Rolling Stone: Counting Edwards Out Would Be A Big Mistake.

The article begins - "The Real Liberal: John Edwards may rank third in the polls. but his progressive agenda and old-school campaign have given him the edge in the states that count."

"If he weren't rich, handsome and so well married, you might feel a little sorry for John Edwards. Never before in the in the 231 year history of the republic have the inalienable traits that Edwards possesses - his fair skin and a Y chromosome - have been anything but a prerequisite of presidential politics. Today his race and gender stand a chance of derailing his campaign altogether. 'There's a lot of Democrats who would like to make history,' says Markos Moulitsas, founder of the influential online forum Daily Kos. 'The party is anxious to nominate a black or a woman' agrees Dick Morris, the former advisor to Bill Clinton. 'You have to sign off on either of those two options before you even get to voting for Edwards.' Indeed, Edwards has been all but eclipsed by the celebrity candidacies of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama: He ranks a distant third in national polls, and his $12 million cash on hand is barely a third of Hillary's and Obama's hauls."

"But counting Edwards out would be a big mistake. Flying below the radar, the former vice-presidential candidate is pulling off a feat that Democratic consultants have long considered impossible: staking out the most progressive platform among the viable candidates while preserving an aura of electability. In head-to-head polling agains the likes of Rudy Gulliani and Mitt Romney, Clinton and Obama have managed to post only modest leads. Edwards, by contrast, not only bests every Republican in the race, he trounces them - by an average of twelve points."

Use the link for the full article. It's a very detailed analysis.


http://www.johnedwards.com/news/headlines/rs-20070810/

Democracy is not a spectator sport.