If Time Could Be Turned Back.....

[DimplesinMI]

I still believe that if time could be turned back and Edwards did not make the final mistake with Hunter, that he did....he would have actually made a better President than the current office holder, Barack Obama. Sorry, but I really do believe this.

Why, you ask? For one, I strong feel as if Edwards would have stood firm on issues impacting the unemployed, underemployed and jobless. He would have came out strong against the "robo-signers" issues with foreclosures, facing millions of American homeowners.

Other issues....I seriously doubt he would have attempt to appoint a commission that would have stated "let's raise the retirement age and cut Medicare to bare bones, to solve our nations' deficit". Nope, do not believe this at all.

He would have fought the GOP tooth and nail on the extension of the Bush Era tax cuts and the public at large would not have been unsure, which side of the fence he was on, with this issue.

Environment issues would have taken a huge seat at the table, along with education equality, student loan modification or reform, Health Care for all (no insurance company backroom deals) and number of other issues that most independents, liberals and progressives would agree upon.

In the effort of fair discloser, originally, I was a Edwards supporter. I am also a African-American female who made the decision to vote for President Obama in August of 2008; later than most other friends of my race, I know. See, I was unsure if President Obama was not giving the American Public one big smoke screen, in his speeches.

To be fair to the President, I have not completely given up on him yet but, I will say that I am wondering about his true support of the middle and lower class populations of this country.

Thanks for allowing me to share this opinion.

[asdjrocky]

1. I find little reason to believe JRE would have been any different.

And John had no bigger supporter here at Du.

[DimplesinMI]

3. Thanks for your opinion...

We might disagree but, I respect it. I do wonder if given the chance (minus the huge screw up with Hunter) if he would have shown the Progressive/Liberal mantle, he carried so well in the campaign. He is one of the only candidates (even after he lost, the issue with Hunter came out and the separation of his marriage) that continued to work with rebuilding New Orleans and work in Africa to help the citizens of that country. In that aspect, he was true to his word by his actions.

[blue neen]

2. Edwards showed extremely poor judgment.

IMHO, he was very selfish to continue his run for the Presidency in light of his personal life situation. He risked losing the Presidency to the Republicans. That's just an ego trip.

Edwards showed a lack of compassion for his wife and children; his wife in her time of most need. How was he going to show compassion then for America's poor?

I also was originally an Edwards supporter. He let a lot of people down.

:dem:

[DimplesinMI]

4. I agree, he let me down too....believe me

But if none of the SERIOUS DRAMA surrounding his personal life happened, I do firmly believe he would have done more for Middle and Lower Class Americans, than President Obama has done, to date.

[Bucky]

5. Could be. However the man's real life track record suggests tragic flaws in his character

I admired his intelligence and his unabashedly speaking up for the poor. That said, I always got a huckster vibe from Edwards. He always struck me as being too smooth to be sincere. He's got more fight in him than Obama, but I trust Obama and I never fully trusted Edwards. By way of analogy, I would reference Federalist Alexander Hamilton's position in the 1800 presidential election which, by a flaw in original structure of the Electoral College, came down to a congressional vote between Republicans Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr. Lots of Federalists were trying to put Burr in the presidency because he was a little closer to their ideology and had been less demonized than Jefferson. But Hamilton spoke up for Jefferson, his long time nemesis, and against Burr, his friend, one time law partner, and fellow founder in the Manumission Society (New York's first antislavery organization). With every reason to prefer Burr, Hamilton still threw his support to Jefferson. He was an opponent in every sense, but he was an honorable opponent while Burr was a friend of questionable honor. The job required and requires more than just correct political alignment. It requires character. I'm pissed at Obama's complacency, but I still trust the man.

[Ozymanithrax]

6. I supported Edwards once...

but have come to believe that it was just a little show to get power. Maybe I'm wrong.

I think Clinton would have been a better choice. But the Democratic party didn't agree with me. They wanted and nominated a community organizer who acts exactly like a community organizer.

Who knew?

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

33. A community organizer who served in the Illinois state senate for 11 years.

And the U.S. Senate for 2 years. And who beat the Clintons. Get over the primaries!

[ProSense]

7. Interesting

Environment issues would have taken a huge seat at the table, along with education equality, student loan modification or reform, Health Care for all (no insurance company backroom deals) and number of other issues that most independents, liberals and progressives would agree upon.

On every one of those issue, President Obama has implemented historic reforms. Edwards' health care plan was not only the weakest of the three, it specifically included garnishing wages to enforce its mandate.

Edwards' track record as a Senator was not liberal.

[awoke_in_2003]

15. "included garnishing wages to enforce its mandate"...

as opposed to having the IRS come after you- which is basically the same thing. Candidate Obama ridiculed Clinton's and McCain's mandates, then president Obama supported the same thing. Meet the new boss.

[karynnj]

56. Congress put that in the bill

What changed was that the business forum strongly supported the mandates. (Ivan Seidenberg testified before the Finance committee.)

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

31. He was in fact a member of the DLC, right. The two-nations rhetoric

was first introduced when he ran for Vice President because I'm sure he came to the reality of what was happening with Bush and the Republicans in power.

[hlthe2b]

8. to this day, I can't hear his name without letting out a big sigh.....

Long ago, I would have thought him sincerely populist in his viewpoints, objectives, and priorities, but I just really do not know now. Such a pathetic waste of potential and one that still hurts those who supported him.

[Ter]

9. Hillary should have gotten the nomination

She should have taken it to the convention.

[ProSense]

10. She lost. n/t

[Ter]

13. Unfortunately

n/t

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

32. She would not have been any better. Hillary is DLC. It amazes me how

progressives mistakingly confused her as one. She is not. She is just as bit of a corporatist as Obama, probably more.

The only difference is that I think she may have fought the Republicans much harder than Obama has, so I understand the frustration.

But there is absolutely no evidence that she would have governed that differently in terms of her policies.

[emilyg]

44. Most unfortunately.

[GSLevel9]

14. nah... she'd still lose

She had her chance early and didn't take Obama seriously.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

34. ...and she ran a shitty, desperate, and unorganized campaign.

You can't manage your own campaign but expect the American people to believe that you can manage the Oval Office?

[Politics_Guy25]

17. Ummm how would she have won?

The supers locked in President Obama with way more than the 2,118 delegates required. She could take it to the convention and howl at the moon naked until midnight all 4 days of the convention and it wouldn't have mattered. Where were her 2,118 votes going to come from when the current President, who by the way is now very close friends with her as his secretary of state, already had them locked up?

Even Rendell was telling her to drop out remember?

Hillary supports Barack now and works with him. So should you!

[Ter]

22. I didn't say I don't support him

I said I wished she had one. By taking it to the convention she may have still come up short, but a fight would have made it much more interesting. Popcorn for sure.

[karynnj]

58. Interesting, obviously - but devastating for the Democrats

The convention is important to any candidate. It is his(her) time to introduce themselves again to the American public.

What this would do is make the days up to the vote contentious. Not to mention it would have just been incredibly poor sportsmanship. As it was, it was only shortly before the convention, when Hillary and Bill shifted to actually supporting Obama. There was a period of at least a month where they were still pouting (for lack of a better word).

Their support of Obama during the convention and afterward was extremely important in having a unified Democratic party - all fighting to make Obama President. Putting aside their disappointment and doing this was them doing the right thing. There would have been no real to do this had she brought the fight to the convention.

[Phx_Dem]

24. No, she shouldn't have. She ran such a shitty campaign it

speaks volumes about her ability to lead a campaign, let alone a country. And when her real personality shined through, it was not pretty.

[karynnj]

57. Had she done that, she was still not going to win

Obama had the most regular delegate votes and there were a large number of superdelegates that felt that only under some unusual circumstance should they "correct" the vote of the regular Democrats. By the last primary, Obama also had enough superdelegates who said they were for him.

No one would have been helped by a divisive convention - other than McCain.

Hillary lost because she assumed she could become the defacto nominee on Super Tuesday. The huge pile, of mostly Clinton friendly states, of contests that day was designed by Clinton allies to make it difficult for anyone else to have a chance. The thought was that she already had the name recognition, Bill Clinton, and many who wanted her President in the future since 1992. Her team's chutzpah was so great that they did little ground work in the next sets of contests.

[mtnsnake]

11. Long before Edwards personal troubles surfaced, I always thought him to be a complete fake

I used to take some heat here on DU for calling Edwards a phony back when he was so popular here, but as it turns out, Phony is his middle name. I can't understand how you'd think John Edwards of all people would make a better president than Obama, but then again, lots of people couldn't believe it when I used to call Edwards a big phony way back when, so yeah, I guess it's nice we're all entitled to our opinions.

John Edwards could make a fortune being a snake oil salesman or maybe one of those fire and brimstone preachers. IMO, he'd say anything to take advantage of naive people. Him and his Mr Populist image. What a joke that was. I think John Edwards turned out to be one of the biggest embarrassments to our Party ever.

It's way too early to give up hope on Obama. He's done some promising things and there's still a chance he could turn out to be one of the great ones. Sorry, but Edwards could never walk in Obama's shoes.

[jillan]

16. He made all his money in hedgefunds ON WALL STREET - 2 Americas? Yep John was part of the good one.

A complete fake.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/22/AR2007042201339.html

Elizabeth should have been the one in the family to run. I think she would've made a great President. Hope she's okay!

[DrToast]

18. I agree

Something about that guy always bugged me. He always seemed full of shit to me, even though the words we was saying were words I would agree with. For similar reasons, I'm not a Gavin Newsome fan. Newsome is Edwards part II.

[otohara]

48. Two America's, Then Came The Mega McMansion

seemed hypocritical of him to still be yammering on about Two America's - although he's lived in both.

then came the g-friend, ugh, such a disappointment.

[GSLevel9]

12. to be honest... I always thought Edwards was a phony.

A progressive in front of the camera but lives like a pig.

[Raine]

19. I was an Edwards supporter but I just don't know

if he would've stood up to the special interests or not, he seems to be of weak character (Hunter). After Edwards dropped out I enthusiastically supported Obama. I'm sorry now that I didn't support Clinton instead (not that the outcome would've been different but I would feel better about my own judgement).

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

35. Your logic doesn't make sense. You say that you wished you had support Hillary

but admit that she wouldn't not have been any different. Please explain. I'm confused. :wtf:

[Raine]

40. NO that is NOT what I meant at all

I'm talking about supporting and voting for her in the primary. My one vote that I gave to Obama instead didn't change the outcome of her getting the nomination. THAT is what I'm talking about. I NEVER said that Hillary wouldn't have been a different president from Obama.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

41. O.K. Thanks for explaining. I, too, moved from Edwards to Obama. But i just couldn't

trust Hillary. There is absolutely no evidence that she would have stood up to Corporate America, seeing as though she and her husband embrace that world. Remember that they are all corporatists and are members of the DLC.

Again, it baffles me why people are convinced that Hillary would be different. Maybe I'm too old and remember the Clinton years very, very well.

[madinmaryland]

20. He said all the words we wanted to hear, but I have no idea what

is governing skills would have been. It is one thing to campaign with platitudes, another to actually govern and make decisions.

The Hunter thing was bound to happen. It's just better that it happened before the election than after.

[polichick]

21. Who knows - seems like just another kind of con man. nt

[Rowdyboy]

23. In 2008 I believed in John Edwards and my partner and I supported him completely.....

We were wrong. He was a fraud who made fools of us for believing his lies.

Maybe, had he been able to keep his tawdry secrets he might have been a great president. We'll never know, however, because he couldn't keep his dick in his pants and THANK GOD he got caught before he could destroy the Democratic party.

Obama is a bit of a disappointment-I expected at least a bit more. John Edwards is a devastating betrayal. I will never forgive him for his self-centered arrogance. What an absolute prick.

[Milo_Bloom]

25. His votes on Iraq War, Bankrupcy Bill, Nuclear Waste, No Child Left Behind and the Patriot Act ...

Suggest otherwise.

[Carolina]

43. Thank you!

As I have read this thread, I am amazed at how many forget his voting history. Two Americas made a good theme and served the campaigning John, but then there's John with the mega ego, the mega house, and the mistress. John, the liar, cheater and all around swindler.

Never trusted him despite being glad when he beat Faircloth in the 1998 NC Senate race.

[southernyankeebelle]

26. Only one problem Obama or Edwards have had to deal with would be the bastards blue dogs dems.

[FrenchieCat]

27. This speculative talk about someone who's own voting record thru 2004,

was 180 from what he ran on in 2008, and said "sorry" more times than I can count,
as his explanation for those pre 2004 votes that were diametrically opposite of
of his 2008 stances, doesn't even make any sense.

I will say that Edwards was super cute, and he did have good hair......
so I guess some would have thought that this would made him a great President......
only if he wasn't who he was, and hadn't done all what he did.

But If you think, even now, that A two faced cheating lying "it's all about me"
kind of used car salesman who literally used his wife's terminal Cancer as a story
to score brownie points with voters, all the while he was banging some other woman,
and denied the child produced for months and months and months.....

would have made a better President than President Obama ,
than I don't know if you are even salvageable
in your judgement on politics.

[JoePhilly]

42. +100

Sounds like another "let's see in which way we can undercut Obama" line of argument.

[Irishonly]

46. I Was An Edwards Supporter

I was familiar with his voting record and I believed he had changed. I was also one of the fools that sent him money before the CA primary. He fell with a huge thud when he fell off the pedestal I had placed him on although I always said I thought Elizabeth would have been the better president. I try not to judge although I am positive had he won President McCain or Palin would really be screwing things up now.

I don't know if it serves any purpose to the should have, could have and would haves. No one can be all things to all people. I know I get terrified when I hear about cuts to social security. My husband and I are both disabled and we go without a lot as it is. I have to stay out of SS threads because people hear my fear and I can be a tad bit irrational.

Obama is our president. He said to hold his feet to the fire and I try. He isn't as progressive as I would like but I also think in order to get some things through he has had to compromise. I don't like it but a politician I am not.

[Crunchy Frog]

52. That about says it all.

[karynnj]

59. [phone]

[cliffordu]

28. Thanks for sharing.

[dionysus]

29. !!!!!!!

:spray:

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

30. I supported Edwards before finally moving to Obama. (I could not support Hillary

due to her DLC ties.) But looking back on Edwards' record, hindsight is 20-20, I'm not so certain that he'd be any different. And in fact, we would be much more disappointed that the rhetoric didn't match the behavior.

[cornermouse]

36. Fortunately, we have someone who passes laws

that look good without actually doing anything to benefit the average person whose income and ability to earn enough to pay the bills has been under almost non-stop attack for the last 30 years.

I'm betting you also think JFK was a failed presidency as well since he had women on the side on a regular basis. :eyes:

[treestar]

37. Not true, with the same Congress and the same economy

The most he could do was what President Obama has done, and possibly less.

[Imajika]

38. Edwards was a complete fake..

A con man in every way.

[Avalux]

39. Thanks for your opinion. Maybe he would have been better since he' s dishonest and lacks integrity.

The man is a complete phony; I could never buy into him because he just didn't seem sincere. Much the same way I feel about Bush. His political image was a construct completely different than who he really is. But you know, maybe that's what the Dems need in a presidential candidate.

[tritsofme]

45. The important things, like making yourself millions of dollars at hedge funds to learn about poverty

John Edwards was a great big phony from the start. The whole incident with his mistress and the ensuing cover-up/denials were par for the course for a man of John Edwards' integrity. It didn't surprise me at all, or make me think any less of him.

[Honeycombe8]

47. No way. He would've made a terrible President. And didn't he vote for the Iraq War?

No Democrat who voted for the Iraq War could've won, IMO. In other words, I don't think Edwards would've beat McCain. It may have been close, but I don't think he would've come out on top. For one thing, McCain wouldn't have chosen Palin, I think, had it not been for Obama's charismatic, unique charm, which forced the McCain camp to do something on the wild side, like choose Palin for a running mate. Palin hurt McCain (despite what Paliners and pundits love to say, which is that she infused his campaign with enthusiasm and ultimately helped him).

[LisaL]

49. I never liked him. Even before Hunter's episode I always

had a feeling he was fake.

[Hawkowl]

50. Obama was the worst of the candidates

In retrospect I think all of the major candidates would have done a better job than Obama.

[yurbud]

51. Congress did pass student loan reform under Obama

[activa8tr]

53. If Edwards, Clinton, or any of these other wannabee's had won, does anyone actually

dream that the Republicans and Blue Dogs in Congress would have acted any differently?

OF COURSE NOT!

Sometimes I have to wonder who posts here in DU.



What specifically would any of the other people who ran done that would have made a difference, based upon their collective
lackluster campaigns, their previous record in personal lives and/or elective office?

Does anyone think that Fox News, Rush, and Beck would have gone easier on Hillary or Edwards?

Oh, wait, there are all those racial issues that Rush ("the magic negro" singer) and Beck ("deep down racist who hates white people" to quote him) and Fox, (hundreds of examples from new black panthers to reparations).

Yes, I understand now, it would have been a cake walk for a white person as president.

I have never read such a sour grapes thread on DU, nor one that ignores the blatant racism in the media and in the posters'own wishes.

In politics, Democratic, progressive, or liberal, you dance with the guy who brung you or you don't do us any favors at all.

Of course it's been disappointing, and the work has been hard, but to think the situation would be any different with another character standing for the same things in the White House, well, I think some of the posters here have drunk from the Glenn Beck Kool aid, or donned one of the tea party bonnets, just for a moment here and there.

[Vinca]

54. In retrospect, it seems John Edwards - a man I supported for some time -

missed his calling as a used car salesman. IMHO, he was out for personal gain and the "Two Americas" was a schtick.

[karynnj]

55. JRE was and is a fraud - consider that NOT ONE of the Kerry people

(meaning the Kerry fund raisers, strategists, and others in the 2004 campaign) went to Edwards after Kerry opted not to run. They knew him well after working closely with him. Possibly because they took their lead from Kerry, who they admired enough to be with him even in late 2006, they have been closed mouthed about Edwards' actions in the 2004 campaign.

It is from EDWARDS' comments that it is clear that he was the VP candidate from hell. Even Palin, who was of course worse, was willing to use the campaign's slogan - yet Edwards BRAGGED that he continued to use "hope is on the way" over Kerry's "help is on the way" leading to media comments in 2004 that the campaign couldn't decide on a slogan - thus Kerry was indecisive!

But, although his actions in 2004 and his lies about the campaign afterward greatly anger me, you need to look at his real history. He was apolitical until he ran for the Senate in 1998 - often not voting and saying that he did "not remember" if he cast his first vote for McGovern or Nixon. NOBODY who was actually for McGovern that year "forgot" they voted for him - I still have a "Don't blame me I voted for McGovern button and a McGovern button. He entered the Senate, where his best friend was reportedly Evan Bayh, who he ran with - and his voting record was very similar to Bayh's. He voted for a the 2001 version of the atrocious bankruptcy bill. You can't put that off on being a naive Freshman - Elizabeth Edwards' specialty was bankruptcy law.

When he started running in 2003 for 2004, he was to the right of everyone except Lieberman. In the last primary debate before Kerry clinched the nomination, he blasted Kerry's health care plan, which was near universal care (near because it did not have a mandate), as breaking the budget - his plan was far less generous and covered just kids. On the environment, Edwards had a 66% League of Conservation Voters record - lower than his major opponents in 2004 and 2008 - especially Kerry, who had a 96% and was a strong environmentalist, who was an activist on this issue BEFORE he spoke against the Vietnam war. He was involve in the 1970 Earth day.)

In 2005, as an experiment, I looked at in how many speeches various Senators used the words "poverty", "poor", etc in the Senate record. I chose 2000 as the year, because 1999 was his first year, 2001 is weird and after that he was often gone campaigning. Kennedy, Kerry, and Dubin came up far higher on the number of "hits" from the searches than Edwards. (I can't remember the others I searched on - in this strange look at whether poverty was his issue. The two Americas theme was NOT new - it was the theme of the Kerner report in 1968 and of a famous (far better than Edwards) Mario Cuomo speech at a convention.

After losing in 2004, he redefined himself as to the left of all the viable candidates - because Hillary was the obvious candiate of moderate/centrist Democrats. He basically changed not just from his Senate record, but his 2004 campaign - taking positions close to Kerry's positions which matched Kerry's much more liberal history. But, at the same time, he was working at a hedge fund, that was included one of the companies that foreclosed on many people in New Orleans, a few days a month doing what he thought useful, for $500,000. (Think about that when you remember his attacks on taking lobbyists campaign money - this is worse.) Worse yet, was his UNC poverty center really was just an incubator for creating his 2008 platform. Note this allows uncapped contributions that are considered charitable.

The fact is that Edwards was a very charismatic person, capable of lying while looking at you with unblinking big blue eyes. To me, he is an example of someone who can craft an image and stay within it - almost as an actor playing a character. What is odd, is that to many this simple, consistent persona seemed more authentic than people who were who they really are - with all complexity that involves.

In 2007 and 2008, Edwards was a demagogue willing to say whatever was needed to get people to follow - and he was good at it.