WASHINGTON (CNN) – Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards said Friday he’s the Democratic presidential candidate who has the best chance of wining closely-divided states in a general election.
“The press and the pundits think the most electable candidate is the one with the most money and the most ties to Washington,” Edwards said Friday at an event in Los Angeles. “The problem is the press and the pundits have confused the candidate who would win an election inside the Beltway with the candidate who can win an election in the rest of America.”
Supporters of Edwards also held a conference call Friday, arguing Edwards offers the best chance of winning swing states.
“Here's the deal - If we don't have a good person at the top of the ticket – someone who can help stop the hemorrhaging in Missouri, then we'll go red,” Missouri state Minority Whip Connie Johnson said. “It's as simple as that. And it will affect state reps, state senators, treasurers, governors, everybody.
“If Hillary comes to a state like Missouri, we can write it off,” Johnson added, referring to Democratic field’s frontrunner, Hillary Clinton.
– CNN Ticker Producer Alexander Mooney
You know, John, you probably would have a better chance of winning a national election... but for some odd reason "progressives" seem to favor an angry lesbian who has – at all costs – protected her fake-marriage thereby preserving her political opportunities. Should any bimbo attempt to confess publically, Hillary would either personally or send in the "muscle" to intimidate and shutdown any publicity. Her message is sociliasm, embraced in senior thesis at Wessesley College when she wrote about Saul Alinksy. Selling her brand of socialism hopes to fulfill a life goal of ushering in a fundamental change in American economics – counting on the ignorant and those entrenched with entitlement addiction to vote her into office.
No, John. You party has embraced Hillary.
john, quit thinking like a lawyer when you plead your case. even liberals know that you are a fraud with this 'two americas' deal.
Wake up, Henry, you Hillary hater, you. Our party endorsed John Edwards yesterday and some us don't support Hillary anymore than you do.
Good grief, haven't the past 7 years taught us anything?
America deserves an Edwards Administration...GO JOHN GO!
connie johnson the reason your state is in the shape it in is because you people went red and you got all of thous religious bigots(conservative).
"Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated by CNN and will not appear on this blog until they have been reviewed and deemed appropriate for posting" Really and the first comment is deemed appropriate??????
Wow Henry, you took the words right out of my mouth!
This is the message that needs to get out. We live in the real world, and no matter how much some Democrats would like to think the country will elect a woman or an African-American, they won't. Let's get out heads out of the clouds and win back the White House with John Edwards. Or go back to the Republicans again. Our choice.
There we go again – Edwards should focus on his campaign. All he can do is talking about Hillary. Edwards is yesterday's news and his constant whining is becoming very predictable. It will make Hillary only stronger.
I like John Edwards but everytime he is in the news, he always attacks anything Hillary. Doesnt he have any other agenda to push other than to criticize Her? John, talk to us about policies and your 2008 dreams for America. There's more than enough people pouncing on Mrs Clinton...you are better than that...
Mr Edwards is still not telling voters what he has done that qualifies him for President. Mayor Guiliani has reduced crime dramatically and lowers taxes in NY over 20 times. Those are accomplishments that fit with what Presidents should do. Gov Romney turned the Olympic organization around and has years of experience that show fiscally superior management .
William.. Nice try, but nobody is going to waste their vote on John. We are all saving our votes for Hillary.
Put a fork in it John. Elizabeth has a better chance at becoming President than you.
Edwards is right on this point. Hillary has the lowest win over Republicans than Edwards/Obama. Actually Hillary is in a statitical tie with Rudy. As, I've been saying, why would the Democrats risk losing blue states (what they already have) by nominating her. It doesn't make sense. Hillary regardless of her pollster hacker is the canidate with less cross over appeal and actually is the only canidate that will energize the Republicans into voting.
But then again Democrats don't have a long history of voting on electablity-which is a shame, because as a Democrat I will not be voting for her if she is the nominee, which is something I've never done before. The stakes are too high to vote for the lesser of two evils. Because I think both Rudy and Hillary are the bigger of two evils and I won't contribute to the ruination of the Democratic Party nor our country.
John Edwards and his policies are the direct opposite of Bush and Clinton. The issues of ethics in government, international integrity, balanced and equal access to government, civil rights, taxes, fair wages, fair trade, unionization, health care, farm aid, Katrina aid, education, justice, free speech, global warming/environment, etc., are the same in each state, with some distinctions between urban/suburban and rural regions. America needs the bold change John Edwards brings and the majority of her voters in each state will understand this before election time. America is tired of business as done over the last 25 years. The voters, inclusive of fed-up Republicans, will stop the madness and elect John Edwards. In the end, it won't even be about party affiliations, it'll be about the desire for the country to make a 180-degree turn on the date of inauguration 2008!
Edwards is a legend in his own mind. The fact is that his repeated presidential pursuit is just a dream and is turning into a nightware.
Here are some more troubling numbers for Edwards vs Hillary in some swing states:
AZ: Clinton 41% Edwards 16% Obama 14%
NV: Clinton 51% Edwards 14% Obama 11%
PA; Clinton 41% Obama 14% Edwards 11%
Edwards is unelectable because he is being perceived as lacking in leadership and inexperienced. He won't win a single red state, and would lose most purple and even some blue states. Most people know this now, which is why his numbers have plummeted of late. He used to poll much better in PA during the "hype" days. Edwards just thought that he would have a shot at it since he ran a credible campaign against Kerry the last time. But, unlike the Repubs, the Dems do not do reruns; they do not reward past also-rans...
Hiillary will get the Dem nomination and be a formidable general elecytion candidate because she will win every blue state, most purple states (as this poll shows), and then grab some red states (at least she'll win AR).
A new poll puts another crimp in the Hillary -is-unelectable argument, finding that she's beating Rudy Giuliani in head-to-head matchups in the top three swing states.
The new Quinnipiac poll found that she's leading Rudy in Pennsylvania (48%-42%), Ohio (46%-40%), Florida (46%-43%). Another key fact: In all three states, sizable majorities say they're not too likely or not at all likely to change their minds, leading Quinnipiac to conclude that "her support appears to be as deep as it is wide."
Quinnipiac also notes that Hillary is the only Dem to beat Rudy in all three states . Obama loses to Rudy in Florida and Pennsylvania but beats him in Ohio. And John Edwards loses to Rudy in Pennsylvania and Florida but beats him in Ohio.
This is simple electoral math for edwards to lose and hillary to win.
To be in a constant state of denial is bad for edward's mental health.
Still baffles me....everyone complains about the high cost of insurance (and hospital charges...and drug companies...etc) – yet...the correlation to lawyers who profit into the hundreds of millions never seems to factor in...Edwards is part of the problem....and the bar association who actively supports his campaign...wonder why they like him....I guess because he's able to make the Dems forget that he is part of the problem....and Hillary and the others have convinced her supporters that she didn't vote for the war...and that the other Democrats funded it...(along with the Republicans) – how convenient....
Yes John,GO JOHN GO...AS FAR AWAYAS YOU CAN AS FAST AS YOU POSSIBLY CAN!
Sorry but there won't be any "poor brave Elizabeth" votes coming your way from our house.You become more and more irrelevant every minute.When you have an original thought about ANY issue,it will be your first.
Now stop copying from everyone else's paper and stand in the corner.Please take Elizabeth with you.Her speeches are only accentuating the growing list of your deficiency's.
Edwards can win across America (in a eating contest).... I mean hilary is a chick and Obama looks unhealthy... I bet John can eat more hot dogs then both of them combined!
P.S. thanks for not wanting any votes from my state!
What qualifies him to be President? He has good hair…he talks to unborn, injured babies in court…and…his wife likes to attack everyone.
LOL, he couldn’t even keep his seat in the Senate. He knew he’d lose, so he didn’t run. Unless hairdressers turn out en masse, John is in trouble.
No, John you can't win.
Mr Edwards, please spare us this hogwash.
YOU COULD NOT EVEN WIN IN YOUR OWN HOME STATE WHEN YOU WERE ON THE DEMOCRATIC TICKET WITH JOHN KERRY !! HELLOOOOO .....!
IN FACT, AMONGST DEMOCRATS, YOU ARE NOT EVEN WINNING NOW IN THE POLLS IN YOUR OWN STATE.
Lets be realistic, Sir. That ship has long sailed!
I have alott of family in Mo. and there voting hillary.and there is alott of religious organizations.the state is alott different than when i grew up.i couldn't stand living there now,I say the same Mr Edwards quit attacking Hillary and get your plans out.No wonder Obama and him are behind they can't push the issues,jap there jaws at Hillary,and she is getting stronger support everytime they do it...always happens in Campaigns,every 4 years.But its there own fault if she winns.
Given recent polls that have Clinton leading in Kentucky (!), Edwards's argument is shown to be plain wrong.
Granted I don't always find Edwards' pigheadedness flattering to the Dems, he is the one I trust most out of the top three Dems and I really hate all the GOP's except Paul. It seems to be the latest fashion trend to bash Hillary, next they'll be coming out with crap that she marched with Lenin into the Kremlin.
Blah, blah, blah.
Okay, I have had my daily slam of Senator Clinton by former Senator Edwards.
Former Senator Edwards is running out of time, his negative campaign is losing him support among Democrats and Independents daily. If he serously wants to become President, he needs to get new advisors and a new approach for his campaign; like selling John Edwards, what a thought!
Otherwise, and until then, it is still Senator Clinton '08.