Re: John Edwards to endorse Barack Obama...

BibsBro wrote:
> "Lamont Cranston" <Lamont.Cranston@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:g0hlum$rhu$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> DickCheneysTits@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
>>> On May 14, 8:00�pm, "geno4321" <eugenefk...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>> > You mean as a back room closed room politician.
>>> >
>>>
>>> I like John Edwards, but him and his wig would not influence my
>>> vote. Common sense influences my vote.
>>
>> That isn't relevant.  What's relevant is that John Edward connects
>> with a part of the electorate that Obama has been unable to.
>>
>>>
>>> This endorsement was planned to offset Barack's very disappointing
>>> loss last night. Edwards must have made some deal with Barack last
>>> week.
>>
>> The loss was totally expected, so it wasn't disappointing.  The
>> timing of the endorsement was politically brilliant in that it
>> upstaged Clinton's victory in West Virginia.
>>
>
> Edwards is just another elitist Democrat politician.

Sure.  Edwards came out of blue collar family, studied hard, went to 
college, went to law school, worked hard, and made a lot of money so he's
an 
elitist.

But, George W. Bush are born with a silver spoon in his mouth, is given 
everything including admissions to universities that he was not qualified
to 
attend, and he is just an everyday, down-to-earch kind of guy that you'd 
like to have at a backyard picnic.

I get it.


> The fact that Obama is not sup****ted by working people does not go
> away by a wave of Prettyboy Edward's magic fairy wand.

You are confused.  Many, many working people sup****t Obama.  His sup****t 
among white, blue-collar types is weak.  Since Edwards grew up in a white,

blue-collar environment, he has strong sup****t from the same white, 
blue-collar types and it is quite likely that he will have a very 
significant effect on how they vote.

Now, that wasn't too complicated for you, was it?