Essay and/or background: Welcome to the second formal debate hosted by Swords Crossed and open to multi-blog participation! We will be discussing whether Edwards supporters should prefer Obama or Clinton. You can add support, make a counter-argument, give points, or participate in conversation about the debate. We are also linking all essays written today on this topic at SC, so if you write something on your blog please comment at SC and it will be added to the list.
Cruxes...
The top point in support right now is, "Obama and Edwards support restricting lobbyist influence but Clinton says lobbyists "represent real Americans." Obama worked with Feingold on ethics and lobbying reform bill. "
Obama and Edwards support restricting lobbyist influence but Clinton says lobbyists "represent real Americans." Obama worked with Feingold on ethics and lobbying reform bill.
A fresh post:
(Boost this post if you think it is a good argument, even if you don't agree with it.)
0 people have reported this post.
To report it, login first.
5
Feb 02
2008
Shandora
Obama is inconsistent; having hired Moses Mercado into his campaign, for example. Mercardo represents the National Rifle Association, Monsanto, and other big scaries. Hmmm...
Both Edwards' and Obama's campaigns rely heavily on grassroots, activist support. Edwards supporters will find Obama a better fit for that kind of politics.
The activists may go for Obama but the Edwards voters will go for Hillary, because Edwars and Hillary talk about bread and butter specifics. Not Obama who talks about generalities.
Obama opposed the Iraq invasion as a "dumb war" that would "require a US occupation of undetermined length" and "fan the flames of the Middle East" in 2002.
Edwards too voted to authorize war; so did Kerry and others supposedly respected by Obama's campaign. Obama derides Clinton's vote only because she's his biggest competition.