Edwards only polling 12% nationally.

[Clarkie1]

Not so hot, considering he's been running the longest.

January 22, 2007
Now, Clinton is ahead 31% to 24%. A week ago, it was Clinton 22% Obama 21%.
John Edwards (D) remains in third place, but dropped three points from last week and now earns support from 12% of Likely Democratic Primary voters.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Political%20Tracking/Democratic%20Primaries/DemPrimary20070122.htm

[skipos]

1. And to think at this time in 2003 Lieberman was leading the pack. nt

[Clarkie1]

2. Yeah, I know. Another silly poll.

We start this stuff way too early, and everything will surely change many times over before it's done.

[chimpymustgo]

37. Y'all need to get over this. It is UNHEALTHY.

Try to go an hour without obsessing on John Edwards. Try.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

38. Or Hillary. Or Obama. Or Anybody Else.

Go sledding -- watch an old movie -- write a letter. Something, for God's sake. The first primary is still a year away and we're looking a daily poll numbers. A candidate can go from the top of the heap to an also ran in a matter of a few weeks -- and if you don't believe me, just ask President Dean.

Breathe deep. Relax.

[GreenArrow]

8. that's a good object lesson

but nothing about it guarantees the same thing happens this time around.

[TSIAS]

11. Holy Joe had the name recognition

Luckily, Dems quickly came to understand the real Lieberman.

[burythehatchet]

3. By next week Edwards will be in damage control mode

but you can't put the toothpaste back in the tube.

[Robbien]

4. Edwards just needs to keep doing what he is doing

Two years is a long time.

[Clarkie1]

5. Two years is indeed a long time.

Why is everyone starting so early? I think voters are going to get kinda sick of it all after two years.

[pa28]

27. Edwards wears well on the public.

He started slow and gained strength and I suppose he will again.

[KingofNewOrleans]

6. I've always gotten the impression

that Clark supporters don't believe in polls.

[Clarkie1]

7. I believe polls are a snapshot, but the snapshot can and usually does change.

However, I still think it's interesting Edwards is doing more poorly than Obama and Clinton, who announced later.

His early start doesn't seemed to have helped.

[FrenchieCat]

14. We believe that polls are manipulated.....via media and who they

decide gets the buzz.....that's quite different! And sure polls don't always tell the story...cause Dean was polling high in Iowa......and yet, came in third...

If Clark got some fucking free media like the "current top contenders", maybe his polls numbers would be higher, but he doesn't ....and barely did after the buzz he received once he got in the race in 2003 during the last set of primaries....and, yet...still.

this is the part that one must pay attention to,

Clark still managed to do damn good without the Buzz and the free media during the '03 primaries....and that something that needs to be looked at closer than most have done thus far.

A candidate who is strong even with smears being thrown and media not reporting much positive on them ending up still winning a state other than his own (only Clark did that apart from Kerry)and beating Edwards in 5 of 9 contests thru mini Tuesday...without cameras (while Edwards had camera galore as he came out of Iowa all the way through).....well that's something!

Here's more on that.... http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2006/12/wes_clark_did_hella_goodthe_20.html

and http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/9242.html
and

[KingofNewOrleans]

20. Clark didn't have the organization

to keep going after mini-Tuesday. Plus he made the tactical mistake of skipping Iowa, thus denying himself media buzz.

I've got nothing against Clark and I'm not really interested in covering 2004 ground again. As for this year, You've got eight serious candidates hiring staff and fundraising at this point, if Clark wants to run he's got to get going soon.

[FrenchieCat]

24. Understood that Clark skipped Iowa.....which was a big mistake...

and he understands this well....but then so did Clinton, and that wasn't the end of those primaries.....

8 serious candidates who will be called Snow White and the 7 Dwarfs. Just another reason we need Clark.

[KingofNewOrleans]

28. Clinton skipped Iowa because

of Tom Harkin. Who was the Iowa candidate that led Clark to decide to skip Iowa in 2004?

Each election cycle has a different dynamic. The early start to this election cycle is the new twist this time around. IMO each day Clark is on the sidelines puts him at a greater disadvantage.

One example, you mention free media and media buzz, who will the political shows be more likely to put on, somebody who announces that they intend to run for President or somebody who might run?

[FrenchieCat]

29. Clark is not "Blaming" anyone but himself for having taken the advise

of those who he thought at the time knew better. He was a neotype in Politics, and he admits that this mistake cost him a great deal....

He had 4 months, and decided to forego Iowa....

He's learned about that...and also understands based on his own experience that no two political cycle is exactly the same.

But in term of the media, hell, they were giving buzz to those who initially said they would not run.....so the media does what it chooses, and I think it has very little to do with what a candidate does. Biden declared long ago, and the media, aside from his Sunda show performances don't really focus on him.

So in essence, I consider the media a much more powerful force in this game than you do. They not only determine who they will put forward and push, but in that same way they will develop name recognition for those they want to have it.

And yes, Clark has to decide within the next few weeks.....the sooner the better. With that I agree.

[1932]

9. I think the DNC is setting this up so that Edwards wins the whole thing.

It's absolutely imperative for the Democratic nominee to come out of the primaries appearing as if he or she has accomplished something. You have to look like a giant-killer whose arc is going up, and not steady or down.

Before Obama and Clinton entered the race, there were no giants to kill. Watching Hillary's announement convinced me that she's not going to win. But the media is really going to push both Hil and Barack (which is why they're up this week and Edwards is down).

I think the DNC is exploiting the media -- the DNC knows the media is building up the giants for Edwards to knock off. And I bet Hillary and Obama are in on it too. I bet they don't try too hard and I bet they drop out if they're not ahead early (and they won't be ahead, because Edwards is most likely going to win Iowa and SC no matter what Hill and Barack do).

[KoKo]

16. According to your scenario, though. WHY would Corprate Media want Edwards to win? n/t

[1932]

18. They don't. Where'd you get that impression?

I think they're promoting Hillary and Obama because they think they can't win and because they don't want Edwards to be the nominee.

I think the DNC is setting the corporate media up. They're giving them the rope to hang the right wing. They're building up the giants that Edwards will beat in the primaries, which will give him the momentum to win the general election.

[KoKo]

21. So you are saying the DLC Supports Edwars and is going to Knock Off

Hillary and Obama? :eyes: You are kidding, right?

[1932]

32. KoKo, the DNC. D...N....C. Not DLC. The Democratic NATIONAL Committee.

[FrenchieCat]

23. I think Edwards always gets a lot of positive media.....same reason he went to

Bildenberg, doesn't say boo about Media conglamoration, hasn't mentioned voting machines and is doing teleconferences to prove his support!

and the fact that he offers losta promises, but his record prior to running doesn't point to sincerity in his beliefs.

Even as he improved as a candidate in 2004, however, Edwards remained a vague and frequently ill-defined contender. He condemned President Bush's management of the war in Iraq, and was particularly critical of the war profiteering that had been allowed by the White House. But Edwards never really took a clear stand on the war.

Edwards talked tough about the need to protect American farmers. But he developed an initial "farm plan" that seemed to be more sympathetic to big agribusiness than working farmers.

Edwards tried to portray himself as a champion of labor. But he never really developed a coherent, let alone effective, message on the central issue for unions and their members: trade policies that favor multinational corporations and Wall Street over working Americans and Main Street.
http://www.madison.com/tct/opinion/column/nichols/index.php?ntid=113280


and goes with the sentiments here...
Although as a senator, Edwards initially championed the Iraq War, co-sponsored the infamous Iraq War Resolution along with a cadre of conservative Senators, and stood stoically by his vote for three years, he eventually apologized for his mistake stating that he had been misled by the Bush administration. The corporate press has yet to highlight this earlier lack of judgment as a question of competence (considering their own collective misjudgment, they may not), and prefer to focus on his November 2005 apology, which some rationalize as enough to earn him a promotion to leader of the free world.

Edwards is more often lauded for his poverty stance which he has worked to his political advantage with progressive voters. However, one is hard-pressed to locate a single piece of poverty legislation (besides the standard fare of raising the minimum wage) that Edwards championed in his six years in the senate. Ever since his “Two America” speech was widely praised by the media during last primary season; the poverty issue has become synonymous with the failed ’04 Vice Presidential candidate from North Carolina.

By concentrating on cultivating organized labor, Edwards has enamored himself to voters who want to see the shrinking power of unions reversed. When the issue of his 2004 electoral loss (including his own southern state) comes up, his supporters quickly retort, “no one votes for Vice President”.
http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2007/01/2008_candidatestoo_much_of_a_g.html


Edwards has gotten excellent media ever since coming out of Iowa......

The media know that they should focus on the two others now....which is exactly what they are doing.

The minority vote is literally being split out between Obama, Richardson and Clinton...leaving one Southern White boy left to pick up the majority of the votes.

That's why they'd prefer for Clark not to enter)and pressuring him as we speak hoping he'll say no--hell probably working him over as we speak!)....what John Edwards doesn't need is another Southern white guy on the ticket...especially one that knows what to do about this war and how to approach the Iran issues as well considering the times as they are. That would make Edwards have to work for the nomination instead of it being given to him via default.

[1932]

25. How many times has he been on the cover of the Washington Post?

What was the story about?

How many times are Obama and Clinton in the press?

[FrenchieCat]

30. Edwards is getting just the right amount of media for right now....

he doesn't want to be the "Frontrunner" this early on...he wants to be in the top tier though...and that is exactly where he is.

What counts is when folks are just about ready to vote. But you know that!

[1932]

31. I don't think the media promoted Dean for a year because their plan was to help

Kerry or anyone else. I think when the media starts promoting candidates they do it because they want that candidate to suck all the oxygen from all other candidates. I think when the Washington Post pretends that the purchaser of someone's house impugns the candidate's character, they're not doing that to help that candidate sit back in the pack so they can make a successful charge in the final stretch. They do it because they don't want the candidate to be anywhere near the front in the home stretch.

[TSIAS]

10. Doesn't matter

As long as Edwards is strong in Iowa and Nevada, he'll be fine.

National polls mean nothing at this point. I think Wesley Clark is at 2 or 3 % right now.

[Clarkie1]

12. Yes, but Edwards announced first, and Clark hasn't decided.

Just find it interesting Edwards is not doing better at this point, considering all that.

[illinoisprogressive]

13. It is surprising concidering all the coverage of HRC that she did not bounce as big

as I expected. I thought for sure she'd do a 20 point. With the media coverage wall to wall positive and the publicity blitz, I would have thought she would have rated much higher.
In about 2 weeks things will be different and Edwards will move up again and so will Obama and Hillary will slide.

[Clarkie1]

15. Good point.

Interesting prediction...we'll see.

[illinoisprogressive]

17. You have a media blitz and publicity you get big polling.

It depends alot on if she owns the media and they cover her exclusively or if it settles down and we get back to normal. Then the polls level out.
You should read this excellent article on Hillary and her campaign at Mydd. One of the best I've read.

[aquart]

19. Then we obviously don't need primaries, do we?

Oh, good grief, it's rasmussen. He pretty much only polls Republicans.

[illinoisprogressive]

22. polls and primaries are very different. Polls dont' always match what people feel.

[The_Casual_Observer]

26. Edwards is a good person, he deserves a good run at this.

[Imagevision]

33. it's way too early for the poll BS. to have any real meanings... msm toy!!!

[Renew Deal]

34. And Clark is in the single digits.

What's your point?

[rhombus]

35. Did anyone catch C-Span tonight discussing New Hampshire and Iowa?

A college professor, Dr. Schmidt (his other name is Dr. Politics) of University of Iowa said that John Edwards has pretty much lived in Iowa these past two years. Its a reason why his numbers seem high there. He predicted that as soon as Hillary and the rest start campaigning actively, Edwards numbers would go down and he'd fade. The race is just too fluid now if you ask me.


Just so you know, Hillary is going to be in Iowa this weekend, Sat 1:30pm live coverage on C-SPAN.

[madfloridian]

36. That was to be expected. Give it some time.

Edwards appears to running a different type of campaign. It will be interesting to watch. He has great union support built up because he has been working a while.

It is mostly name recognition right now anyway...really. Clinton's name is big. Give it time.