Gore Supporters, Where Are You Now? (w/ Poll)

This is not a jab at those who expected Gore to enter the race. (Had he run, I might have supported him myself in the primaries). Rather, I'm simply interested in learning where Gore supporters have gone (or are going, as the case may be) since it became evident that Gore would not be running. I also think Edwards supporters may wish to keep this in the back of their collective mind. Here's why.

I'm sympathetic to the claim that Edwards is getting shut out by the MSM. He's the candidate who seems the least hospitable to the corporate interests which underwrite so much of our nation's news media.

However, I'm also cognizant of his place in the polls. (And, yes, I saw what happened in New Hampshire). Here's what's coming up.

Nevada, January 19th
Apparently, many think Nevada is difficult to poll, so there hasn't been much of it. Still, there hasn't been a mainstream poll within the past year which has given Edwards more than 16% of the vote. And the recent endorsement of Obama by the Culinary Workers Union doesn't exactly help Edwards any.

South Carolina, January 26th
There's significantly more polling in this race. Within the last six months, Edwards garnered as much as 24% in an ARG poll. But that was last August, and for the past month Edwards appears to be hovering around 16%, with Obama and Hillary each garnering twice as much support among South Carolina voters.

After South Carolina, it's Florida (with its stripped delegates) on the 29th and then Super Duper Tuesday on February 5th.

I don't write any of the above to discourage Edwards supporters. It's possible he could stage a come-back, which I would welcome; however, I myself wouldn't put money on it. Regardless, it's important for Edwards supporters, like the Gore supporters of yesterday, to realize that, if the race for the Democratic nomination turns into a two-person race between Obama and Hillary --and it may have already become that--, then Edwards supporters can do more to influence that race now than if they wait another month or two.

Be that as it may, if you were a Gore supporter in the past, then please take the poll.

•  Just curious. n/t

  by machopicasso on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 05:54:17 PM PDT

  •  Alright, there's something going on with the site

    Neither the original poll nor the one's I've added via the edit function are showing up. So, please cast your vote in the form of a comment. We'll try the poll again later.

    by machopicasso on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:11:22 PM PDT

    •  will await...good diary!

      excellent idea this.  would love to see where the gore folks are situated.

      by maxschell on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:15:26 PM PDT

    •  yes, there's a problem....

      I've posted two diaries over the weekend,
      on Gary Hart and HR333, and, in both cases, the polls I lovingly crafted did not show up when published.  

      Same thing happened to Tamasher

      Have no idea what's going on.  How do we alert site techies that this is beginning to seem like a pattern.... tho' I've seen a lot of diaries with polls, to be fair, during the weekend as well.  Weird.  

      by penncove on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:43:59 PM PDT

      •  oh, and as to your pollish question

        This Gorite is leaning strongly to Obama, could live with Edwards or Hillary, but worry that Hillary might be toxic even in this autumn, which should be a D-landslide!

        by penncove on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:45:25 PM PDT

    •  no strong preference.

      Edwards scores on fighting the corporations.  Loses a point for being a-priori opposed to nuclear power.  

      Obama scores on vision and renewal.  Loses a point for some indications that his energy platform was written by non-specialists.  

      Clinton scores on crisis management.  Loses a point for having anything to do with some of the "DLC types."  

      I'm still not sure who gets my vote in the primary.  Any of them would be a capable president.  All of them need to put Gore's climate proposals into their platforms.  Whoever gets in is going to immediately have to deal with the economic depression that's about to hit with full force.  

      If Gore decides to run he'll still have my support.  I'm slightly bugged about all the guessing games this year, but "whatever," the job must still be done.

      "Whoever turns out to be the candidate" gets my ferocious support for the general election.  

      I'm more than sick of the sniping that goes on around here with all the "my candidate is a superhero and your candidate was seen torturing small animals" crap.  People who do that sort of thing are helping the Republicans, whether they know it or like it or not.

      Word to the wise: we have brains & we use 'em.  If you want to promote your candidate, what we want to see is a detailed exposition of his/her policy proposals in specific areas, and track records in those areas (or explanations of why the track record doesn't match up with the proposals).  

      Better yet let's see some truly unbiased comparisons between all three on various critical issues.  

      by G2geek on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:51:54 PM PDT

  •  I completely disagree with this:

    Edwards supporters can do more to influence that race now than if they wait another month or two.

    If you want to know about Gore supporters, why make the diary almost completely about Edwards? I smell a rat. (OK, just a little sneaky mousy.)
    ;-)

    by nehark on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:25:20 PM PDT

    •  No rat.

      I'm genuinely interested in where Gore supporters have ended up. But just posting the poll didn't seem like a sufficiently substantive diary (especially now that the poll was a victim to a tech problem). As I stand back and look at the situation, Edwards isn't out of it, but his chances now look the poorest of the three main candidates. And that means Edwards supporters may soon end up in a situation similar to that of yesterday's Gore supporters, so I thought it was worth discussing.

      by machopicasso on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:49:13 PM PDT

      •  My feeling is that...

        ...when we all get to the convention, Edwards can put his delegates where he thinks they'll do the most good. There are only two things that can change my vote from Edwards: 1) If Gore enters the race, or 2) If Edwards himself tells me to.

        So my answer to your poll, if it ever shows up, is Edwards. And seriously, I think it's way too early to count him out. I want his voice speaking for me all the way to, and during, the convention.

        by nehark on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:02:09 PM PDT

        •  I didn't say it was over for Edwards.

          And seriously, I think it's way too early to count him out.

          I'm just saying that, from where things stand today and where he's been in the polls for the past six months in the next states to hold primaries, things aren't looking great for him.

          by machopicasso on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:10:48 PM PDT

      •  Oh yeah and you are doing a great job of

        trying to help the media marginalize Edwards.

        With Democrats helping and working so hard to limit who the people get to vote for why do we even have elections.

        I will tell you why.

        I want to vote for the person who best represents my interest in this or any other election and.
        
        I AM DAMN SICK AND TIRED OF YOU PEOPLE TRYING TO TELL ME I AM STUPID TO VOTE FOR EDWARDS SO GET OFF OF IT.
        
        I can make up my own mind thank you.

        That from a former Gore supporter who stand firmly behind J Edwards.

        by eaglecries on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:11:40 PM PDT

        •  Easy cheatah!

          I'm not telling you who to vote for in the primaries. It's possible Edwards will make a comeback. And, since I like Edwards, I'd get some satisfaction in watching the MSM having to report on Edwards in virtue of his having won some primaries, or even the nomination.

          I'm just saying that, based on where Edwards has been in the Nevada and South Carolina polls for the past six months, the near future doesn't bode well for him. And, if that's correct, then Edwards supporters are closer to the position in which Gore supporters used to be.

          by machopicasso on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:21:20 PM PDT

          •  Gore's supporters were in a harder position

            than the Edwards or Kucinich supporters ever were in, for they had to advocate for a man who never declared his candidacy.

            Edwards and Kucinich put themselves on the ballot. The Draft Gore groups had to try to do it the hard way, by canvassing for signatures.

            Unfortunately Gore stopped the draft groups before we could put him on the ballot in any state. But I think we'd have managed to get him on the ballot in at leaste one state, probably more.

            by limpidglass on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:31:45 PM PDT

      •  And yesterday's Gore's supporters ...

        ... had more influence on the race by standing on the sidelines. For example, they would have been part of what enticed the two current front-runners into declaring co-sponsoring legislation in May that was substantially stronger than the legislation they co-sponsored in January.

        We have Ms. "Ready from Day One" ready to risk looking like she'll need John Edwards in the White House if something comes up that needs new policy thinking. And the pressure on the Senator mentored by Senator Lieberman to push for policies as Audacious as his hopes ... that pressure's building.

        Its the corporate Mass Media against the difficulty of filtering New Media, and the establishment, as always, is the short odds favorite, but knocking John Edwards out of the race everywhere across the country while simultaneously fighting tooth and nail for California may prove trickier in the doing than in the imagination of the pundits.

        by BruceMcF on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 11:42:52 PM PDT

•  suggestion= add a poll to your diary

  great topic!! i'm very interested myself

  by elephantitis on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 05:55:45 PM PDT

  •  I put a poll there, but it's not showing up. ARGH

    And it's not taking on any of the edits. (I've tried to add it three times).

    So, in the meantime, if you were a Gore supporter, please post it in a comment below.

    by machopicasso on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:00:04 PM PDT

    •  kamp kucinich n/t

      by elephantitis on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:01:16 PM PDT

    •  It seems like others are having this problem

      of the poll not showing up.  Plus, I noticed my ratings have not been registering for a while.  I'm sure it will all be sorted out.

      by Dianna on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:07:32 PM PDT

  •  I agree

    I was a die-hard Gore supporter. I have a Gore 08 tee shirt. Each day Iowa got closer, the more I clenched my teeth anxiously waiting for Gore to throw in his hat. I was super disappointed when he didn't.

    It would be interesting to see where those types of people have gone... though there'd be no way to stop people who weren't really all that gore-crazy from freeping the poll.

    Personally I was leaning Obama, totally ambivalent.. the only candidates i wasn't crazy about were Gravel and Richardson.  Biden didn't do much for me either. But in general i went from really liking all of the to being really apathetic about them all.

    Then I started watching their IA stump speeches.. about a month before Iowa I became a die-hard Edwards supporter.  He hasn't been endorsed by Gore (yet! crossing fingers) but NH draft Gore did support him for his environmental plan.  Obama is a distant second choice for me now.

    by goodlittlesquid on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:02:36 PM PDT

    •  You've given up already? Was it over when the

      Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

      by revenant on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:16:33 PM PDT

      •  HELL NO

        by goodlittlesquid on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:20:55 PM PDT

        •  After Bloomberg announces. Just be patient.

          Al will waltz in and kick some serious ass.

          by revenant on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:23:17 PM PDT

          •  Your lips to God's ears! n/t

            by nehark on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:28:09 PM PDT

  •  Don't forget my guy on it KUCINICH

    by snackdoodle on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:07:45 PM PDT

    •  I'll add Kucinich to the poll once the poll

      function starts working again.

      by machopicasso on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:13:41 PM PDT

•  Fixed your tags. n/t

  by Stymnus on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 05:57:57 PM PDT

  •  Can you fix my poll?!

    It's not showing up after repeated tries.

    by machopicasso on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:00:44 PM PDT

    •  I think it is a glitch

      in the system.

      The last week or so my TU blinks in and out between refreshes, my rating history only goes up until January 5th so I can't recycle, and you are not the first one I've heard had difficulty posting a poll.

      After Gore didn't run I went into the "undecided" camp and am still there. I lean Edwards, but will vote for anyone that gets the nomination. No one inspires me.

      Now if I could combine traits from all of them...

      by SeattleLiberal on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:09:30 PM PDT

  •  TAGS< I saw "Gore, Edwards",

    So I Put in first names:

    Al Gore, John Edwards,

    by Roger Fox on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:32:05 PM PDT

    •  I think they got 'refixed' out from under me.

      I made the same changes.  Diary owner must have changed them back :)

      machopicasso: there are tagging guidelines, here.

      by Stymnus on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:56:26 PM PDT

•  don't see a poll, but I'll give you my answer

  Leaning strongly towards Edwards, closely followed by Obama. . .OH primary not until March.  Hopefully things will still be shaken and stirred until then!

  by Great Lakes Gal on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 05:59:41 PM PDT

•  Well I Went To

  Edwards pretty early in the game cause I felt before most here that Gore wasn't going to run (early-to-mid summer). I still am sticking with and have a small amount of hope for Edwards.

  Now I am also a realist ..... and if forced to pick between Obama and Clinton the choice would take about .01 seconds. Obama.

  My primary is 2/5 (Illinois) and I plan to vote for Edwards. I don't see any way Obama is going to lose Illinois. If I was in another state and voted on or after the 5th and it was just Hillary/Obama I'd change and vote for Obama just to try and stop her.

  by webranding on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:01:07 PM PDT

•  Fired up...

  

  by blueyedace2 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:02:09 PM PDT

•  This seems more like

  a Edwards is not going to win, so you MUST choose another, rather than a Gore supporters where are you going.

  Don't let the Media tell you who to vote for!

  John Edwards 08
  http://johnedwards.com

  Washington Woman

  EENR

  by kevin22262 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:07:40 PM PDT

  •  By the way

    All of you Edwards supporters... The campaign IS watching us. They are listening.

    So never give up no matter what the media says and no matter WHAT people here try to make you think or do.

    http://johnedwards.com

    Washington Woman

    EENR

    by kevin22262 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:13:14 PM PDT

    •  I Ain't Giving Up

      Don't worry about that!

      by webranding on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:14:25 PM PDT

  •  As I wrote above,

    I do think Edwards is getting screwed by the MSM. My opinion regarding the likelihood of his run being successful however is a function of my reading of the polls.

    by machopicasso on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:16:02 PM PDT

    •  IF the

      fucking MEDIA would do their job, this race would be different right now.

      Why don't some here understand that the media and the corporations do not want John Edwards!? This is not some tin foil hat crap, this IS reality.

      So if the media is OK with O and C but not E, wouldn't you all agree that means something?

      If it is Not Edwards then I see a president that acts like this current congress.... "Oh No... you are Threatening a filibuster... shit... We give... next." Instead of a congress that says... "OK, go ahead and really filibuster, let the media pick up on it. You want to talk for 4 weeks, go right ahead."

      hm.

      Washington Woman

      EENR

      by kevin22262 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:22:45 PM PDT

      •  I noticed

        that O and C have both started using Edwards populist words and themes. Isn't that interesting? Isn't that telling...? hm.

        Washington Woman

        EENR

        by kevin22262 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:24:25 PM PDT

      •  Just b/c Edwards is getting screwed by the MSM

        doesn't necessarily mean that he'd be doing as well as either Obama or Hillary if he weren't the target of a media blackout.

        by machopicasso on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:53:32 PM PDT

        •  Well

          it doesn't mean he wouldn't. At least it would be fair.

          Polls are very heavily influenced by media coverage.

          Washington Woman

          EENR

          by kevin22262 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:08:06 PM PDT

          •  I grant that the media coverage hurts him.

            But, if the complaints of Edwards supporters are any indication, the media blackout is by and large subsequent to Edwards's poor showing in the polls of, say, Nevada and South Carolina.

            by machopicasso on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:14:30 PM PDT

            •  My god

              are you blind to the fact that Edwards has had MUCH less media coverage from day one? They DO Not like his message. His message goes against them... the corporations and the lobbyist.

              After Iowa it was... OBAMA... Hillary .... oh... hm.... oh yeah.. edwards.

              His poll numbers in Nevada and SC can be, in great part, partially tied to the lack of coverage he has gotten.

              Washington Woman

              EENR

              by kevin22262 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:27:48 PM PDT

              •  You seem to assume,

                had Edwards received equal media coverage from day one,  that he would be doing better in the polls. That doesn't necessarily follow, and it's far from obvious.

                by machopicasso on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:55:42 PM PDT

                •  how can you

                  assume the opposite?

                  Washington Woman

                  EENR

                  by kevin22262 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:58:25 PM PDT

                •  The point is...

                  ...we will never know.

                  The media should not have slammed the doors.

                  All we know is that his campaign is hurt by being mentioned 1/8 as much as his opponents, while doing quite a bit more than 1/8 as well -- despite the blackout.

                  There are a lot of people who seem to think Edwards dropped out, because you don't hear about him much anymore.  Even right after his Iowa 2nd place showing.

                  by Stymnus on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:59:16 PM PDT

        •  I guess we'll never know (n/t)

          by nom de paix on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 08:13:30 PM PDT

•  Undecided n/t

  by vicki on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:08:26 PM PDT

•  Gore in 2000

  and a wish for 2008
  now it is Edwards until he asks me not to.

  by demnomore on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:08:48 PM PDT

•  hey where's the poll?

  I came for a poll asking for my very valuable opinion.

  I'm sad now. :(

  by DawnG on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:10:17 PM PDT

  •  You think YOU'RE sad!

    I feel like I've invited everyone to my place for a party. The guests have just arrived and discovered I have no food, no music, and no booze.

    by machopicasso on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:18:19 PM PDT

    •  do you have board games at least?

      There's nothing like a rousing game of parcheesie to make a party!

      Oh..OR...do you have a network?  LAN PARTY!!!!

      WOO HOO!  

      by DawnG on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:21:03 PM PDT

      •  I got dice.

        by Roger Fox on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:27:03 PM PDT

        •  OOOOoooo!!!

          D&D!

          by DawnG on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:41:19 PM PDT

          •  D4 to D20

            RPG to Table top wargaming.

            by Roger Fox on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 08:52:49 PM PDT

            •  I still have an entire bag of my brother's dice.

              I just couldn't bring myself to throw them away.

              I don't know where they are EXACTLY, but I have them...somewhere.

              You never know when you can use a small bag of assorted die.

              by DawnG on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 09:08:30 PM PDT

              •  Imperial Trenchers

                

                Table top Miniatures wargaming.

                by Roger Fox on Mon Jan 14, 2008 at 06:40:55 PM PDT

•  Undecided. n/t

  by CAL11 voter on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:10:32 PM PDT

  •  you're one demanding voter :)

    by NeuvoLiberal on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:31:07 PM PDT

    •  I like the three of them. :-)

      I'm just not sure which one I want to vote for this year.  I'm disappointed that the candidates have not spent more time in California addressing our issues.  I'd like to know what they plan to do about our problems!

      by CAL11 voter on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:41:30 PM PDT

•  Gore in '00, '08

  Although I was in the small minority of CA Dems who voted for Bradley in the primary.

  Now with Hillary.

  by Pacific John on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:11:16 PM PDT

•  You *still* think he's not running?

  by revenant on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:15:12 PM PDT

•  Hillary n/t

  by Coldblue Steele on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:15:46 PM PDT

  •  Why? It's not that she didn't do what she could

    to undermine Gore's efforts in 2000.

    by elender on Mon Jan 14, 2008 at 04:36:40 PM PDT

•  In most of the polls done up to this point

  on DKos by Gore supporters, Edwards has been the clear preference with around 40 to 50%.

  I wish Gore had made it clearer earlier that he wouldn't run. It might have allowed his supporters to be more organized in supporting others. A lot of people waited so long for Gore, even after the NH filing deadline passed, waiting for that "Shermanesque" statement.

  by okamichan13 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:17:13 PM PDT

  •  Agreed.

    I wish Gore had made it clearer earlier that he wouldn't run.

    I am not pleased at how coy he played it.  That was not cool.

    by Mehitabel9 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:34:54 PM PDT

•  Fantasy scenario:

  no one has enough delegates to win nomination. Brokered convention=GORE / EDWARDS TICKET!  Though if that actually did happen it would more likely be a Gore/Obama ticket.

  by goodlittlesquid on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:18:31 PM PDT

  •  oh yeah!

    remember this?

    by penncove on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:49:21 PM PDT

  •  Now you're talking!

    Have you read my dreams somehow?

    by SharonRB on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:50:49 PM PDT

  •  That should have been the 2000 ticket

    Yeah that's my fantasy too. a brokered convention but Gore/ Obama!

    by never forget 2000 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:08:11 PM PDT

•  where am I?

  Here, of course. Where else would I be? Certainly not in a location different from where I am, like over there.

  Seriously, I'm not backing anyone in the primaries. None of the candidates is so outstanding that I would get behind him/her, and none of them is sufficiently objectionable for me to get behind another candidate in order to stop him/her.

  In the general, I'll vote for any Democrat over the Republican.

  by limpidglass on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:19:40 PM PDT

  •  Wow, I like that first part. That's kind of how I

    think, except I sometimes find myself in a location different from where I am.

    Rather a lot, really.

    by revenant on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:27:23 PM PDT

•  Obama... he seems to be

  doing in the political realm exactly what Gore is doing wrt environmental issues-- building a movement that will shift the discourse, with an eye towards the future.  I'm embarrassed that this only clicked for me a week or so ago, although I'd already settled on Obama as the default candidate with the most potential.

  by latts on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:20:00 PM PDT

  •  that has struck me as well

    that Obama is a coalition builder. Like Gore he's interested in establishing a lasting political movement.

    They are similar too in that both are very studious and analyze issues in thorough detail before coming to a conclusion.

    Obama's taken some flack here for not ruling out nuclear power, but his argument sounded quite reasonable and thoughtful: if we can take care of the waste and security problems, we should use nuclear power as part of our energy strategy; otherwise we shouldn't. (Gore also acknowledges that nuclear power might play a role in our energy strategy).

    Also, Obama has a reputation as a moderate. Gore, too was considered a moderate for most of his career. He was one of a few Democrats to support the Gulf War in 1991 (rightly, in my opinion), and he wasn't generally regarded as highly liberal even in 2000.

    Gore is considered very radical now (and quite justly) because what he's calling for now in response to the climate crisis is far beyond what our political system is capable of delivering at the moment (indeed, as Gore says, the climate crisis is a spiritual and moral issue, not merely a "political" one).

    Gore does believe in the primacy of people over profits, but he places his faith in the power of the free market (suitably regulated by the government) to generate products and technologies that will improve the quality of life.

    And he believes in the rule of law and the Constitution, which, before Bush decided to crap all over them, was moderate.

    Obama is earlier along in his political career than Gore, and unlike Gore he has yet to find the issue that really drives him. His lack of experience is a serious liability to him right now.

    But if I had to say which one of the candidates had the most potential to grow into a great leader in the future, it would be Obama.

    by limpidglass on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:57:33 PM PDT

•  trying to decide between Obama and Clinton

  along with everyone else.

  Probably will vote for Obama, but I fluctuate daily.

  by coigue on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:21:27 PM PDT

  •  Everyone Else Isn't Trying to Decide Between

    Obama & Clinton.

    I'm voting for John Edwards, for many-many reasons...check some of those reasons out by clicking here!

    Thanks!

    by Ranting Roland on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:27:46 PM PDT

    •  I'll amend for coigue:

      "along with everyone else" who doesn't have a clue that there are more than 2 candidates running. (Hey I thought it was just Bubba with his beer in front of CNN who didn't know!)

      by nehark on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:33:45 PM PDT

      •  lol

        good luck with that vitriol.

        by coigue on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:55:11 PM PDT

      •  Most of us know

        there are four candidates still. Many of us sincerely believe only two are viable.

        For the record, as one of those many, I'd like to see Edwards stay in the race. That will prevent his supporters from abandoning him for Clinton and then he can hand over to his delegates to Obama in exchange for the VP spot and creating a killer change ticket for 2008 and the potential for 16 years of progressive government.

        by Potus2020 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 08:17:05 PM PDT

  •  You watch way too much CNN.

    There are a good many of us out there who are not trying to decide between Obama and Clinton.

    by Mehitabel9 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:33:12 PM PDT

    •  I don't watch cable news

      I listen to NPR, and read the newspaper.

      But just for your benefit:

      "ouch, I guess I hit a nerve"

      by coigue on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:54:40 PM PDT

  •  If you respect Gore you will never ever vote

    for Clinton.

    Just watch what she has been doing over the issue of Iraq. She lies about what she voted for the IWR and she lies about Obama's record.

    Remember: like Obama and unlike Hillary and Bill Clinton Gore had the gut and wisdom to stand up in Sept 2002 and oppose Bush's insanity.
    We should never forget that.

    by elender on Mon Jan 14, 2008 at 05:47:47 PM PDT

    •  what the fuck ever

      what a crock of bullshit to think that you can speak for Gore.

      by coigue on Mon Jan 14, 2008 at 06:24:46 PM PDT

•  Obama.

  by Mother of Zeus on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:22:59 PM PDT

  •  OBAMA

    by RubyGal on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:52:14 PM PDT

•  Still For Gore

  How can you be a die hard supporter and let a little request to stop supporting his entry into the race stop you? This is what die hard is all about!

  But I have been watching the race, and of those that ARE running, Edwards is my favorite.. followed by Obama.

  by Tuba Les on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:26:03 PM PDT

  •  Hear hear ! (clap, clap) Edwards? Obama? oh,

    I'm sorry, please splash some water on my face. I accidentally fell asleep listening to their boring-ass "hope to change" speeches.

    by revenant on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:30:16 PM PDT

    •  Edwards is hardly

      about hoping to change.

      Try listening to some of his speeches.

      by Stymnus on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 08:01:40 PM PDT

•  Gore girl for Edwards

  and if he doesnt get the nomination, then Obama. Will vote for Hillary if i have to.

  by fireflynw on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:30:54 PM PDT

  •  I am exactly where you are

    I tell everyone I'm really a Gore girl, but I've landed on Edwards in the absence of a miracle.  Obama second and Hillary last.  Truly, though, I'd be okay with any of them as long as they win the general.

    by SharonRB on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:48:40 PM PDT

•  One other thing

  The way you mention Edwards is very "concern trollish". I am not saying you are but it smacks of that.

  Why don't all of you people that are trying to sway Edwards supporters away, just stop. We really are tired of hearing it.

  If you really believe in Edwards message, then why not give him support and stop going where the media is leading you? That is how He can win, that IS how We The People can Win!

  http://johnedwards.com

  Washington Woman

  EENR

  by kevin22262 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:31:14 PM PDT

  •  I think you're over-reacting.

    As I wrote above, as things stand now with respect to the polls alone (i.e. not with respect to the MSM), Edwards supporters are the closest to ending up in the position of the Gore supporters of yesterday. Of course, things could change. And, since I like Edwards, that wouldn't disappoint me. But I'm curious as to how things will look tomorrow, and the best evidence doesn't seem to speak in Edwards's favor.

    by machopicasso on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:59:02 PM PDT

    •  polls

      ARE influenced by media coverage. So... they are the same.

      Washington Woman

      EENR

      by kevin22262 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:06:25 PM PDT

      •  No, polls and media coverage are NOT the same.

        They are related in important ways. But there's no good reason to treat them as the same.

        by machopicasso on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:16:02 PM PDT

        •  I disagree

          Many polls are commissioned by the MSM. They can and do reflect what people see and hear through the media.

          Washington Woman

          EENR

          by kevin22262 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:23:52 PM PDT

          •  Not the same.

            Just because "many" (i.e. some) polls are commissioned by the MSM doesn't mean that all polls are simply the MSM in a different voice.

            And just because polls "reflect what people see and hear through the media" doesn't mean that Edwards wouldn't be in third place without the media blackout.

            I grant that the relation between the MSM and the polls is dynamic, but it seems a bit much just to dismiss all polls out of hand.

            by machopicasso on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:40:23 PM PDT

    •  Just in case you do not understand it the

      Media which has marginalized J Edwards also has controlled the polls by that non exposure. In fact almost any exposure that they tend to give John Edwards is if they can do so in a negative manner.

      By the way how does it feel to carry the water for the MSM? That is exactly what the Obama bunch are doing in browbeating the Edwards supporters trying to get them to switch. Sounds pretty much to me that is all this diary is really about anyhow.

      I for one will stand up and not let the MSM dictate who my choices are.

      Anyone that cares about any real changes should be standing there also.

      by eaglecries on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:24:37 PM PDT

•  I would like to have supported

  Dennis Kucinich, but I ended up (after a long period of depression over Gore's non-candidacy and indecision about who else in the field deserved my support) deciding to vote for John Edwards.

  by Mehitabel9 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:32:02 PM PDT

•  Was Edwards, then Gore, now Edwards...

  Who to sink next? Hillary. No, wait. Obama, no....Truly, I'm not undecided. I would have ditched Edwards, had Gore decided to run. Sorry, JE, but he did get elected in 2000 so we kind of owe him.

  I plan to vote for Edwards Feb. 5th but the media shut-out of his message and campaign is pretty much total.

  If he were to drop out prior to then (and I doubt that will happen)and I were forced to decide between Hillary and Obama, I'd be hard pressed. I think they are both strong candidates. I'm put off by the idea of the BushClintonBushClinton cycle. Probably some other families are perfectly capable of producing presidential material. Obama is exciting. I think both need to be focusing on bashing the Republicans and not each other at this point.

  On the plus side, Edwards fans, I have a co-worker who I'd have sworn would have voted for Huckabee, and she's taking a close look at Edwards!! I was stunned. We agree on very little politically but she heard him speak after New Hampshire and was most impressed with his message. So, if that message gets out, somehow, he may find others willing to vote for a white male one more time.

  by LibrariAnne on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:33:41 PM PDT

•  In an undisclosed location

  still choosing a candidate. I'm undecided, but that's not unusual when I have a slate of really strong candidates to choose from. At least I think so - hasn't happened a lot:)

  Good luck with the poll - seems to be wonky tonight.

  by themis on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:34:33 PM PDT

•  My answer

  Not very helpful, I'm sure.

  1. Edwards

  2. Obama/Clinton

  I keep moving between the two second choices. Still don't know which one I'd prefer. It used to be Obama, but at this point it's 50/50.

  by Topaz7 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:34:36 PM PDT

•  reasons... for thinking... saying F U to the MSM

  Washington Woman

  EENR

  by kevin22262 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:36:05 PM PDT

•  I wanted Gore

  Now I am with Edwards.  I knew long before 2008 that Edwards was my guy if Gore didn't run.

  Edwards all the way. I hope he stays in it all the way.  I will keep giving $ to him all of the way too.

  by thegools on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:39:31 PM PDT

•  Edwards needs to keep getting over 15%.

  He only needs 15% to impact the race.

  The Democrats have required proportional representation in every state.  So it no longer is of any benefit to shift your support to one of the two main candidates.  Unless you don't trust Edwards to do the right thing with the delegates he earns, you are best off voting for him to get as many delegates as he can get.  As long as he's over 15%, he gets delegates.

  I want to see this happen in the interests of more democratic elections.  I'm tired of the media picking our candidates, and minority candidates not having a voice.

  I'd like to see Edwards stay in it just to prove proportional representation can work.

  by acerimusdux on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:41:58 PM PDT

•  I'm still for Gore also.

  I am sympathetic to Edwards also but I wish he hadn't voted for the war.

  My absentee ballot has arrived here in California and I'm writing Gore in.  However, I'll have to vote for the Dem in the general.

  I'm still around, but I'm getting a little disillusioned, to be honest.  And one thing that is kind of on my nerves is having Gore supporters being labled as weird, or cultist.  For me it's more about 2000 and the rule of law, things like that.  Anyway, I'm still around but I'm getting a little despondent as time goes by, about where we find ourselves in this country and where we're headed.

  by Dianna on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:43:02 PM PDT

•  Obama

  Edwards 2nd, Clinton never.

  by roycej on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:44:33 PM PDT

•  was strongly for gore

  still hold out vain hope of a brokered convention floor battle that brings him to the fore, but basically, i'm undecided.

  got until feb 5 to make up my mind, and no argument from anyone's boosters here is going to help me come to that conclusion. i'll be watching the advisor teams obama and edwards build up (my feeling is that the advisors predict later action more than the rhetoric) and the narratives/vision of america's future that emerge in the nevada and south carolina contests, making my decision sometime feb 4th.

  so far, i have not been impressed. i'd like to, and will be doing some pretty intensive website combing to look for hints of something more concrete than the abstract nouns that get thrown around as simulacra of any substantial political vision, just in case i missed something.

  extra bonus points to the candidate that bothers to set foot in the central valley (sacramento excepted), out of sheer regionalist pique.

  by wu ming on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:44:50 PM PDT

  •  Did you notice that Darrel Steinberg...

    apparently switched from Edwards to Obama.  Hank Shaw, in his blog, reported that this past week.  Maybe, he can entice Obama to visit the Valley.

    by CAL11 voter on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:19:38 PM PDT

    •  i almost blogged about it

      given that steinberg was stumping for edwards as recently as jan 2nd, it was a pretty interesting shift.

      seeing as how the CA primary allots a significant % of votes by congressional district, the utter disinterest that the candidates have shown in the valley is bizarre. i suspect that ron paul will walk away with a fair # of delegates because of regional support in the foothills, north coast and bay area; were i edwards, i'd park myself east of the coastal range and go after voters noone seems to care about, like he did in '04 in western iowa IIRC.

      by wu ming on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 08:38:35 PM PDT

  •  P.S.: Recently, Hillary and Obama released...

    proposals to stimulate the economy.  I think the differences in their proposals say a little about their approaches to economic policy.

    by CAL11 voter on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:29:33 PM PDT

•  I would still love for Gore to run

  but I'm being realistic and am now in the Edwards camp.  I would love to see Gore drafted from the floor of the convention, but I know it's only a pipe dream.

  As I live in Michigan, of course, I can't vote for Edwards, so I will be voting Uncommitted.  

  by SharonRB on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:45:32 PM PDT

  •  Why aren't you voting for ROMNEY?!!!

    Just because you live in Michigan doesn't mean you can't still make a difference.

    by machopicasso on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:05:33 PM PDT

•  No one's been nominated yet, so we'll see...

  I'm still for Al Gore.

  by number six on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:50:59 PM PDT

•  I caucused for Obama. nt

  by venatrix on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 06:58:02 PM PDT

•  After Gore, I went to Dodd...clueless now n/t.

  by Dopusopus on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:02:04 PM PDT

•  I so hoped Gore would get in

  but now I'm leaning Obama. I like Edwards a lot and would choose him over Clinton any day.

  by mommaK on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:03:09 PM PDT

  •  When I was a teenager,

    there was a woman at my church who would occasionally help out with the youth group, especially when it came to cooking and hosting. We called her "Momma K". That can't be you!

    by machopicasso on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:08:10 PM PDT

    •  Sorry, not me. n/t

      by mommaK on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:09:06 PM PDT

•  was trying to get Gore in

  now firmly in support of BOH.  I would take Edwards too, but its looking more and more like we have "Clinton" or "not Clinton" and I see Obama as the only way out of this spiral.

  by pooh74 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:09:17 PM PDT

•  I am now with Edwards to the end. He is the only

  candidate that I trust.  I want someone who is going to fight for the change and stand up to the special interests.  If you think the others will do that dream on.  The longer he can keep it together hopefully he can continue to drag the argument to the left.  You can here the retoric changing every debate.  They are saying more and more of Edwards message.  I doubt either of them mean it though.  Clinton is too in bed with the interests and Obama is too willing to compromise.  If either were willing to fight for anything why weren't they on the floor of the senate with Dodd standing up for something.  The next time I see either of them stand up will be the first time other than talking.

  by skaye19 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:21:28 PM PDT

•  Was a Gore support - now Edwards supporter.

  I don't expect him to win the nomination. I do expect him to keep fighting to be heard for as long as possible. Fine with me.

  by Quirkygrl on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:27:15 PM PDT

•  Obama.

  by NeuvoLiberal on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:32:12 PM PDT

•  1,2,3...

  Edwards
  Obama
  Clinton

  If I had a +1, it would be Gore. I still wish it would be Gore. But whaddayagonnado?

  by TheCorkBoard on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:39:35 PM PDT

•  the diversity of responses here

  hint that Gore would be able to unify a very fractious and diverse electorate, were he to reenter politics.

  The posters here have gone everywhere after Gore decided to stay out: HRC, Obama, Edwards, Kucinich.

  Many of the posters are bitterly partisan when talking about the "big three" candidates, defending their preferred candidate and attacking his/her opponents. But once Gore's name is mentioned all those differences fall away.

  Even without formally being in politics he is helping to bring people together in the fight against global warming, in a way that's unthinkable for anyone else inside or outside politics.

  by limpidglass on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:56:03 PM PDT

•  mr. joyful and I are both voting for John Edwards