My Photo



« We want to talk right down to earth in a language that everybody here can easily understand | Main | Southern California »


dsb nola

You're buying this? So Edwards is the grown up and the others aren't? That's too easy by half.

Have you seen how Russ Feingold has been hammering Edwards lately? How about: "I don't understand how somebody could vote, five or six critical votes, one way in the Senate and then make your campaign the opposite positions" and "You have to consider what the audience is, and obviously these are very popular positions to take when you are in a primary where you are trying to get the progressive vote. But wait a minute -- there were opportunities to vote against the bankruptcy bill, there was an opportunity to vote against the China [trade] deal. Those are the moments where you sort of find out where somebody is. So I think, people are being taken in a little bit that now he is taking these positions"?

Feingold is all growed up, too.


Yeah, they're all grown up. Too bad they can't act like it.

I don't understand the Feingold thing at all. Given the choice, I'd vote for Feingold over all of 'em. However, if you'll note in that HuffPo piece, Feingold isn't endorsing anyone-- just slamming Edwards.

Edwards is still the only one that mentions NOLA and the gulf coast on a regular basis, the only one that has reduction of poverty (with details!) as a plank in his platform.


Edwards can claim genuine positioning changes from earlier votes because he stepped out of the purely political career, for whatever reason people want to spin that.

He's got perspective all the one track politicians wedded to DC don't.


Over the past 20 years of my life, my position and opinion about things have changed. Especially after studying them, debating them with intelligent people. Why would I expect someone in politics not to have taken positions in the past they would not today?


Just about everybody in the country was fooled by "No child left behind." The fact that only the teachers' unions opposed it made it easier to sell.

NAFTA was a lot more evenly split, but the respectable thinkers on both side supported it. I saw fooled.

I'd need to do a lot of googling to find excuses for some of the others. But if I remember the debates correctly, NAFTA and "No Child" were totally understandable. The only question to me is whether a candidate will acknowledge that NAFTA needs to drastically overhauled or scrapped and that "No Child" just needs to be scrapped.

The comments to this entry are closed.