Head-to-head match ups. Edwards fares best by far against

[JDPriestly]

Republican contenders. If you are in Iowa or New Hampshire, undecided and want to pick a winner for November 2008, check this out based on Dec. 11, 2007 polls:

Petey pointed out that the latest CNN poll (PDF) shows some very clear patterns in the head-to-head presidential matchups. In particular, John Edwards polls as the strongest Democratic candidates whereas John McCain polls as the strongest Republican.

Of course, it's hard to know what to make of this sort of polling (except that as a white man, I'm patting myself on the back) since the events of the campaign really do change things. How much does Edwards' relative cash shortfall matter as an electability issue? And I bet most of the respondents to this poll don't know (yet) about Rudy Giuliani's criminal associates -- a series of charges that's probably more damaging than any muck that'll ever get dredged up on Romney. But despite the uncertainty, I think you do need to count this as a serious point in Edwards' favor when you combine it with the considerable merits of the policy positions he's staked out. Meanwhile, for the GOP I think nominating McCain is clearly the right across a whole variety of considerations, but I guess if you really, really, really hate immigrants it doesn't look that way.

http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/12/headtohead_matchups.php

Iglesias presents charts that are pretty impressive. And even though the polls are not that recent, I am quite aware that they represent the pattern that has existed for many months now. Edwards bests the other candidates when pitted against the potential Republican candidates.

The pundits in the MSM like to ridicule Edwards, but he is our strongest candidate and will show the pundits whose boss if given the chance.

[cali]

1. One more time: we can't know who the strongest candidate is a year out

from the general election. Edwards does well in polling, but that's before hundreds of millions of puke dollars frame him, and before the MSM sinks their sharpened fangs into him. Vote for the candidate you like best. The electability crap didn't work out for us in 2004, so well. In fact, this sounds just like the Kerry argument. Oh, and if you think the pundits are ridiculing Edwards now, just wait. If he wins Iowa, you'll see what ridicule really looks like.

[JDPriestly]

3. As you well know, I like Edwards best and so do the majority of DUers.

[cali]

5. um, what does that have to do with my post?

And what the majority of DUers like or don't like, is hardly germane to the facts.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

7. You're A Smart Person

You should know argumentum ad populum is a logical fallacy...

[babylonsister]

8. I'm part of that majority, and Edwards is NOT my favorite, FWIW. nt

[earthlover]

10. The Kerry arguement?

Well, it is true that many folks settled on kerry because they thought he was "electable". They obviously didn't think that through! I will also point out that many of the accusations of the swift boaters were obviously going to be raised way back before the primary season was over and it was pointed out on these boards that kerry was going to have some serious mud thrown at him. All this warning was ignored because the mantra of the day was kerry was electable. However, if we had thought things through we could have seen that this was not the case.

Hillary, Edwards and Obama each have things that could be exploited in november. Each worries me. Especially Hillary, who I think has the least electability of all and the thinking among many that she is the most electable really does remind me of the "kerry arguement".
People want to believe that she is inevitable.

We should be proactive, not reactive. We should anticipate what the MSM is going to do with each candidate and ask the simple question can he/she overcome this?

Because electability is not just a minor factor. A candidate's views on the issues are fine but NONE of their platform is going to be enacted if he/she does not win!

So take a good hard look at all the candidates. I think Biden by far is the most electable.

[Mojambo]

2. I just don't think the money thing will be a big deal if Edwards is the nominee

I know a lot of people on here are leery about it (most of them supporters of big money candidates), but if there were ever an election that the Republicans were ill positioned to buy, it's this one.

This is the perfect election to get a public financing candidate elected. And Edwards' message is the perfect one to do it with.

[weeve]

4. Corporate Media wants another Republican President.

No surprise there. Their bottom-line grows, they make more $$. Simple.

If the vote margins are too great so that they cannot collude with / cover for the bogus vote tabulators, then they'll opt for the most Corporate-friendly of the Dems. Hence Hillary and Obama getting ALL the positive coverage these past few years.

Edwards threatens their bottom line. As President he would fight Media conglomoration. Hence their record of ignoring/subtley smearing him. Hopefully IOWA will change all that. He's got MY vote.

[cali]

6. They don't care. Quite honestly, they don't

I grew up in a town stuffed to the gills with corporate CEOs and if you think they're frightened of an Edwards presidency, you don't know that culture.

[AtomicKitten]

9. Zogby: Obama is the only candidate that beats all five top GOP.

:shrug:



http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1404&loc=interstitialskip

[JDPriestly]

12. That is Zogby on Dec. 20, 2007. Here is Rasmussen for today

Edwards (44%) Giuliani (44%) 0 margin
Edwards (49%) Huckabee (37%) 12% margin
Edwards (46%) McCain (39%) 7% margin
Edwards (50%) Romney (34%) 16% margin
Edwards (48%) Thompson (39%) 9% margin

Obama (43%) Giuliani (43%) 0% margin
Obama (45%) Huckabee (41%) 4% margin
McCain (45%) Obama (43%) -2% margin
Obama (45%) Romney (41%) 4% margin
Obama (47%) Thompson (40%) 7% margin

Giuliani (45%) Clinton (44%) -1% margin
Clinton (47%) Huckabee (43%) 4% margin
McCain (49%) Clinton (43%) -6% margin
Romney (44%) Clinton (43%) -1% margin
Clinton (46%) Thompson (44%) 2% margin

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/favorables/election_2008_democratic_candidates_running_in_2008_presidential_election

The major contenders on the Republican side are Giuliani and Romney. Neither Obama nor Edwards polls better than Giuliani under Rasmussen. But look at the significant difference with McCain. Edwards outdoes McCain by 7% margin, while Obama does not beat McCain and loses by 2% (within margin of error most likely, but still significantly worse than Edwards). And in a Romny match-up, Edwards is way ahead of Obama.

So, Rasmussen polls show Edwards tied with Giuliani and besting the rest, but also shows that McCain bests Obama. Why anyone who wants to win in November 2008 is backing Hillary is beyond me.

[AtomicKitten]

13. "Why anyone who wants to win in November 2008 is backing Hillary is beyond me."

:thumbsup:

[Stop Cornyn]

11. kick