Skip to main content

View Diary: '08 Watch: New Poll Says Edwards Beating Hillary in Iowa (202 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Two points (5+ / 0-)
    1. This early poll is nothing more than name recognition.  The fact that H. Clinton came in #2 tells us that she is unpopular.
    1. The only people who are backing H. Clinton for president are the Democratic Washington insiders and the Republicans.

    Clinton as a senator has displayed lack of courage and no leadership at all.  She's a silent supporter of the Iraq War and only takes safe stands.  She's the same type of 'don't alienate the Republicans' candidate that we lost with in the past.

    •  Agreed (0+ / 0-)

      Vilsack?  Oh please.  Him getting 10% tells me this poll is meaningless.  

      "But your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore"--Prine Pay attention Georgie - 2480+ dead Americans. Jesus Christ, make it stop already.

      by Miss Blue on Sun Jun 11, 2006 at 05:44:52 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Vilsack (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Shawn, Joe B, iCaroline

        getting 10% is very meaningful since he is the freaking govrnor of the state.  If people were deciding with their "emotions", the hometown boy would be first.

      •  This poll is very meaningful (7+ / 0-)

        I'm in Iowa and I completely believe it.

        It confirms the following things for me:

        • Vilsack would lose an Iowa primary - badly.  I've thought that since he's been talked about running.
        • Hillary will NOT be our presidential candidate.  Her "front runner" status is pure right-wing media spin
        • Edwards "stealth" candidacy is working.  The media is ignoring him because he is talking about poverty.  They don't care about poverty.  But the Democratic base does, and we (especially in Iowa) have seen what he's been doing.

        Pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space because there's bugger all down here on Earth.

        by bawbie on Sun Jun 11, 2006 at 08:01:40 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Did you read the (0+ / 0-)

          alternet piece, it was based on this blog entry John Atlas on Edwards and the Politics of Poverty?

          In a walnut paneled conference room with Georgian chandeliers, Remington-style bronze reproductions, 17th century Flemish art and Persian carpets, including one woven by servants of the Shah of Iran, there sat Edwards for two days, at a small round table, picking at a box lunch and taking copious notes, as panel after panel expounded on new policies to fight poverty. The stark contrast between the setting and the topic mirrored the reality that in an era with vanishing unions and shrinking civil rights organizations, the topic of poverty is kept alive, if at all, by the ivory tower, the privileged and the beneficent powerful. More than that, Edwards who has the courage to focus on the issue of poverty risks antagonizing the very financiers essential to his political future. As Edwards shifts to the minimum wage, the need for strong unions and economic rights, his political tightrope narrows.

          He told the conferees "When I spoke on the campaign trail about the two Americas, people called it a downer." I am sure it was--to the rich who dominate politics.

          Oh and by the way his leadership PAC is broke. What a coincidence. I thank God he's a trial lawyer and cash in those markers when the time comes.

    •  the meaning of the poll (5+ / 0-)

      I'm going to disagree a bit. I think the poll reflects a bit more then name recognition. Hillary has the highest name recognition of everyone. John Kerry's name  recognition is equivalent to Edwards and does less than half as well. Of course, Vilsack is the current governor. Among this top tier, you can't really ascribe the results to being a pure function of name recognition. I think there's a real substantial judgement being made. The second tier is can be explained by named recognition, although its well to note that Iowa Democrats have already been on the receiving end of multiple trips from Edwards, Kerry, Bayh, Warner, Biden, Feingold, and Daschle.

    •  not true (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kindertotenlieder

      please check her voting record and she is something that most other potential candidates are not STRONG ON WOMEN'S RIGHTS.

      mcjoan is the new Armando

      by TeresaInPa on Sun Jun 11, 2006 at 07:20:22 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  well said. (0+ / 0-)

      "Clinton as a senator has displayed lack of courage and no leadership at all."

      well said.

      "duck and cover" is hillary's campaign motto.

      she is seriously miscalculating on iraq. it is no longer politically "safe" to be hawkish or to even be straddling the fence on iraq.

    •  Incorrect (0+ / 0-)

      Because the names Edwards, Clinton, Vilsack, Feingold, etc are well known among likley Democratic voters.  So, they are making a choice.  Name recognition is only a real factor is only 1 or 2 candidates is known.

      Democrats are the party of those who are working, those who have finished working, and those who want to work. -- Elizabeth Edwards

      by philgoblue on Mon Jun 12, 2006 at 06:37:10 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site