The Edwards campaign released four mini-ads. Two are wrong.
Comment: I understand how you fell boxed out by the press/media. I watched a news cast were Fox had a reporter at B.O.'s campaign stop and at yours the only had a camera person. I DON'T want the media CHOOSING my vote. I CHOOSE you. Some may say I will waste my vote on Super Tues. if you bow out (your name is on the ballot) but I feel I still have the right to CHOOSE WITHOUT PRESSURE FROM GROUPS THAT WANT TO RUN OUR Country.
Comment: Factcheck article by Justin Bank is just a little bit half-truth. At the time the mini-ads were made, the most "recent" CNN poll did show that Edwards beat all Republicans. I think when you have a column called "Factcheck" you should be doing what it implies -- checking the facts. Mainstream media think they can shape this race - even "select" the next Democratic nominee by ignoring John Edwards. Please don't insult the intelligence of the American people. Remember, it is "We the People" who will make the selection, not you.
Comment: Factcheck article by Justin Bank is just a little bit half-truth. At the time the mini-ads were made, the most "recent" CNN poll did show that Edwards beat all Republicans. I think when you have a column called "Factcheck" you should be doing what it implies -- checking the facts. Mainstream media think they can shape this race - even "select" the next Democratic nominee by ignoring John Edwards. Please don't insult the intelligence of the American people. Remember, it is "We the People" who will make the selection, not you.
Comment: The mainstream media are a disgrace to this country for the way they have ignored, smeared, and misrepresented John Edwards' campaign, and pushed his competitors to the forefront without giving them the scrutiny they deserve. In this case, I find nothing wrong with Edwards' "Beat" ad, since it does not speak of the "most recent" poll but only of the "recent poll," which is perfectly honest and legitimate. The truth is that for the past year Edwards has consistently beat ALL Democratic contenders in head-to-head matchups with leading Republicans. Check thejedreport.com if you don't believe me. Fight_the_Hype is right (below); MLK III's endorsement is far more significant than nitpicking these ads. Newsweek is the one playing loose with the facts.
Comment: What a joke of all the things said and done in the Edwrads campaign the news media picks this to write an article about? How about the endorsement on Martin Luther King Jr. Day that Martin Luther King's son gave regarding Edwards' ongoing fight for the middle class? What about the fact that he woudl probably be a "bigger" contander if he would just sell out and take money from the same people that he vows to fight. I am personally outraged at the disregard that the American media has given John Edwards and I contirbute that to the gfact that the man has real integrity which would require major corporations to step up to the plate. I am personally starting a campaign to boycott the major media outlets and there sponsors I hope that anyone else who feels the same will join this fight. I will not be limited to two candidates.
Comment: The corporate media may be winning the battle against the Edwards campaign but they are going to lose the war. The American public is beginning to wake up to the Orwellian control of information resulting from media consolidation; the brownout against John Edwards (who, incidentally, has one of the highest favorability ratings among all presidential candidates) has been so blatant that it's become water-cooler conversation, and reason for ire. A significant chunk of the populace supports John, and our heels are dug in. We are loyal, we are vocal, and we are targeting the media next. I have been a subscriber to Newsweek for nearly 20 years, but no more. I've also stopped watching NBC News and everything on MSNBC except Olbermann (rarely). How sad that we who know John best and understand the good that he can do for this country have allowed you media-types to derail his campaign. And how very rich that after giving Obama a pass when, in the days before the Iowa caucuses, he touted himself as the most "electable" based on a single poll that excluded Edwards even then, you nitpick a 10-second ad that states what polls have shown consistently for a year: John Edwards is the most electable democrat, and the only one who can beat John McCain.
Comment: Oh, please. You are going to ding him because the polls aren't covering him any more? That alone is a crime. Yesterdays LA Times / Bloomberg poll included FOUR republicans (right on down to Guiliani, who can hardly beat Ron Paul at this point), and only TWO democrats. That is criminal! And now you are aggravating the crime. Listen up, arrogant media and pollsters: You are HIJACKING the electoral process and there will be lots of ANGRY americans if the wrong democratic candidate gets nominated and proceeds to lose in the November election. We already suspect you of being corporate-driven propaganda machines, and that election outcome will clinch it.
Comment: Are you kidding? Newsweek decided to go after Edwards on THIS? The article itself states that the CNN poll had come out only a month earlier, and that the 'most recent' came three days before the ads were put up--well after they were filmed. Moreover, the ads don't even say 'most recent,' they just say 'the recent.'
And Kucinich--I think Edwards can be forgiven for excluding him when the network debates have already done so.
There's no way either of these ads are any less accurate than what other candidates have put out. Newsweek should be ashamed of itself.
Comment: Are you kidding? Newsweek decided to go after Edwards on THIS? The article itself states that the CNN poll had come out only a month earlier, and that the 'most recent' came three days before the ads were put up--well after they were filmed. Moreover, the ads don't even say 'most recent,' they just say 'the recent.'
And Kucinich--I think Edwards can be forgiven for excluding him when the network debates have already done so.
There's no way either of these ads are any less accurate than what other candidates have put out. Newsweek should be ashamed of itself.
Comment: John Edwards may sound like a broken record about understanding the plight of the average American, and hearalding from South Carolina, but at least he's staying true to his message and himself. He's not slinging mud unneccessarily. I really hadn't heard much about his solutions, so I went to his website www.johnedwards.com and learned alot. If I was a democrat he would have my vote.
Comment: There four hundred plus member sent to washington on behalf of the American people, and it hasn't happen to date. They are all self serve, centered and the truth is no where to be found. Clinton and Obama have craweled into the mud pit and I for one hope they sink. Lie to me if you will but look me in the eye and do it. I for one have tuned them out. John stay Positive and others will see you as I do and will get my VOTE.
Comment: I have seen the Edwards spot to which you refer above and he says "a recent CNN poll." By your own admission that is true! He does not say "the MOST" recent poll, he says "A" recent poll. YOU are the ones distorting the facts, not John Edwards.
Comment: I hae seen the Edwards spot to which you refer aboce and he says "a recent CNN poll." By your own admission that is true! He doesn't say the MOST recent poll, he says A recent poll. YOU are the one distorting the facts!
Comment: Here's a story: What's Wrong with Newsweek's Mini-Journalism:
Newsweek, along with most of the other corporate-owned media outlets, clearly has a bias towards Clinton and Obama. By continuing to ignore the fact that John Edwards is still in the race, mainstream media/corporate America is manipulating the vote.
Edwards is being deliberately shut out. As Mr. Bank, in this article, points out while attacking Edwards on a minor flaw, "Edwards wasn't even included in the most recent CNN poll...."
Clinton and Obama are in the news every day. Edwards has been mostly ignored. For those who say that he is too far behind Clinton and Obama, others of us say that he is behind because he's not been getting a fraction of the press that Clinton and Obama have had.
Some of us might also say that we believe it is, in most cases, a deliberate attempt to shut out Edwards because he would be the most formidable opponent for any Republican nominee, and the corporate-owned are afraid that Edwards would win.
It's unethical, and it's not what real journalists do.
Comment: I'm disgusted with the way the media attacks John Edwards on minor points while they give Hillary and Obama a free pass. I don't mind them criticizing Edwards, but they certainly don't show the same sort of journalistic hardball to the two beauty candidates. It's bad enough that they don't cover how Edwards won the crowds over in the last two debates and they treat Edwards as if he doesn't exist -- giving the nation a distorted impression of his viability as a candidate; but to let the other two play according to a whole different standard is just too much. And to think I used to like this network, too.
Comment: look at the number of votes in Nevada, my little town has more than what was cast in the whole state. the system needs changed and take away all the money, let them fight for every state over a 3 month period, its the same message over and over anyway.
Comment: Obama and Hillary say what you want to hear, but John Edwards sounds like he really does care.
Comment: Fact check!!! Read the other comments below to see how ironic this name is. The public are disgusted with the way the media selects which facts and which parts of which facts will be presented. Shame on you for misrepresenting the facts. John Edwards speaks the truth.
Comment: John Edwards is the most truth telling and courageous person in the race. Why does the spinless media and pundits are so fearful of an honest man? Obama or Hillary will not win. They are LOSERS, just like John Kerry.
Comment: Wrong on both counts; at the time the ad on "only" was made, he was the only; by the time the "more recent"poll ran, he wasn't in it. As for Kuncinich being another foe of NAFTA, you never considered him competition to the big 3 until it became convenient to use him to beat up the third. Once more the media has insured that the populist candidate will be eclipsed by those acceptable to the corporate status quo. NEWSWEEK, you suck!
Comment: Ok let me get this straight-- Edwards was not included in a recent poll? Why not? You in the media ignored him and then say he is not truthful. And when Edwards does not include Kucinich in his ad -- That is wrong? Does the media dictate all of the terms? Who should and should not be included?
Comment: There is definitely something shady going on with all these bullsh** articles. It is a shame that our electoral system is so messed up that the media has the most say on who is best for the people, or in their case, who will scratch their back the best. Why would CNN include Edwards to begin with?? This article right here negates your first point about that - http://www.skirsch.com/politics/president/comparison.htm
Comment: Yea, sorry Newsweek. Your association with MSNBC sort of negates the "Remember Dennis" argument. Try remembering Dennis when it comes time for the next debate, thanks. The "only" Ad is incorrect in that there is a more recent poll than the one it is referring to, but he is referring to the most recent poll that he is included in.. so it is sort of true as well. True enough for an American election at least.
Comment: Yea, sorry Newsweek. Your association with MSNBC sort of negates the "Remember Dennis" argument. Try remembering Dennis when it comes time for the next debate, thanks. The "only" Ad is incorrect in that there is a more recent poll than the one it is referring to, but he is referring to the most recent poll that he is included in.. so it is sort of true as well. True enough for an American election at least.
Comment: What's wrong with Edwards' Ads? NOTHING!!! Except perhaps that GE, NBC, et al, don't want Edwards to be heard, and certainly would prefer the candidates that are marinated in corporate cash. Come on, you guys didn't even know Kucinich existed before the opportunity to use his candidacy to make a bogus argument against John Edwards came along. Give me a break!!!
Comment: How about Obama on LIquid Coal and his friendship with GE? Also will MSNBC stop posting ads on their website for Obama even though paid for and doing fluff pieces, IN HIS OWN WORDS....
Comment: Let us cut to the chase. First John Edwards was the first to use the concept of beating Republicans. Also, Kucinich is now mentioned he is a wonderful person but by the standard of the network is not in this race.
The ad also said and I quote you beats all, you state, "Most recent" they state recent. Edwards most vehemently opposes Nafta unlike Barack. Remember the Veterans. Stop posting ads for Obama on MSNBC.
Comment: Yay!!! FINALLY someone is covering the Edwards campaign! It may not be good attention, but at least it's some attention.
Comment: This is no different, and I'd submit not nearly as deceiving as Obama's clever assertion that he does not accept contributions from "federal lobbyists" while actually accepting money from state lobbyists. There's not a lot of wiggle room in a 10-second ad, so the point is obviously going to be simplified, and with how overlooked he's been by the media, maybe it needs to be simplified. There has, however, been plenty of time over the last several months that Obama has been spewing lies and half-truthes about his record and policy ideas to ask him probing questions and dig a little deeper to see that he is just following the Reagan 1980 election playbook. There is nothing new about Obama, and worst of all there is nothing reformist about him. If John Edwards has to use a simplified, 10-second ad to make that point, I see no harm.
Comment: THERE IS A BIG RISK IN VOTING FOR OBAMA OR CLINTON. Consider this: If Americans find themselves unable to vote for a Black male or a Female at the last minute, we could end up with a HUCKABEE
Comment: WAA WAA, STOP WHINING. George Bush used Flip Flop ads to make Kerry look bad and then Bush went on to become one of the biggest Flip Floppers of all time. Edwards is a saint compared to some of the other candidates out there.
Comment: I don't think anyone is scared of Edwards. I think he a viable candidate don't get me wrong and I want to see him stay in the race, but scared???? I think it is unreasonable to think any poitician is exempt from some connections to business and lobbists. But I don't think this means they are in the pockets of either one of these groups either. The Dems don't need to fight with each other. Tell us what they can do and then show a united front against the Republicans. We need that.
Comment: Could it be that the reason Edwards was not included in the "recent' poll is that the media, largely owned by Republicans, does not want him in the race? He is the only one following his plan of not letting big companies own the president by not taking money from lobbyists. The others are selling themselves just like they always do. And if they want a 2nd term, they have to stay in the pocket of the people who finance them the irst time.
Comment: Unreal! What about all the mistakes in the Clinton and Obama ads? When Obama said he was the only one to beat all the Republicans did you question that? MSNBC and Newsweek must be really afraid of John Edwards to run an article like this.
Comment: Could it be the MSNBC/GE/Newsweek would make this even a "story"?? From the time Edwards made his ad (when the "old" poll was the "latest") till the time the new "poll" (which conveniently left out Edwards, due to the corporatocracy being scared of his populism and anti-corporate/lobby rhetoric) came out, it could be easily possible for his ad to still be running. This "news story" is only one to take any kind of shot at Edwards who DOES have BEAT all republicans head to head in a general election matchup. And since this fact got known, suddenly new CNN "polls" rise up that state the other two corporate shills also do now. The MSM is a pathetic bunch of toadies masquerading as the "free" press when it is the farthest thing from that. For proof of that, let's just see how long my post lasts on this site.
Comment: Could it be the MSNBC/GE/Newsweek would make this even a "story"?? From the time Edwards made his ad (when the "old" poll was the "latest") till the time the new "poll" (which conveniently left out Edwards, due to the corporatocracy being scared of his populism and anti-corporate/lobby rhetoric) came out, it could be easily possible for his ad to still be running. This "news story" is only one to take any kind of shot at Edwards who DOES have BEAT all republicans head to head in a general election matchup. And since this fact got known, suddenly new CNN "polls" rise up that state the other two corporate shills also do now. The MSM is a pathetic bunch of toadies masquerading as the "free" press when it is the farthest thing from that. For proof of that, let's just see how long my post lasts on this site.
Comment: Could it be the MSNBC/GE/Newsweek would make this even a "story"?? From the time Edwards made his ad (when the "old" poll was the "latest") till the time the new "poll" (which conveniently left out Edwards, due to the corporatocracy being scared of his populism and anti-corporate/lobby rhetoric) came out, it could be easily possible for his ad to still be running. This "news story" is only one to take any kind of shot at Edwards who DOES have BEAT all republicans head to head in a general election matchup. And since this fact got known, suddenly new CNN "polls" rise up that state the other two corporate shills also do now. The MSM is a pathetic bunch of toadies masquerading as the "free" press when it is the farthest thing from that. For proof of that, let's just see how long my post lasts on this site.
Comment: I can't believe Newsweek and MSNBC would publish this - and make it a top headline, no less. We all appreciate Dennis Kucinich's selfless contribution to the debate, but Democrats know very well that's where his "candidacy" ends. John Edwards is the only anti-NAFTA candidate 'running' for president; Kucinich is in a slow crawl at best. ..and, by the by, Mike Gravel is still on the ballot - and he's against NAFTA as well - I notice he was selectively glossed over by the Hypocrite, er, I mean Author.
Comment: Obahama invokes the name of Ronald Regan - the same Ronald Regan who "Broke the Unions"! Today's labor unions are pretty much powerless leaving the average blue collar worker out in the cold. John Edwards seems to be the only candidate who is addressing the issues of the working middle class. I hope he gets the Democratic nomination. He'll get my vote!
Comment: What kind of argument is that?? Newsweek is slanted. They admit that when the first ad was made, he WAS the only one that beat the Rep. Also, it doesn't say the MOST recent, only recent. And if he wasn't even included in the new one than that makes his point even more.
And I'm sorry to all of the Kucinich fans (I like him too), but he isn't really a candidate anymore. Edwards is campaigning against Obama and Clinton, not Kucinich. The recent MSNBC Debate should show you that. He can't compare himself to every fringe candidate out there...he's not competing against them.
Comment: I completely disagree with the writer's disingenuous and misleading characterization of these ads as "wrong" for the reasons pointed out in the earlier posts. And I wonder what motivates the "news media" to try to eliminate Edwards from consideration as the Democratic nominee? I personally do not want my choices for the next President of the United States narrowed by "political analysts" such as Chris Matthews and Tim Russert, et al. Their efforts to simplify the process by eliminating one of the most qualified candidates ever to grace the field is ruining the democratic process for the rest of us. I like all three candidates, but I am disgusted to see that support for Edwards may be slipping simply because the media keeps obsessing over his "failure to win" a primary!!! At this stage of the game, comments like this are ridiculous and irresponsible. In fact, Edwards has "won" 18 delegates so far to Obama's 25 and Clinton's 24. Big deal! I urge you to give democracy a chance, Mr. Bank, and consider the impact of misleading headlines such as yours on the folks out there who are still influenced by the "news media."
Comment: Again with the anti-Edwards bias. Newsweek--you're already outed for your corporate slant. So stop it already.
Comment: Again with the corporate anti-Edwards bias. Stop it, Newsweek--you're losing your credibility
Comment: ...and Hillary has been SO honest in all of her assertions....please. If you are going to fact check Edwards, fine - Apply the same fact checking to everyone (of course, if you did that you wouldn't have room for anything else in your magazine or on your website).
And WHY is this the only press Edwards gets?? I think the Media Decided that they wanted to cover a Clinton v. Obama race a LONG time ago and so they created the story they wanted to cover. It is getting really scary when the media chooses the people who will run the country and that decision is based on who will sell the most soap. God help us.
Comment: ...and Hillary Clinton has been just SO Honest...please. If you are going to fact check Edwards, fine - fact check the others too...And why is this the ONLY press Edwards is getting? I think the press really wanted to cover a story about Clinton vs. Obama...so they created it. It's getting a bit scary when the press decides who the candidates are and that determination is made by who will sell the most soap. God help us.
Comment: How amusing that big corporate media Newsweek just exposes the plain fact of USA media bias against John Edwards because of his passionate devotion to putting things back on a level playing field in this country against the big money/big profit greed creed that now rules us. Every time I see a media attempt to dump on John Edwards unfairly, I go to his site and donate another $25. Enough already! You media clones do not fool us any longer.
Comment: I should point out that your assertion that Edwards' opposition to NAFTA "rings a bit hollow" immediately brings to mind the fact that Barack Obama was not a United States Senator at the time the initial vote to authorize the war was taken; yet he constantly campaigns on his "opposition to the war from the beginning" and not one media outfit, Newsweek included, has claimed that his "pronouncement rings a bit hollow." I oppose the war; I do not dislike Barack Obama. However, as he was not held accountable to the same degree that United States Senators were (though he was an Illinois state senator at the time, his electorate is much smaller, less demographically diverse, and the overall impact of his outspoken opposition was negligible at best,) I feel that the claim is rather spurious.
Comment: I should point out that your assertion that Edwards' opposition to NAFTA "rings a bit hollow" immediately brings to mind the fact that Barack Obama was not a United States Senator at the time the initial vote to authorize the war was taken; yet he constantly campaigns on his "opposition to the war from the beginning" and not one media outfit, Newsweek included, has claimed that his "pronouncement rings a bit hollow." I oppose the war; I do not dislike Barack Obama. However, as he was not held accountable to the same degree that United States Senators were (though he was an Illinois state senator at the time, his electorate is much smaller, less demographically diverse, and the overall impact of his outspoken opposition was negligible at best,) I feel that the claim is rather spurious.
Comment: Is a poll from a month ago a recent poll? Yes. What's the point in discussing a poll that doesn't even include Edwards? None. What I find interesting is that Edwards was the only candidate to beat all 4 Republicans in a poll - a month later, the media is not even bothering to include him!! Let's see - Major media owned by: Corporations. Edwards: anti-corporate. Which equals virtually no mention of Edwards in any major article (or poll apparently)
Comment: I'm currently looking at the poll averages on realclear politics and I don't see Clinton or Obama beating John McCain. And I agree with everyone that you can't exclude Edwards from your latest polling then slam him for a commercial he put out when the statement was indeed true, and before your latest polls. As far as dragging Kucinich into it, that only shows how pathetically biased your coverage has been. I'm surprised you remembered how to spell his name. But it's very convenient when you're trying to find more things wrong. Sad, sad, sad.
Comment: I'm looking at realclearpolitics and I frrankly don't see where Clinton or Obama in the poll averages are standing a chance against John McCain. And I heartily agree with everyone, that you can't exclude Edawrds from your polling, then come out with a poll AFTER his commercial and claim he made a false statement,. And suddenly dragging in Kucinich tells all of us how biased you are. I'm surprised you remembered how to spell his name.
Comment: I see, we "include" Kucinich when it's convenient, otherwise we write him off. According to the precedent the media has set, there are only 3 candidates in the Democratic party and only 2 who the media is telling us are viable. So based on those perameters Edwards is probably right. The whole transparent evolution on the media's opinions or non-coverage of Edwards is because he wants corporate influence out of Washington. Corporate owned media can't have that can they? And interestingly enough, Edwards was the first candidate to say there would be no corporate influence if elected. Recently, Obama has picked up that mantra. John Edwards is the only candidate who can truly make change. Corporations have influenced every aspect of our administrations for years by dumping large sums of money to candidates who then owe them a big favor. We'll never have health insurance for everyone in this country as long as insurance lobby's are sitting at the table. Same is true with big oil, etc. And since these large corporations are eligible for the wonderful tax cuts this administration has provided them, they're protecting their own interests by covering the candidates they know are least likely to cause waves. They want status quo - I don't. John Edwards 08!
Comment: I see, we only include Kucinich when it's convenient. Based on the media's decision that there are only 3 candidates in the Democratic race and only Obama and Clinton get the press his ad is probably right. When he came in second in Iowa it was played down, but when Thompson came out of hybernation it got all kinds of coverage. This article is a dog that won't hunt. John Edwards wants corporate influence out of Washington and corporate run media just can't have that. Even Obama is now saying the same thing with regard to corporate influence that Edwards has said all along.
Comment: Ragtop sounds like he's jealous of a man with nice hair! Edwards haircut is nothing compared to Mitt Romney's $1500 facials. In today's media, a candidate has to look decent. As for attacking the black man and the white woman, race or gender is completely irrelevant. CNN is the Clinton News Network and excluded Edwards because hasn't been bought and paid for by the two $100-million corporate-backed candidates. In recent polls by other companies, Edwards is the only candidate who beats all Repubs. Obama only won in Iowa because he brought in supporters from other states to vote. 50% of Americans say they will not vote for Hillary under any circumstances. When it comes to electability, Edwards is a winner for the Democratic Party. I'll be donating on the 18th!
Comment: If you are tired of the corporate media and their blackout of John Edwards, join thousands of Edwards supporters this Friday as we "Go for the Gold." We are planning to go to the Edwards website and donate en masse in order to help him get his message out to the American people.
Send a message to the media. Tell them you will not allow them to choose your candidate for you!
Comment: Thanks, I'll be joining you with a donation on Friday!
Comment: If the corporate media blackout of John Edwards bothers you as much as it does me, go to John's website on Friday and donate. We are "Going for the Gold" in order to send the media a powerful message.. That message is; "We will not allow you to choose our candidate for us!"
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/1/13/171722/549/52/436243
Comment: Mr. $400 haircut sounds desperate to attack the black man and white woman in this race.
Comment: You're right...because someone can afford an expensive haircut means they can't be President. Are you serious when you make a comment like that. You must have been joking because I seriously doubt you would want to look uneducated to everyone.
Comment: So, why did CNN not include the candidate that led the last poll. You have just confirmed what many have noticed, a media blackout of Edwards. Nice.
Comment: I honestly believe Edwards commited political suicide by not running for Senator again. Now he has an eight year "blank" compared ti tge itger twi stribg leaders. I also believe if Clinton gets the Dems vote, she won't win, as Democratic voters are known for not getting out and voting, especially if it's raining, which it does a lot of in the South.
Comment: You will have to excuse my misspekked words. When one writes a "reply" it's in light blue and very difficult to read when typing. I meant to say: compared to the three strong.....Sorry for the typos, I can spell.
Comment: I honestly think John Edwards committed political suicide when he decided aganst running for a second term as Senator. It would have given him a background he could be judged on as a State leader. but by deciding to not run, I sincerely believe he did himself in, although I als believe he is anexcellent candidate, but has no recent Senate votes or activity in eight years now.
Comment: Comment: Actually, you should look at the Rasmussen one-on-one data (they have not excluded Edwards).
Versus Romney:
Edwards +16
Obama +6
Clinton -1
Versus McCain:
Edwards +7
Obama -3
Clinton -11
Versus Huckabee:
Edwards +12
Obama +2
Clinton -3
CNN-let america select the next President not CNN- GO Edwards!!! :-)
Comment: Comment: Actually, you should look at the Rasmussen one-on-one data (they have not excluded Edwards).
Versus Romney:
Edwards +16
Obama +6
Clinton -1
Versus McCain:
Edwards +7
Obama -3
Clinton -11
Versus Huckabee:
Edwards +12
Obama +2
Clinton -3
These data are consistent with the earlier data from CNN.
Comment: WEll, aren't you being silly, wouldn't you post the one with a;ll the candidates to compare?
And it is the truth!
John Edwards for America!
Comment: Actually, you should look at the Rasmussen one-on-one data (they have not excluded Edwards).
Versus Romney:
Edwards +16
Obama +6
Clinton -1
Versus McCain:
Edwards +7
Obama -3
Clinton -11
Versus Huckabee:
Edwards +12
Obama +2
Clinton -3
These data are consistent with the earlier data from CNN.
Comment: Newsweek is connected to the Washington Post? Hmm. I've read more hatchet jobs and articles leaving out John Edwards in the Washington Post than I can even count. I read one article to which were appended over 100 comments calling the Post on its biased coverage.
Every time I read another hatchet article, I make another small donation to the campaign.
GO EDWARDS!!
Comment: Typical hack job from the corporate media. People who think independently are in large numbers aware of the biased coverage that has been provided by the corporate media in covering the Edwards campaign. The corporate media is not so much reporting the news but actively attempting to shape it and determine the outcome of the primaries. Every time I read another article by the herd of reporters with an agenda, my response is to simply make another small donation to the campaign. GO EDWARDS!!
Comment: Here is the CNN poll people, see for yourself: http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/10/poll.head.to.head/
Comment: It is my inderstanding that the new poll your referring to came out after the new ad of Edwards came out. So your article is misleading. And I believe there was a new poll in the USA Today paper that shows Edwards is the only Democrat to beat John McCain.
Mark
Comment: Well, DUH! The real question is: WHY DID CNN LEAVE EDWARDS OUT? Sounds like they didn't like what they were hearing--that the corporations that have BETRAYED this democracy since 1947 by ramming the gasoline engine firmly down our throats in cahoots with big oil are FINALLY going to brought to heel. Not by corporate candidates Obama and Clinton, but by Edwards. I think Obama would be a great veep---he's got some stuff to learn.
PopulistsThink
Comment: WHAT'S WRONG WITH BIG MEDIA? I mean leaving Edwards OUT of the poll? Please. They know Edwards will bring big business to heal.
UppityWomenWhoRememberTheirRootsUnite!
Comment: It is obvious that the Press, the Media have decided there are two candidates from the Democrats: Obama, the favorite one, and Hillary,
I don't understand the logic, so called, of your argument. When Edwards was included in the polls, he beat all Republicans.
The latest poll did not include him, (SURPRISE, SURPRISE). If he wasn't included, how do you know he would not have come ahead of your chosen candidates.
When Edwards was included he did.
InessaK
Comment: It's good to see you guys start to cover the Edwards campaign. This negative news is good news because as they say : "any news is good news." This demonstrates is that Edwards is still in the fight. It's funny that you refer to Kucinich in order to make a point against Edwards. You can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't ignore and exclude Kucinich one moment and then use him when it suits your purposes. Sad, really.
Comment: Restoring the Middle Class, Prosperity and Quality Jobs in the United States
You must have a viable strategy that will be inherently financially supported and carried forward by the "invisible hand of economic globalization". The US is declining as the global economic leader, only because the Fed Gov and powerful interests do not have a viable strategy.
The US became the Economic Leader of the World only by the recognized hard work of Franklin, Edison, Westinghouse, Henry Ford, Einstein, and the countless technically creative, engineers and scientists, inventors, as strong individual leaders, led the world in INNOVATION. (Greenspan has listed INNOVATION as the missing ingredient in the current US strategy, that was previously was in place, and the related Intellectual Property and Patents, built this country to become the World Leader).
The adverse influence of powerful large entities, major venture capitalists, CEO???s, and other powers using lobbies, now erroneously promote what actually built this US, as high risk, discouraging financial support for qualified individual technologists, inventors, scientists, and engineers. We are killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.
Most important the current US decline can only be eradicated by a new direction to create a quality domestic industry, protected from the ???offshore competition??? by innovations Americans control with US Patents. Studies at MIT and other entities have proven that these qualified individuals working independently have, always created the most significant inventions and new manufacturing with secure quality jobs.
Restoring the Middle Class, prosperity and quality jobs in the US will only happen when you create approval certification programs for technologists to receive financial backing, and restore tax shelters for financial support of individual qualified engineers, scientists, medical doctors, researchers, inventors, and start-ups. In this way, the current 80% employment that is provided by small entities would generate a wealthy middle class, instead of a group of ???hamburger flippers???. This will also solve the problem of math and science leadership of young people, and encourage the neglected 40% of high IQ students to pursue math and science.
As a graduate engineer and small entity inventor, I have started ventures and provided quality jobs, some under now defunct technical tax shelters, and in other instances the corporate large entities, like the old ???robber barons??? have managed to rob me of some of my important Intellectual Property. My personal experience validates the sad lack of financial support for technologists.
David A. Estabrooks, ScM
estabrooksdavid@yahoo.com 915-613-2116 617-240-2968
Comment: Restoring the Middle Class, Prosperity and Quality Jobs in the United States
You must have a viable strategy that will be inherently financially supported and carried forward by the "invisible hand of economic globalization". The US is declining as the global economic leader, only because the Fed Gov and powerful interests do not have a viable strategy.
The US became the Economic Leader of the World only by the recognized hard work of Franklin, Edison, Westinghouse, Henry Ford, Einstein, and the countless technically creative, engineers and scientists, inventors, as strong individual leaders, led the world in INNOVATION. (Greenspan has listed INNOVATION as the missing ingredient in the current US strategy, that was previously was in place, and the related Intellectual Property and Patents, built this country to become the World Leader).
The adverse influence of powerful large entities, major venture capitalists, CEO???s, and other powers using lobbies, now erroneously promote what actually built this US, as high risk, discouraging financial support for qualified individual technologists, inventors, scientists, and engineers. We are killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.
Most important the current US decline can only be eradicated by a new direction to create a quality domestic industry, protected from the ???offshore competition??? by innovations Americans control with US Patents. Studies at MIT and other entities have proven that these qualified individuals working independently have, always created the most significant inventions and new manufacturing with secure quality jobs.
Restoring the Middle Class, prosperity and quality jobs in the US will only happen when you create approval certification programs for technologists to receive financial backing, and restore tax shelters for financial support of individual qualified engineers, scientists, medical doctors, researchers, inventors, and start-ups. In this way, the current 80% employment that is provided by small entities would generate a wealthy middle class, instead of a group of ???hamburger flippers???. This will also solve the problem of math and science leadership of young people, and encourage the neglected 40% of high IQ students to pursue math and science.
As a graduate engineer and small entity inventor, I have started ventures and provided quality jobs, some under now defunct technical tax shelters, and in other instances the corporate large entities, like the old ???robber barons??? have managed to rob me of some of my important Intellectual Property. My personal experience validates the sad lack of financial support for technologists.
David A. Estabrooks, ScM
estabrooksdavid@yahoo.com 915-613-2116 617-240-2968
Comment: Edwards' emphasis on how much he will "fight" for the rights of middle class America and "fight" against the dominance of Big Business, Big Pharma, etc. sounds less appealing to me coming from a Presidential candidate as it would from a candidate for Congress. Presidents have executive authority, which means that not everything necessarily needs to be in terms of a fight. I want a President who knows how to (constitutionally) exercise their authority and has the ability to "lead" us in the right direction, not one who is just willing to fight the good fight.
Comment: You forget the fact that knowing how to do it is worth nothing unless your willing to do it. Look at Congress they all wanted to but what have they accomplished. Maybe with a strong leader with integrity we will be able to guide them to do the things that they told us they would.
Comment: Edwards emphasis on how much he will "fight" for the rights of middle class America and "fight" against the dominance of Big Business, Big Pharma, etc. sounds less appealing to me coming from a Presidential candidate as it would from a candidate for Congress. Presidents have executive authority, which means that not everything necessarily needs to be in terms of a fight. I want a President who knows how to (constitutionally) exercise their authority and has the ability to "lead" us in the right direction, not one who is just willing to fight the good fight.
Comment: Hey, I bet this is the first time the media even announced that Kucnich was against Nafta. And you only did it to whack Edwards. Pitiful.
Comment: Well considering the media has practically made Edwards invisible we don't mind that the commercials are a tiny bit off. I didn't hear anything from you about the other Edwards commercials. What's the matter couldn't find anything to knitpick on?
Enter comments if any for reporting abuse
SPORTS Luxury stadiums are on the rise. A top seat can cost $150,000. Beer costs extra.
Sponsored by
|
VIEWPOINT The vast majority of Americans are dissatisfied with the direction of the country. So who are the 10 percent who think everything is A-OK?
Sponsored by
|
Loading Menu
