Who has changed their support from Edwards after the latest revelations about Iran and the house?

[Herman Munster]

And where are the former Edwards supporters leaning now?

[Horse with no Name]

1. Of course not

I haven't made up my mind yet on who I want to support...however, when I sit down and make my list...this will definitely go at the bottom.

[Leopolds Ghost]

34. Don't you think Edwards' foreign policy beliefs are important?

The fact that he purchased (and lost) his Senate seat does not hurt him,
because it was not ill-gotten money (he made it suing tobacco companies)
but I hate to say it, doesn't distinguish him either.

The Kennedies were just playboys who bought their way into Massachusetts
aristocracy and later public office, until history thrust them into
greatness for purely circumstantial reasons -- because of who they were
up against (Kruschchev, Nixon, the Cuban Mafia, and the hard-liners who wanted nuclear armageddon.) Similarly, Robert Kennedy started out as a
friend of McCarthy who had to make a conscious effort to break with his
old-money, hawkish Democratic friends and become a populist in 1968.
When Gore became a populist in late 2000, the DLC attacked him and has
been attacking him ever since.

It is possible for people to change. But just because someone
grew up poor does not make them a champion of the disposessed.
It just means their newfound wealth was gotten at the expense
of some bad guys (tobacco lobbyists).

The issue is that there are a million NON-wealthy people every day
who change their minds and start to care about the poor and the
disposessed. But we do not hear about them because only the rich
are in a position to effect change. Even at the level of political
campaigns, only the children of the upper middle class have the
contacts and background and the demeanor to mingle with wealthy
donors and get promoted to leadership positions.

[Erika]

2. Some must enjoy dems eating their own

instead of going after the GOP. Wonder what party they really back.

[saltpoint]

3. I'm considering a lean toward Edwards after today's misplaced

emphasis on his damn house.

I think John and Elizabeth Edwards are A-Ok folk and I like them a lot and I don't give a good goddam where they live either.

I want them to raise those children the way they were raised and send them out into the world to keep the true fires burning.

[Codeblue]

4. I liked Edwards

from the beginning. Not saying he's necessarily my candidate at this early stage, but I'm liking him even more now that people are blowing his house up to GIGANTIC proportions.

[MonkeyFunk]

5. He's not one of my favorites

but the ridiculousness of the attacks against him here make me more sympathetic to him.

[ClassWarrior]

6. You mean that he doesn't want another another nuclear nation? Who does?

And that he has a new house?

:eyes:

NGU.

[XemaSab]

7. I'm liking him less

He seems like a pretty boy who can give a good speech, but I want a leader who shares my morals.

[ClassWarrior]

8. Do your morals involve judging people on shallow surface qualities?

:shrug:

NGU.

[cynatnite]

12. Have you ever read something...

that made you want to hit your head on your desk? i.e. the post you responded to.

[ClassWarrior]

14. Where do you think I got all these bumps!?

:rofl:

NGU.

[XemaSab]

19. Interesting that your name is "Class Warrior."

I suppose it's evident which side you're fighting for.

My morals involve environmental responsibility and living modestly. In addition, I can't imagine why the hell anyone would WANT a house that size. It's frankly baffling. :shrug:

[ClassWarrior]

20. Judging people on their wealth, appearance, personal style... and now name...

Wow. Deep.

:eyes:

NGU.

[XemaSab]

22. So that's what your parents called you?

I'm sorry. :(

[leftofthedial]

9. I'll vote for whomever the Democrats nominate

I was not an Edwards supporter before. He has dropped significantly in my estimation.

The two biggest issues we face are the class war and the global environmental collapse. A house like his is dead wrong on both counts.

[illinoisprogressive]

10. It doesn't affect me as I am not supporting him to begin with.

[NorthernSpy]

11. after the whole Iran thing, I REALLY don't trust him...

No, the house doesn't matter in and of itself. I think people are just seizing on the house because it kind of symbolizes the fact that he really isn't one of us, and really doesn't share our values, despite the things he says in his speeches (the ones he intends for us to hear, anyway).

[ClassWarrior]

13. Yeah, because what we REALLY need is ANOTHER nuclear nation.

SHAME on him for proposing "meaningful political and economic sanctions!!" The evil bastard!!

:eyes:

NGU.

[NorthernSpy]

17. I don't like people who push America into wars that promote Israeli interests...

... while bankrupting us and cheating us of our right to live in peace with countries that have not attacked us.

Tough buns if that doesn't sit right with you.

[ClassWarrior]

18. Since when is imposing "meaningful political and economic sanctions"...

...warmongering?

NGU.

[NorthernSpy]

25. ...since Iraq!

Sanctions and other withdrawals of ordinary diplomacy are how today's warmongers like to start the fun. Some Hitler-of-the-Month fails to meet some imposed "deadline" for something, and yipppeee! We've got ourselves a sure 'nuff pretext to start shooting!


:eyes:

No thanks. We've already heard that one, and we know how it ends.

[ClassWarrior]

27. So now the use of diplomacy is the "withdrawal" of diplomacy?

Sounds awfully Luntzian to me. And just when, pray tell, did Dubya**'s team ever use political or economic sanctions in Iraq? We ARE talking about the same Iraq, aren't we?

NGU.

[NorthernSpy]

31. LOL! Nice try!

Like I said, we've already heard this one. These threats, ultimatums, and lines in the sand are all meant to set the groundwork for war. They are NOT diplomacy, and they are NOT intended to preserve the peace.

Go sell your line to someone dumb enough to buy it. Might be tricky to find enough useful fools this time around, though, as so many seem to have smartened up of late.

[ClassWarrior]

33. You didn't answer the question.

When did Bush/Cheney** try to use economic or political sanctions in Iraq?

Of course, your arguement MUST be strong if you have to bully and verbally abuse people to convince them. :eyes:

NGU.

[trashcanistanista]

36. The Iran thing

was very scary to me and I won't support him unless he is the final nominee. The house is really not the issue, though considering all the debate it's caused here, common sense says this issue is not going to go away, but the Iran remarks were first and definitely had a major impact on me.

[LostInAnomie]

15. My guess is that someone is pretty damn frightened...

... of Edwards if they are throwing this much shit against the wall and praying something sticks.

He has my support now.

[EVDebs]

16. Edwards leads in Iowa right now according to Zogby poll...

""For Democrats, Edwards, who announced his candidacy on Dec. 28, had support from 27 percent of likely caucus goers in the Zogby poll.
Bunched behind him were Illinois Sen. Barack Obama at 17 perecent, with New York Sen. Hillary Clinton tied and former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack tied at 16 percent.
Next were Delaware Sen. Joseph Biden and Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry at 3 percent, with U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson at 1 percent each.
Thirteen percent were undecided.""

http://blogs.dmregister.com/?p=4027

Looks like others are feeding on strawmen in order to get at Edward's lead...BTW, Kerry's 3 percent should probably go to Edwards too making his lead more like 30% huh ?

[Fovea]

21. I haven't

In fact, I may have converted a DLC'er to Edwards earlier this afternoon.

[RiverStone]

23. The IWR vote did it for me long before the house...

I'd hold my nose and vote for him, as I would Hillary over ANY rethug in 08.

Yet, I'd love to have this choice first: GORE/CLARK

And I'll take Obama second to that...

For me JE and HRC are lower tier candidates because they did not have the principal to vote NO on the IWR - like 23 other Senators did and 133 other Reps. They should have joined the minority, we ALL (off the Hill) knew back in Oct of 02 that Shrub was going to fuck this tragic Iraq war up big time.



peace~

[ClassWarrior]

24. But don't we as Progressives know better than most...

...that forgiveness and redemption are possible?

NGU.

[RiverStone]

30. Would you ever forgive Shrub or Shooter?

I could not ClassWarrior. Some actions are so grievous to humanity that they are beyond redemption.

In the case of JE and HRC, I believe they are talented and caring folks who got swayed by the seduction of political expediency vs what their heart might have told them on the IWR (if they went deep enough to look there).

I posed a question related to this a while back. Here it is in my Journal if your interested:

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/RiverStone/11

As I said, there is enough forgiveness for them that I could and would vote for either over ANY rethug, though I truly hope our party nominates someone who was opposed to the IWR from the get-go, and have nothing to apologize about. That person had the heart to put principal ahead of politics - I want someone like that to be my DEM President. It was just one vote, but sadly one of the most errant votes in the last 50 years, IMHO.



peace~

[ClassWarrior]

32. "So grievous to humanity that they are beyond redemption??"

The IWR? Hoo-boy.

:eyes:

I pity you, my friend.

NGU.

[RiverStone]

35. Did you not read my Subject line???

"So grievous to humanity that they are beyond redemption" - referred to Shrub and Shooter pushing this damn war to the Hill in the first place!

No - I will not ever forgive SHRUB & SHOOTER for their crime against humanity by dreaming up this insane war machine which has traded so many lives for their fucking corporate oil. Are you saying YOU forgive them?


And believe me, I don't need or want your pity??? You can keep that.

[ClassWarrior]

39. You're the one who brought up "Shrub and Shooter"...

I was talking about the IWR - which was your original point, remember? :eyes:

NGU.

[Bluebear]

26. Herman, Herman, Herman . . .

:sigh:

[LSK]

28. the house didnt change my support, Iran stance did thou n/t

[donheld]

29. You cannot be serious

I still support him as much as ever. :eyes:

[trashcanistanista]

37. There is way too much at stake with Iran

to make the same mistake again. He needs to push diplomacy, not sanctions.

[donheld]

41. What has that to do with the size of Mr Edwards house?

:shrug:

[ecstatic]

38. I supported him in the past because I felt that's what most Americans wanted

An attractive candidate, with a loving wife and family, and a nice rags to riches "American Dream" success story to tell.

Everything changed within the past couple months... at least for me... and ironically, it was Pelosi's insistence that impeachment was off the table that jarred me back into reality. I am now willing to be honest about what I want from my government, regardless of who is in charge. Of course I want a Democrat in the White House, but what good will that do if Repug policies are still the rule of the day and we get no real change?

Edwards has made one horrible move after another--from SPONSORSHIP of the IWR, to backing down immediately with Kerry after the rigged vote in 2004, to fake photo-ops with Katrina evacuees while wearing expensive $1,000+ clothing /BlackBerry accessories (:sarcasm:), to now the latest outrage of possibly ramping up the rhetoric of a war with Iran. I'm sure none of his kids will be headed off to war, so why would he make hawkish comments like that?

[SeattleGirl]

40. Oy.

:crazy:

[Raine]

42. Edwards gets my support

out of those that are running.