Obama and Edwards - a Team?

Hillary's team claims the 'guys' ganged up on her during the Democrat's last debate. Perhaps she's right?

I've noticed of late how John Edwards hasn't been attacking Barack Obama on the issues the way he's been going after Hillary, even though Obama has basically agreed with Hillary on how long troops will be in Iraq and he's agreed with her feelings toward the New York's Governors plan to give licenses to illegal immigrants. Senator Obama is in second place in most polls, including in Iowa.

Iowa is the first big step in a politicians endeavor to gain the nomination for President. Most political pundits have declared that unless you come out of Iowa in second or first place you have little to no chance of winning the nomination.

Why isn't John Edwards, since he's so low in the polls nationally, going after Barack Obama instead of attacking Hillary Clinton, at this time; who, according to National polling, is at least, 20-30 points ahead of both Obama and Edwards? Have John and Elizabeth come to the conclusion that since we seem to be losing, we might as well give it our 'all' and if all else fails, join a team; the Barack Obama team?

What does John Edwards keep telling us that he can do best? Doesn't he speak a lot about his ability to help citizens with their health care by taking on the insurance and pharmacuetical companies and his ability to get assistance to needy families -- issues that make a difference to American families?

What position would that be in a White House cabinet? Wouldn't that be as Secretary of Health & Human Services?Why would John be willing to take on such a, behind the scenes position, you ask?

John has tried for the presidency once before, the vice presidency once, and he's pretty much assured that he will not win this time around. What's one of the next best things to be in the White House? A position in the President's cabinet.

As we all know, other then foreign policy, the War on Terror, Iran, North Korea, the War in Afghanistan and the War in Iraq, health care is the number one issue in the minds of most Americans. What experience does John bring with him into the position of Secretary of Health and Human services? His own biography on his website tells us, "For 20 years, John dedicated his career to representing families and children just like the families he grew up with in Robbins. Standing up against the powerful insurance industry and their armies of lawyers, John helped these families through the darkest moments of their lives to overcome tremendous challenges. His passionate advocacy for people like the folks who worked in the mill with his father earned him respect and recognition across the country."

It's been reported in the media that John Edwards and Barack Obama's health care plans are very similar. What better way to make the history books, when you can't be president or vice president, but to be the one to help initate Universal Health Care for All Americans?

Have Obama and Edwards decided to work as a team to get passed Hillary Clinton? What do you think?


Poll
Would John Edwards Be Good Sec of Health & Human Services
Yes
No
Maybe

Votes: 7
Results : Vote Link : Polls

Display:


Re: Obama and Edwards - a Team? (none / 0)

I've been saying this from day one.  One way or another, Edwards live of public service needs to be revitalized.  He is too good to slowly trickle out of the picture.  

I wish he could be VP, but if things go my way and Obama is at the top of the ticket, we'd need someone to balance the ticket.  


by JeremiahTheMessiah on Sun Nov 11, 2007 at 09:23:10 AM EST

Re: Obama and Edwards - a Team? (none / 0)

I don't believe Edwards would make a good VP candidate, mainly because of his failed run in 2004 (not all his fault).  I really do think using him as Health Leader would a great idea.  He's well known for fighting the insurance companies.


by coonsey on Sun Nov 11, 2007 at 09:26:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama and Edwards - a Team? (none / 0)

As for the team, I don't see it as anything official... Or unnofficial for that matter.  Edwards took potshots at both Obama and Hillary the other night.  If he were teamed with Obama in some way, I doubt he would continue to keep shooting at both of them.  


by JeremiahTheMessiah on Sun Nov 11, 2007 at 09:24:57 AM EST

Re: Obama and Edwards - a Team? (none / 0)

Oh don't get me wrong.  I think Edwards WANTS the presidency position and he will continue trying to get it - for awhile (New Hampshire - maybe).

But I do think he's also looking further down the road - what happens if he doesn't win?


by coonsey on Sun Nov 11, 2007 at 09:31:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I think you are living (none / 0)

in a fantasy if you think Edwards wants anything like that from Obama.  Dream on.

It is Obama who seeks the VP slot.


by TomP on Sun Nov 11, 2007 at 09:45:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama and Edwards - a Team? (2.00 / 1)

Edwards doesn't need to attack Obama. Clinton is currently the prohibitive front-runner.  Edwards just needs to bring down her numbers so that if and once he wins Iowa, the "bounce" will allow him to overtake her in New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina.

Obama and Edwards have different plans.  Hillary Clinton copied the Edwards plan for the most part.

As far as "balance" on the ticket, I don't think it's necessary.  Edwards or Obama could add emphasis to their message of change by selecting each other.

I truly hope the Edwards campaign communicates to its precinct captains that if he is not viable in any precinct, their support go to Obama.  Of course, I hope the reverse is true as well, that non-viable Obama supporters shift to Edwards.


The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK
by Vox Populi on Sun Nov 11, 2007 at 09:39:52 AM EST

Re: Obama and Edwards - a Team? (none / 0)

From what i'm hearing , the Edwards campaign doesn't believe Obama can win Iowa because they claim he has almost no traction among older voters and his supporters are also known to not show up when it's time to caucus so they consider Hillary their main opponents not Obama.

They may have a point but on the flip side , every single polls coming out of Iowa have been showing Obama trending up while Edwards trends down so one could assume that Obama is improving , not regressing in Iowa and among older voters.

Obama may never get as much support among older voters in compare to Hillary and Edwards , but if he can keep on improving then enlarge the younger poll of caucus goers , he'll have a shot at winning.

So i don't think Obama has no shot in Iowa.

The Obama people also think Edwards can't win Iowa because he won't be able to grow his current support.

Edwards has the most devoted supporters out there but unless he can enlarge his base , he will not win.

The problem for Edwards is , everyone in Iowa knows him and it's very hard to believe some Iowans are still undecided about him.You'd think that they won't have to think about it before throwing their support toward Edwards.

Obama , on the other hand , has more potential then Edwards because people will give him a strong look because he's new and fresh.

That doesn't mean they'll vote for him , but i do believe more undecided will give him a strong look then Edwards because if don't support Edwards right now , then there's a good chance you won't support him later since he's basicly been living in Iowa for the past 4 years.


by Prodigy on Sun Nov 11, 2007 at 10:30:38 AM EST

Re: Obama and Edwards - a Team? (none / 0)

The last polls i have seen seems to all suggest Obama trending up while Edwards trends down.

Is there any new Iowa poll out?
The most recent Iowa poll is from zobgy which also shows the same trends,Obama trends up , Edwards trends down.


by Prodigy on Sun Nov 11, 2007 at 11:10:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

What is the timing on that? (none / 0)

A couple of weeks can be a long time in politics ... between the Edwards campaign going on the air with advertising, and the debate froo fah fah last week, it would be a bit much to project trendlines ... AFAIR, it took at about three weeks of advertising for Senator Clinton to grab the top spot in the polls aside from ARG.


*John Edwards* ... and the JE08 Supporters Blog
by BruceMcF on Sun Nov 11, 2007 at 03:31:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

An incredibly stupid diary (1.00 / 1)

And for a Hillary hack that means a lot.

The down-ticket death virus has been her own worst enemy lately, and the Hillary Hack Pack can't stand it.

A terrible debate performance that even the Wolfson fearing media coulnd't ignore.

Playing the "gender card" and losing support over it.

Bill saying to ignore her health care "scars"...it was all his fault.

Yep...just like he did not have sex with that woman (I personally don't give a rat's ass...oops, speaking of a rat's ass isn't that what Hillary thinks we all should eat for lunch?...I was saying that I didn't give a rat's ass about the Lewinsky thing...but lying about it and then pulling the whole "meaning of 'is' is" crap just made it all worse)

A drop in 2 NH polls.  Doesn't mean much...but if it starts to be a trend she could be in trouble.  I haven't looked at the screens though, although if the screens were loose that actually helps her so either way she could be slipping.

Plant number 1 being exposed.

Plant number 2 being exposed.

The Nation saying that there are a whole bunch more plants where those plants came from.

Her straight out of the 80's - call and response, why...the...fuck...is...she...talking... sooooo slooowwwww...JJ speech.

From "inevitable" to "Iowa Shmiowa" in a week.

Can't wait for the NV debate on CNN.

To quote "NBA Jam" from when I was young, it could be the "Nail in the Coffin!!!"

By the way,

When are you people going to learn that national primary polls mean jack shit?

The media uses them to generate interest and seem legitimate, not because they are accurate.

Around 10 - 15 percent turn out for primaries nationally.

In New Hampshire it is higher.

Yet these national polls have screens that are WAY too loose.

They let any "registered Democrat" or Dem leaner take part. That means that the vast majority of the sample in the poll won't vote in the primary.

Why can't you people get that through your heads?  Does your HILLARY FILTER interfere with your thiking that badly?

Because she is the most familiar candidate (different than name rec, you can recognize all names but Hillary is the most familiar by far) the low-info crowd (look in the mirror) LOVES her and thinks she can do no wrong.  But many of these people aren't likely to vote.

Not to mention that the race is won state by state and the movement happens at the end.

Kerry was at 9% in mid January 2004 nationally.  20 days later he had shot up 40%.  The low-info crowd followed the winner.

Many Iowa polls (ARG and co) and other statewide polls have the same problem.

Anyone of the "big 3" can win the nomination.

At least Edwards didn't have to bus in out of state supporters last night.  He just went on the air in Iowa and sent out his first mailings.  He led in the more reliable polls (Selzer is the most reliable and I am not the only one who says that) for 14 months.  He only lost his lead after HRC and Obama had spent millions on advertising.  Even the Clintonistas have admitted to journalists that Edwards has the most enthusiastic support, and therefore the best ground game.  

What I am saying is that anyone can win Iowa.  If she keeps fucking up and giving ridiculous speeches, the chance that she will win will continue to decrease.

Notice that Terry McShitEatingGrin has already started lowering expectations in Iowa.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2 007/11/10/460242.aspx

By saying that any one of the big 3 on the Dem side or the top 5 on the GOP side (who knows...Huck could pull it off...not likely but very possible) just proves how little they understand politics, primaries, polling, etc.

You do win an award though...

You are the 100th Hillary Hack to prove their complete and total lack of the slightest clue as to what the fuck they are talking about.

Your reward, is a link to some information...

http://esrc08.blogspot.com/

The MyDD Hillary Hack Pack is going to have to get over their fear of all things info sooner or later.


The bold progressive leader is the most electable candidate. Reclaim the Democratic Party! Support John Edwards.
by Michael 4 Edwards on Sun Nov 11, 2007 at 10:55:42 AM EST

Re: Obama and Edwards - a Team? (none / 0)

I don't know whether people have noticed this , but if you look at , not only the recent NH polls internals , but almost all polls internals , you'll notice that Hillary is very strong whenever the "electability" question is asked.

She simply blows away Edwards and Obama combine and this is the one magic number that has to worry anyone who wants to beat Hillary.

I remember that the electability meme was going to be one of her main problem , but the polls seemed to be suggesting that it's by far one of her main strength.

Some may disregard it , but it's very dangerous to do so since Iowans voted based on electability in 2004 and this cost Howard Dean dary.

The nightmare for Obama and Edwards is Iowans deciding to vote based on electability at the last minute just like they did in 2004.They flirted with Dean , then at the end , decided to go with Kerry who was perceived as the more moderate candidate with army credential

Iowans felt Howard was too angry , liberal and soft on terror.


by Prodigy on Sun Nov 11, 2007 at 11:21:28 AM EST

Re: Obama and Edwards - a Team? (none / 0)

If the Edwards campaign, or any other campaign, thought Obama doesn't have the organization that will bring his supporters out for the vote they are surely thinking quite otherwise today.  As important as his speech, last night was an organizational display to Iowa that he has it together.  There were representatives there last night from all 99 counties, brought buses from four staging locations across the state, and printed 11,000 signs for the event.


by Piuma on Sun Nov 11, 2007 at 02:01:05 PM EST

Re: Obama and Edwards - a Team? (none / 0)

Brought buses from four staging locations across the state, eh?  How many staging locations were there in the Chicago area?  What an organizational display!  When we will there be a fessin' up?  It was great seeing those out-of-state college kids passing around the signs for counties in Iowa that they'd never heard of!


by JRE just plain rocks on Sun Nov 11, 2007 at 03:03:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Quick answer ... no. (none / 0)

This is the quite obvious independent political strategy for both Senator Obama and John Edwards at this point ... each is chasing Senator Clinton, and each has serious reason to view Senator Clinton as their main challenge to picking up more undecided voters.

In the simplest terms ... which would seem to be called for by the level of analysis in this diary ... if Senator Clinton wins both Iowa and New Hampshire, both John Edwards and Senator Obama can, independently, pack up and go home (even though both would clearly continue fighting until after Feb 5 at least).

By contrast, if the two of them split Iowa and New Hampshire, both of them are still very much in it.

Since Senator Clinton presents the most serious threat to each of their campaigns, and they have to balance their contrast messaging and their positive messaging, its the obvious choice for both of them to focus their contrast messaging on Senator Clinton in this stage of the race.

Therefore, a diary speculating on a back room deal when there is nothing unusual to explain in the strategies chosen by either Senator Obama or John Edwards ... well, the technical term for that is silly.


*John Edwards* ... and the JE08 Supporters Blog
by BruceMcF on Sun Nov 11, 2007 at 03:41:20 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.