic. The idea of young children in the WH has a sort of Kennedy appeal to it. People feel bad for him for losing his son. He came from nothing rather than silver spoon Bush and Kerry. He is a top-notch debater (from being a successful trial lawyer) and would out-debate Bush easily.

And he's a positive guy. His message is one of hope, not negativity and that will resonate with people.

He's from the South and in the SC election, he won with the majority of the black vote and the majority of the female vote.

The Republicans do NOT want to run against Edwards.

[DemNoir]

11. Very well put!

That is a perfect summation!

[spooky3]

17. I love everything you say, but you do realize he's 50, right?

[Wetzelbill]

19. hell, I started the thread and couldn't say it better!

[Tim_in_HK]

23. Well . . .

I honestly do like Edwards (he's my number 2), but I think it's wrong to say they ain't got nothing on him. Here's two I can think of right off the bat, and these are what he will have to overcome in the GE if he's the candidate:
1) Trial Lawyer. This will be played up AD NASEUM and trial lawyers are the bogeyman of the Republican party (and let's be honest, don't leave a very positive impression in the electorate as a whole)
2) Lack of foreing policy experience in time of war.

But he's also got some good positives . . .

[bearfartinthewoods]

29. don't forget the kerry perp-walk photo.

kerry with his hands on his head...betcha that get's slipped into some photo montage eventually.

[LEW]

12. Why aren't you voting for Edwards then?

n/t

[Wetzelbill]

22. Kucinich and I share a more similar vision of the U.S. and world

[colonel odis]

14. i am bothered by what scarborough said

the night of the iowa caucuses, joe scarborough, who is about the slimiest of the slimy -- by the way, did they ever find out what happened to that dead girl in his office while he was a congressman. you know, right before he decided not to run again -- said he didn't care what they said, edwards is whom the white house doesn't want to run against.

so, though an edwards supporter, i take that with a truckload of salt.

however, dean's message about there being two americas may begin to resonate. it hits people in their wallets, which is how people vote anyway. (or at least that's what they taught us in pol sci classes in college.) as we see stories about layoffs every day, that second america, the one that doesn't get all the bush breaks, keeps growing.

plus, he's talking about our obligation to help the poor in this country. now, if you want to see a freeper start spewing, mention that. yet normal human beings understand it.

aside from the positives already mentioned -- intelligence, charm, affableness, sincerity -- i believe those are the reasons edwards has a chance to catch on.

[colonel odis]

24. "dean's message" should read "edwards' message" sorry n/t

[Skwmom]

15. Let me think

A person who has been a trial lawyer for most of his life (except for 4 years as a senator which is really less considering the time he has spent campaigning).

A person who lifted his whole 2 Americas theme from a book (and can thus easily be painted as a lawyer playing to the jury)

A person with ZERO foreign policy or national security experience.

Are they afraid? Hardly

[spooky3]

20. People have responded thoroughly to these RW talking points previously

with facts contrary to your accusations, but since you don't seem to have read or understood them, it's not worth repeating here.

[bearfartinthewoods]

30. ever hear of jesse helms?

senior senator for like forever, with one of the most ruthless political machines in the country.

EDWARDS IS SITTING IN JESSE'S SEAT!

that is not an achievement of a light weight. it takes someone with a high degree of bulletproofness to pull that off.

[dawn]

21. They are probably just saying that because he's not the frontrunner

I'm an Edwards supporter and I'd love it if it were true. But I highly doubt it. I never trust those neocons.

[colonel odis]

25. there's nothing dishonorable about being a trial lawyer

and if you want to go point by point, edwards may have taken the "two americas" idea from a book, but he differs from w. in that he's at least opened a book.

and his committee work in the senate gives him more foreign policy experience than w. had when he took office.

[tryanhas]

26. YES

But not only is Bush terrified of him, but so is John F. Kerry and Skull and Bones.

That's why Kerry is going all out and trying to beat Edwards in SC because he AND SKULL AND BONES knows that the longer John Edwards hangs around, the less likely it is that Kerry will be able to forge a fluke election between Bonesman (Kerry) V. Bonesman (Bush).

http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Skull-and-Bones

http://www.thememoryhole.org/skull-bones-vid.htm