It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

John Edwards the anti-Hillary in '08?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 11:37 AM
link   
Former NC Senator and Vice Presidential candidate John Edwards is out there working over time trying to secure backing for his very likely run at the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination.

As a citizen of North Carolina I will say I've never been a big fan of his. I thought he was a real climber for serving one term as a Senator and jumping off to run for the presidency. I was very disappointed, too, with his support for the invasion of Iraq. And angry.

He has since stated for the record that his vote for the invasion was wrong and is now calling for the withdrawel of troops by the end of the year.



Edwards wants immediate Iraq withdrawal
AP

MOULTONBORO, N.H. - Former vice presidential candidate John Edwards, who is considering another run for the Democratic presidential nomination, said Saturday the United States should start pulling troops out of Iraq immediately.
news.yahoo.com...;_ylt=Aowc1MtAXVsQvRA5FleDQfuyFz4D;_ylu=X3o'___'A0cDJlYmhvBHNlYwM-


Edwards, unlike Hillary Clinton, the supposed front-runner in the primary race, has come out and confessed his mistake in supporting the war. He, unlike her, has been willing to stick his neck out in opposing the Bush administration on what to do with our troops. Although I disagreed with him strongly in the past, I appreciate his willingness to change course and admit his formerly faulty position.

Hillary has been one of the Bush administration's best friends throughout this entire Iraq boondoggle.

How many people will support Edwards over Clinton in the battle for the primaries?

I, for one, as a Republican, would like to see former Vice president Al Gore run again. I would support him against any Republican candidate today.

[edit on 8/6/06 by EastCoastKid]




posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 11:42 AM
link   
Link didn't work in my post.

Here it is:

news.yahoo.... com/s/ap/20060805/ap_on_el_pr/edwards_iraq;_ylt=Aowc1MtAXVsQvRA5FleDQfuyFz4D;_ylu=X3o'___'A0cDJlYmhvBHNlYwM-



posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 08:17 PM
link   
EastCoastKid assuming you and other Republicans support and elect Al Gore then what ?
Havnt you just elected someone who runs against your political ideology ?

As for Edwards people will never know if he is looking for votes or if he thinks that he made a geniune mistake when he supported the iraq war.

I understand that the likes of Goldwater would probaly be a Democratic today assuming thats the case I wouldnt hang around for the Republican party to return to the likes of Goldwater.

The conservative ideology was transformed by the likes Reagan. Goldwater wasnt the only leader left out in the cold.
Check this out.


Malcolm Fraser
is an Australian politician who was the 22nd Prime Minister of Australia. He came to power in November 1975 in the circumstances of the dismissal of the Whitlam government. After two huge election victories and many legislative achievements, he was defeated by Bob Hawke in 1983, and ended his career alienated from his own party.
After 1996 Fraser was critical of the Howard Liberal government over foreign policy issues (particularly support for the foreign policy of the Bush administration, which Fraser saw as damaging Australian relationships in Asia). He campaigned in support of an Australian Republic in 1999 and in the 2001 election campaign he opposed Howard's policy on asylum-seekers.

The 2001 election completed Fraser's estrangement from the Liberal Party. Indeed, he and Whitlam say they are now good friends. Many Liberals became unrestrained in their attacks on the Fraser years as "a decade of lost opportunity," on deregulation of the Australian economy and other issues. This was highlighted when in early 2004 a Young Liberal convention in Hobart called for Fraser's life-membership of the Liberal Party to be ended. As Fraser passed 70 he had lost none of his combativeness and generally gave as good as he got in these exchanges.


link


[edit on 6-8-2006 by xpert11]



posted on Aug, 28 2006 @ 05:39 PM
link   
As a Republican, I have no problem with Al Gore as president.

a) Although he champions the environment, he is hardly some leftwing wacko. Republican president Theodore Roosevelt was pro-environmental, too. We should all pursue policies that would promote the wise stewardship of this earthly habitat that has been provided us. It is not a left/right issue.

b) Al Gore has major credibility on the world stage and has normally been a realist on foreign policy. That is something that is sorely lacking in today's leadership. He supported the first Gulf War, for those who don't remember and is no dove. He also served in the Vietnam War as an enlisted soldier. Considering his background, I give him props for that.

c) He opposed the invasion of Iraq from the beginning. He now has more credibility in that way that 90 percent of congress. He never shied away from telling it like it was, either. In Bushworld, that is the rarest of things.

d) He is no longer beholden to anyone. He is a maverick.

e) He has more executive experience than most who are planning to run for president in '08.

f) If you look at his family history, he is a man of character and integrity.

g) He is far more intelligent than most who are running. It would be very difficult to pull any wool over his eyes, as has been the case repeatedly with DUHbya.

h) I truly believe Al Gore has the nation's best interest at heart when he promotes his policies.

Finally, the media has really gone out of its way to paint the man in a bad light (i.e., 'he invented the internet'). The powers that be do not want an independent, well-connected man like him taking over. He'd be awfully hard to control.

So, I say AL GORE for president in '08! And let the healing begin.



posted on Aug, 29 2006 @ 02:42 PM
link   
Wow, amazing thread. I was a lifelong Democrat until the 2004 election when I was very disappointed by John Kerry. And it's interesting to me that some of the Republicans on this thread don't think much of their party any more, either, just like so many Dems.

Edwards shows promise I think. I like Al Gore, too, and to me the most important issue we have right now is global warming so he would get my vote for that. And I htink Edwards and Gore have integrity, something which I don't think Hillary does. I have never liked her, I think she's dishonest and doesn't have much backbone.

And having said all of that, I would defintely vote for a Goldwater-type. I think he would have made a great president, he had backbone, integrity and he didn't mince words, he was very forthright. I refuse to support the Dems any more, they have shown too much cowardice as a whole. But Edwards and Gore could be Martians for all I care, I'd vote for them. Hillary doesnt stand a chance, there are too many people that don't like her at all.



posted on Aug, 29 2006 @ 10:42 PM
link   
EastCoastKid assuming Al Gore ran in 2008 who should his running mate be ?
Would Edwards be a good choice ?
Cheers xpert11.



posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 07:22 AM
link   
I would also support Al Gore (should we have another president)...He doesnt strike me as a "player" in the stage of the NWO or a two-faced spineless jellyfish like Kerry was....
I think he would be a good candidate.

What are his chances? The vote rigging will continue to the amazement of the general public who voted Democratic...


I do not like Hillary- She's working for Lucifer.



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 09:56 PM
link   
While Edwards and Kerry have decent poll numbers, I think once the ball starts rolling, those numbers will drastically change. I think Biden and Byah will increase while Kerry will become mute and Edwards numbers will decrease... Gore will not run for President, I think I'm 100% sure of that.

Edwars will have a good chance to make goo because the South Carolina primary is pushed up, but we will have to see. Right now Edwards is ahead in Iowa, but Clinton is ahead in New Hampshire... simply put, it is too early to tell.




top topics



 
0

log in

join