Edwards rising in Iowa, poll suggests

Why are you and others in the media so eager to push this story about Edwards rising? Like with the Insider Advantage poll, this is the first time this polling firm has polled the race. So how can you say he's rising when there's nothing to compare it to?

In the only polls which have polled before (ABC/Wash Post, Rasmussen), they show Edwards staying the same or falling. Why no stories about that?

Edwards will win Iowa because people know that a woman or a black man has never even come close to being nominated, yet alone being competitive in a general election.

Iowa voters seemed to have peaked with Obama, and are now coming to their senses, and going for the one that can't be beat.

Edwards out-polls all the other democrats against republicans, and even beats McCain. It is time for Edwards!

I am so amazed by the comments of voters interviewed in the media. These folks are shamelessly uninformed, and appear to be planning to vote with their confused emotions. Articles like these are responsible for this lack of knowledge. How about running an article about which candidates voted to protect the constitution by holding the phone companies liable for their role in warrantless wiretapping? Or their plans to deal with climate change, Iraq, or the deficit? How about fact-checking their claims at the debates? We need some effort on the part of the fourth estate here. You were asleep during the leadup to the war. Please don't fail us again.

All along polls have shown Iowa as a 3-way race but the media has largely ignored John Edwards and put too much focus on national polls that have little meaning with the way the primary system works. Edwards is a great candidate and will be a president who stands up for all of us rather than being bought by special interests, restores the standing of our country around the world, and brings integrity and real family values back to the oval office.

Most people realize a black man won't be elected President before he's been elected VP. And most people know Obama wouldn't be on Hillary's ticket. Hopefully the "hope" crowd can figure it out in time to vote for John Edwards.

In response to Oscar (comment 2, above), although I support John Edwards, disregarding Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama as simply "unelectable" doesn't really hold up in this election, as there is a serious backlash against the republicans, and the strongest red candidate at this point looks to be an evangelical preacher from Arkansas.

I can't believe the comments saying a black man can't be elected, in 2008 for goodness sakes. This is ridiculous. Look at the polling, Obama is actually the MOST electable Democrat. He fares better against many Republican candadates comapred with both Hillary and Edwards. He was against the Iraq war from the beginning, he has the highest envornmental rating, and he has a proven record of working for the people his whole life.

I am an Edwards supporter. Oscar is not an Edwards supporter, or at least ot a supporter Edwards wants. Perhaps Oscar should look into Ron Paul.

I don't believe anyone is supporting Edwards because is white and a male. People like John Edwards because he has the right message and he wants to fight for average Americans. He will prevail in Iowa because he is the best candidate among the Democrats running for the White House.

It is interesting that Joe tells us to look at polling that claims Obama is the most electable, but does not site any specific poll, maybe because such polling does not exist? If you look at head to head polling between a republican and democrat John Edwards is the consistent leader in elect-ability. The latest CNN poll as a mater of fact confirms this, you can view the complete results of the poll at http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2007/images/12/11/tue6ampoll.pdf. I hate to say this but I don't think this country will vote for a Black man for president, look at what happened to Harold Ford in Tennessee last election. If Obama is the nominee I will vote for him, but I would rather vote for John Edwards because he is the best candidate with the most comprehensive plans for change in this country.

president, look at what happened to Harold Ford Jr in his bid for the open Tennessee Senate seat last election. If Barack Obama is the nominee of the democratic party I will vote for him, but I would much rather vote for John Edwards because he is simply the best candidate with the most comprehensive plans for change in this country.

I'm amazed at the arrogance and ignorance of Oscar (posting #2 above) and JoseyJ (posting #5)! Wake up people, it's the 21st century for Pete's sake! The 2008 election is not about race or sex, it's about honesty, good judgement and the ability to make the tough choices to drive this country forward.

Nick, electability is not a real issue. Look at the Real Claer Politics averages of polls and Edwards and Obama are very close.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/national.html

I saew another NBC poll this morning as well showing Obama with clear leads over the Republicans.

I like Edwards a whole lot more than Hillary, but its clear if you compare Edwards and Obama's careers its Obama who has been the real public servant.

Edwards has been a trial lawyer most of his life and US Senator for 6 years.

Obama was a Community Organizer on the streets of Chicago, a Civil Rights attorney, a Constitutional Law Professor, a State Senator, and a US Senator. Obama has been working for the public good and the working class his whole life.

I hope Edwards loses. I wonder how many of his personal millions Edwards spent on eradicating poverty. His greatest legacy -- the number of doctors he made pay lofty malpractice money and this genius is going to save her healthcare. I shall quit being a democrat if he gets nominated.

Thank you Joe. I don't know why more people don't point out the depth of Obama's experience. Everyone brings up the constitution. Obama TAUGHT the constitution to others. Also, if you want someone who actually has the heart to help people, look at the guy that started in community service. Lawyers, like John Edwards, make alot of money. It doesn't mean their heart isn't in the right place. Obama had the opportunity as head of the Harvard Law Review to go right to the top salary. He chose to go to the streets and work his way up first, not the other way around. I respect that.

CNN= Clinton News Network

And thank you for your point well-taken, Merri. Obama's experience--as a teacher, community organizer, scholar, and politican--makes Edwards and Clinton look like bantam-weights by comparison. He's also the only leading candidate (Biden, Dodd, Richardson, and Kucinich of course have a few things in common with him) who has a broader perspective on the world. Edwards and Billary are hardly different than a Giuliani or a Romney when it comes to "America first--esp. White America-first—policies.

If Obama Hussion Barak, an Islam, became the Dem nominee, I will vote for Rebulican. There is no way American should elect an Islam to be president. Obama will bring Jihad to America and he will surrend America to Osma Bin Ladin!

Electibility DOES matter and I am in Iowa and I get to go first. As Paul Krugman points out in http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/12/17/5862/,
ˇ§So what happens if Mr. Obama is the nominee?

He will probably win - but not as big as a candidate who ran on a more populist platform. Letˇ¦s be blunt: pundits who say that what voters really want is a candidate who makes them feel good, that they want an end to harsh partisanship, are projecting their own desires onto the public.

And nothing Mr. Obama has said suggests that he appreciates the bitterness of the battles he will have to fight if he does become president, and tries to get anything done.ˇ¨

In other words, Obama will have no mandate because his platform is to compromise and because he will have a narrow winning margin.

Go Johnny Go Go Go!

Barack Obama for President.

oh... and Merry Christmas...

Lala... you are an idiot. Barack Obama is Christian. His father (who he never knew) was muslim... and it is worth noting that being a muslim does not make someone an islamic extremist. That being said, I am going to cast my vote for John Edwards because I think he will be the most electable of the top three, and Hillary is way to calculating, phony, and disingenuous to ever get my vote.

the latest polls i've been looking at show edwards leading iowa or tied with obama. they both are leaving hillary in the dust.

other stories show that crowds are really picking up to edwards' events, and hillary's are diminishing.

but no, the main stream media does not want to cover this stuff. they are afraid of edwards being president for some reason, i don't know, maybe it's got to do with this media consolidation stuff...only 8 media conglomerates control just about all the media in the entire country. afraid of a little competition, are we???

sorry you all, electablitiy is a real thing to consider. but more importantly, please vote for the candidate you think will in fact make the best president. for me, i will shamelessly say, it's edwards all the way. simply check out his website to see why he's our next president.

America is a Democracy.
America is not a Monarchy.

As we've learned for the past 7 years - Nepotism has no place in the White House.

Barack Obama for President.
It's time for America to Rise and Shine again.

Senator Barack Obama is the most outstanding candidate. No other candidate even comes close. His leadership abilities along with his problem solving abilities makes a wonderful leap for his being President. We have a lot of talented people, put them with him and let him lead them. His instincts are excellent, his heart is so good, he has integrity. I do not think this country has figured out yet just how they would feel if Obama was no longer in play. He raised all our hopes and helped us to feel confident and dream for a better life and a better world. If he is not there what a terrible loss for everyone. Why is anyone even considering anyone else? He has my vote. I would never vote for Hilliary Clinton under any circumstances! Edwards is a nice guy but not as intelligent or diversified, he could have a place just as others might in an Obama administration. I will vote for Obama or I will not vote!

I live in Cedar Rapids IA and canvassed 47 homes on the weekend of Dec 16-17th
Results below:
1. 23 households not home
2. 2 were Republican and will not go to caucus.
3. 22 were Democrat and 12 were not going to caucus.
4. 7 were for Edwards
5. 1 each for Obama, Clinton and Biden
The 10 out of 24 home going to caucus is 41 percent which is high as it is normally about 15 percent so there seems to be a lot of interest.
I would say the pollsters are right, this is going to be a close election probably on both sides. The 10 going to caucus seemed very committed to going.

Barack Obama walks with the same egotistical arrogance as the present "leader" leaving behind him a similar stench most obvious to those with more than two or three functioning neurons. Why do Americans not see through such pretension and, even more puzzling, why are they in fact attracted to it (Bush as case in point)? This guy (Obama Joe-mama) is a snake oil salesman. We can't afford another of these regardless of his/her race, religion or creed.

I think the Oprah endorsement will in fact backfire. Not many men (of any race) will be prone to vote the way Oprah says we should – they might, in fact, resent the suggestion.

Democrats, independents and moderate rebubicans best hope that either Edwards or Clinton (although I really like Biden as well) take the reigns from Georgie come next year. Otherwise, we are all going to hell in a hand basket.

Mark

Come on if you poll state by state John Edwards does better than Barack Obama. When SurveyUSA has polls comparing the two in red states like Kentucky, and Missouri or most of the blue states John Edwards is more competitive than Barack Obama. It's not because Barack Obama is a black candidate, but rather Edwards is more substantive when it comes to his policy proposals than Obama.

Anyone who would vote for Clinton after she has had so much to do with the colossal screw up that is the Iraq War is delusional. And she's not stupid folks. She wasn't duped by Bush. She went along with Bush when it helped her politically and turned against him in 05 for the same reason. She has consistently put her own interests above those of the country and she cannot be trusted with the presidency. Sure she has experience but that counts for nothing without integrity.

Obama has something that Hillary doesn't have and that's INTEGRITY. No amount of experience will make up for that. She has consistently put her own political ambitions ahead of the country's interests and that is despicable. Hillary stands for nothing but her own advancement and we don't need another person like that in the Oval Office.

To utter amazement, Ashley (# 27 above) writes

"Anyone who would vote for Clinton after she has had so much to do with the colossal screw up that is the Iraq War is delusional."

Are you kidding me lady?

How many idiots voted for Bush in '04 while HE had the most to do with that "colossal screw up that is the Iraq War...? You blame Clinton for that? Get a grip! Edwards voted the same way as did many others. Why no mention of him? Many, many Americans were caught up in the horror of 9-11 both within the general populous and in the political realm. There were many over-reactions as might be expected. The important consideration is who is going to make change for the better from now on. Clearly, that's not Obama. He's too busy smiling in your face while slipping you snake oil.

Could it be that YOU are the one who has indeed been duped - duped by conservative fascists who have (perhaps subliminally) turned you against one of the dems best hopes? Don't fall for the simple minded sound byte propaganda machine any longer. Who do you think the conservatives fear most of all in a 2008 election? It's not Obama to be sure. They'd love nothing more that to see BO as the democratic candidate. No doubt there are many conservative dollars landing in the Obama campaign coffers.

Hey, Ash, why not work on developing your own ability to think as opposed to relying solely on the ugly, predictable, well know right wing political smear game book. Is this not the method by which both Kerry and Gore lost (along with a bit of good ol' voting machine fraud)? Democrats must learn to band together and resist internal bashing which will do little more than hand to the republicans all they need to attack the democratic candidate next year.

Mark

I'd vote for any of the three - Obama, Edwards or Hillary - before another Republican. But, Edwards has been growing on me. He has been consistent. He really hasn't changed his focus or theme for several years, and I think his faithfulness to message is getting through to voters. Living in Texas as I do, I also think that Edwards has the best chance of actually winning next November, and electability does need to be a key deciding point in this campaign.

Think Richardson

Edwards has been outspent by Obama & Clinton and has received less media coverage yet his vision for America and just plain outworking the other two candidates has kept him in this race. Edwards is a fighter and we need a fighter in the White House to take our country back from the entrenched interests that we ALL know control Washington. As voters we can go with Clinton who will just work within the same corrupt system that allows this to happen. You can go with Obama who dreams about it all ending or you can vote for Edwards who recognizes the system is broken and that we have to fight them to fix it. Common sense tells me that these people are not going to be swayed by negotiation to give up their power and their profits. This is going to be the people and our president fighting the special interests and taking back our country.

I have participated in Iowa Democratic politics all of my life and that goes back to a youth I which I thought that the president had to be named FDR and the pope Pius (we had one FDR and two popes named Pius). I have also been actively involved in the caucus system and have never seen this level of organization and understanding of its politics as is shown by Edwards and Obama.

The national news media likes to say that Iowans conduct politics on a retail basis; Edwards’s and Obama’s people understand that the caucuses are Tupperware Parties in boxing gloves, and they have talented work boots on the ground. Also, I am greatly impressed with these young people’s talent and dedication to making an important difference for our country; they are coming off as a new generation of the nations brightest and finest.

I would guess that the order of finish in Iowa will be Edwards or Obama and Clinton quite a ways back. The other candidates are great people, but Edwards and Obama may have so much support that there will only be a top three---if there were an equal split among all candidates, six is the totally improbable maximum.

Anyway, some fine people are going to be going home with no viable count. And yes, there is a surge for Edwards---you can sense it in the crowds that are showing up in very bad, bad Iowa weather. They have the feel of a Give ‘Em Hell Harry whistle-stop back in those challenging times when Harry Truman campaigned across Iowa.

Hillary cant win any state that Kerry didnt win. Edwards is the only Dem that can be competitive in the South(GA,TN,LA,NC,VA). Why take a chance with anyone else? Also, an Edwards/Obama ticket is a slam dunk. Edwards turns red states blue. Time to get out of LA-LA Land and look at the real world. While Obama and Clinton are certainly qualified over half the country will not vote for them. Simple as that.

Hillary for Attny General! Edwards for President!