General Election Polling Review

ALL POLLING IS CURRENT AS OF SUNDAY, JANUARY 6, 2008.

The date listed above the title is the date on which I moved this compilation to this post. This review is updated the same day that new polls are released.

There are a few things I should make clear...

I am not a polling expert, nor am I attempting to pass myself off as one. I am, however, encouraging everyone to look at the totality of 2008 general election polling. While doing this, it becomes very clear that former Senator John Edwards is by far the most electable Democrat.

And for the record, I am in no way affiliated with the Edwards campaign. I am simply a very proud supporter who is thrilled to see that the Democrat most committed to fighting for a progresive agenda is also the most electable.

Links

Pollster

Survey USA

Real Clear Politics

Rasmussen

Quinnipiac University

A PhD numbers theorist recently confirmed what many Edwards supporters have been saying for months now, John Edwards is the most electable Democrat.

You also might want to check out this diary, which was my attempt to lay everything out.

The numbers below only go back to January out of fairness to Senator Obama, who was not included in many general election polls before that time. In reference to Real Clear Politics' General Election polling averages, please read John Edwards and Polling Averages.

Here is a 10 week average of the national general election polling that included all 3 Democrats from July to early September. And here is a 10 week average of national general election polling that included all 3 Democrats from August to early October.

If you need a resource to deal with some of the spin being used by supporters of other candidates, try going here, or read the bottom of this diary.

I have also written about claims concerning who performs best against Rudy Giuliani going here. When reading this, it might help to illustrate what I mean by "natural closing". For instance, a recent Rasmussen poll in Illinois that only included Senator Obama and Senator Clinton, showed Senator Clinton leading Rudy Giuliani by only 3% points. If we were to go by their rules, this means that Clinton could lose Illinois to Giuliani, but we all know that after natural closing takes place, she would almost certainly win the state if she were nominated.

Douglas Schoen, who used to advise President Clinton and is currently the pollster for New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg wrote about one of the many reasons why Edwards does so well aganst Giuliani in an analysis that he wrote for Rasmussen called Behind the Horse Race Numbers: Edwards Strongest Democrat in General Election Match-ups .

Finally, Edwards at this point demonstrates the greatest appeal to Independents beating Guiliani by 13%. Obama wins Independents by 5% and Clinton wins them by 3% against Guiliani.

Real Clear Politics has also confirmed that John Edwards is the most electable Democrat... Edwards, Not Hillary, is Dems' Best Chance.

Here's a brief list of others who have talked about Edwards' electability...

Rasmussen: Edwards Out-Performs Clinton Against All Four Major GOP Candidates; Out-Performs Obama Against Giuliani, Thompson and Romney. According to the most recent general election polling data from Rasmussen Reports, Edwards out-performs Senator Clinton against all four major Republican presidential candidates and out-performs Senator Obama against three of the four. Edwards Leads Rudy Giuliani 50% to 41%, while Clinton leads 48% to 43% and Obama leads 47% to 42%. Edwards leads Fred Thompson 49% to 39%, while Clinton leads him 49% to 41% and Obama leads him 47% to 41%. Edwards leads McCain 45% to 41%, while Clinton leads 46% to 45%. Edwards leads Romney 49% to 38% while Obama leads 46% to 43% and Clinton leads 49% to 40%. [Rasmussen, 9/29/07; Rasmussen, 9/27/07 ; Rasmussen, 9/24/07 ; Rasmussen, 9/21/07 ; Rasmussen, 9/15/07; Rasmussen, 9/6/07; Rasmussen, 9/6/07; Rasmussen, 9/4/07]

Rasmussen (August 27, 2007): Edwards "Generally Outperforms Other Democrats in General Election Match-Ups Against Republicans." In an August 27, 2007, assessment of the latest general election polling data, Rasmussen Reports wrote, "While he generally outperforms other Democrats in general election match-ups against Republicans, Edwards remains mired in third place in the race for the Democratic Presidential nomination." [Rasmussen, 8/27/07]

ABC News (September 2007): "Polls Show Edwards Does Better than Either of His Rivals in Head-to-Head Matchups with Leading Republicans." In a September 2007 report covering Edwards' endorsements from the United Steelworkers and United Mine Workers of America, ABC News noted, "One key selling point Edwards is making to unions — and increasingly to the crowds that come to hear him speak in Iowa, New Hampshire and other early nominating states — is that he stands a better chance of winning a general election than either Clinton or Obama. And in fact, polls show Edwards does better than either of his main rivals in head-to-head matchups with leading Republicans." [ABC News, 9/3/07]

The Global Strategy Group's memos are a great resource, and the data is presented in a very effective way. The first one can be found here. The second memo and third memo are also available.

To see state by state comments about Edwards' electability, skip down past the polling.

Since 2008 general election polling began, there has been a clear trend. Whether the Republicans he faced were Jeb Bush and Condi Rice, John McCain and Rudy Giuliani, or Mitt Romney, Fred Thompson, and now Mike Huckabee... Senator Edwards has shown time and time again that he is the most electable Democrat. Senator Obama, and to a lesser extent Senator Clinton, have had a few days in the sun, but these occasions have become even fewer, and far between.

It has become crystal clear that if we as Democrats want to make the most out of the opportunity that has presented itself in 2008, we need to nominate and elect John Edwards. He is the only candidate who can win a realignment victory, and substantially grow the Democratic majorities in Congress. Edwards can win a sweeping mandate that can help end the "progressive = unelectable" myth, reclaim the Democratic party from corporate interests and spineless triangulators, and allow Senator Edwards to, in his own words, "really move a progressive agenda".

Public Policy Polling - OH: January 6, 2007

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 45%
Romney - 40%

Obama - 44%
Romney - 38%

Edwards - 53%
Romney - 33%

Clinton leads by 5%, Obama leads by 6%, Edwards leads by 20%

Vs. Mike Huckabee

Clinton - 43%
Huckabee - 45%

Obama - 43%
Huckabee - 43%

Edwards - 49%
Huckabee - 40%

Clinton trails by 2%, Obama is tied, Edwards leads by 9%

Vs. John McCain

Clinton - 42%
McCain - 46%

Obama - 42%
McCain - 45%

Edwards - 47%
McCain - 40%

Clinton trails by 4%, Obama trails by 3%, Edwards leads by 7%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 44%
Giuliani - 37%

Obama - 47%

Giuliani - 37%

Edwards - 51%
Giuliani - 34%

Clinton leads by 7%, Obama leads by 10%, Edwards leads by 17%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by 1.50%
Obama leads the Republicans by 3.25%
Edwards leads the Republicans by 13.25%

Rasmussen - National: November / December 2007

Favorable / Unfavorable

Hillary Clinton - 47/50 - 45/52 - 46/52 - 47/53 - 44/55 - 47/50 - 45/54 - 48/50
Barck Obama - 48/47 - 45/50 - 44/50 - 48/47 - 50/44 - 48/47 - 52/45 - 43/51
John Edwards - 46/47 - 46/45 - 47/46 - 48/44 - 43/47 - 47/45 - 48/44 - 49/42

Ideology

% of voters that view candidate as - Conservative / Moderate / Liberal

November:

Hillary Clinton: 9 / 31 / 51

Barack Obama: 6 / 33 / 44

John Edwards: 13 / 30 / 38

December:

Hillary Clinton - 7 / 31 / 54

Barack Obama - 5 / 35 / 47

John Edwards - 9/ 33 / 46

Note: Match-Ups Are Listed In Order Of Release. Some Match-Ups Are Updated More Frequently Than Others.

Vs. Mitt Romney

Edwards - 50%
Romney - 34%

Clinton - 47%
Romney - 42%

Obama - 46%
Romney - 40%

Obama - 48%
Romney - 39%

Clinton - 46%
Romney - 43%

Obama - 45%
Romney - 41%

Clinton - 43%
Romney - 44%

Edwards leads by 16%, Clinton leads by 5%, Obama leads by 6%, Obama leads by 9%, Clinton leads by 3%, Obama leads by 4%, Clinton trails by 1%

Vs. Mike Huckabee

Clinton - 46%
Huckabee - 45%

Obama - 45%
Huckabee - 41%

Edwards - 44%
Huckabee - 40%

Edwards - 49%
Huckabee - 37%

Clinton - 47%
Huckabee - 43%

Clinton leads by 1%, Obama leads by 4%, Edwards leads by 4%, Edwards leads by 12%, Clinton leads by 4%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 48%
Giuliani - 42%

Obama - 43%
Giuliani - 41%

Clinton - 42%
Giuliani - 46%

Obama - 43%
Giuliani - 41%

Clinton - 46%
Giuliani - 43%

Edwards - 44%
Giuliani - 44%

Obama - 43%
Giuliani - 43%

Clinton - 44%
Giuliani - 45%

Clinton leads by 6%, Obama leads by 2%, Clinton trails by 4%, Obama leads by 2%, Clinton leads by 3%, Edwards ties, Obama ties, Clinton trails by 1%

Vs. John McCain

Edwards - 47%
McCain - 38%

Clinton - 45%
McCain - 47%

Obama - 46%
McCain - 43%

Obama - 44%
McCain - 44%

Edwards - 46%
McCain - 39%

Clinton - 43%
McCain - 49%

Edwards leads by 9%, Clinton trails by 2%, Obama leads by 3%, Obama ties, Edwards leads by 7%, Clinton trails by 6%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 48%
Thompson - 42%

Obama - 47%
Thompson - 42%

Clinton - 46%
Thompson - 44%

Obama - 48%
Thompson - 41%

Clinton leads by 6%, Obama leads by 5%, Clinton leads by 2%, Obama leads by 7%

Public Policy Polling - NC: December 17, 2007

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 42%
Romney - 46%

Obama - 42%
Romney - 45%

Edwards - 52%
Romney - 40%

Clinton trails by 4%, Obama trails by 3%, Edwards leads by 12%

Vs. Mike Huckabee

Clinton - 42%
Huckabee - 48%

Obama - 42%
Huckabee - 47%

Edwards - 50%
Huckabee - 43%

Clinton trails by 6%, Obama trails by 5%, Edwards leads by 7%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 39%
Giuliani - 46%

Obama - 43%
Giuliani - 46%

Edwards - 48%
Giuliani - 43%

Clinton trails by 7%, Obama trails by 3%, Edwards leads by 5%

Averages

Clinton trails the Republicans by 5.66%

Obama trails the Republicans by 3.66%

Edwards leads the Republicans by 8.00%

CNN / Opinion Research - National: December 11, 2007

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 54%
Romney - 43%

Obama - 54%
Romney - 41%

Edwards - 59%
Romney - 37%

Clinton leads by 11%, Obama leads by 13%, Edwards leads by 22%

Vs. Mike Huckabee

Clinton - 54%
Huckabee - 44%

Obama - 55%
Huckabee - 40%

Edwards - 60%
Huckabee - 35%

Clinton leads by 10%, Obama leads by 15%, Edwards leads by 25%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 51%
Giuliani - 45%

Obama - 52%
Giuliani - 45%

Edwards - 53%
Giuliani - 44%

Clinton leads by 6%, Obama leads by 7%, Edwards leads by 9%

Vs. John McCain

Clinton - 48%
McCain - 50%

Obama - 48%
McCain - 48%

Edwards - 52%
McCain - 44%

Clinton trails by 2%, Obama ties, Edwards leads by 8%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by 6.25%
Obama leads the Republicans by 8.75%
Edwards leads the Republicans by 16.00%

Quinnipiac University - OH: December 5, 2007

Favorable / Unfavorable

Hillary Clinton - 46/45
Barack Obama - 44/28
John Edwards - 48/29

Vs. Rudy Guiliani

Clinton - 45%
Giuliani - 41%

Obama - 42%
Giuliani - 38%

Edwards - 45%
Giuliani - 38%

Clinton leads by 4%, Obama leads by 4%, Edwards leads by 7%

Quinnipiac University - OH: November 14, 2007

Note: Edwards and Obama were only polled against Giuliani.

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 44%
Giuliani - 43%

Obama - 41%
Giuliani - 41%

Edwards - 46%
Giuliani - 40%

Clinton leads by 1%, Obama is tied%, Edwards lead by 6%

Newsweek - National: November 3, 2007

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 49%
Romney - 45%

Obama - 53%
Romney - 37%

Edwards - 53%
Romney - 37%

Clinton leads by 4%, Obama leads by 16%, Edwards leads by 16%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 49%
Thompson - 45%

Obama - 52%
Thompson - 39%

Edwards - 53%
Thompson - 39%

Clinton leads by 4%, Obama leads by 13%, Edwards leads by 14%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 49%
Giuliani - 45%

Obama - 48%
Giuliani - 45%

Edwards - 48%
Giuliani - 45%

Clinton leads by 4%, Obama leads by 3%, Edwards leads by 3%

Average

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 4.00%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 10.66%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 11.00%

Quinnipiac University - National: October 29, 2007

Favorable / Unfavorable

Democrats

Hillary Clinton - 46/46
Barack Obama - 50/26
John Edwards - 46/29

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 48%
Romney - 38%

Obama - 46%
Romney - 36%

Edwards - 47%
Romney - 34%

Clinton leads by 10%, Obama leads by 10%, Edwards leads by 13%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 46%
Thompson - 41%

Obama - 45%
Thompson - 37%

Edwards - 46%
Thompson - 36%

Clinton leads by 5%, Obama leads by 8%, Edwards leads by 10%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 43%
Giuliani - 45%

Obama - 43%
Giuliani - 42%

Edwards - 44%
Giuliani - 41%

Clinton trails by 2% Obama leads by 1%, Edwards trails by 3%

Vs. John McCain

Clinton - 44%
McCain - 44%

Obama - 43%
McCain - 43%

Edwards - 42%
McCain - 42%

Clinton ties, Obama ties, Edwards ties

Average

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 3.25%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 4.75%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 5.00%

Quinnipiac University - Florida: October 25, 2007

Favorable / Unfavorable

Hillary Clinton - 46/47
Barack Obama - 45/29
John Edwards - 50/28

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 47%
Romney - 39%

Obama - 44%
Romney - 37%

Edwards - 48%
Romney - 34%

Clinton leads by 8%, Obama leads by 7%, Edwards leads by 14%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 46%
Thompson - 41%

Obama - 43%
Thompson - 39%

Edwards - 47%
Thompson - 36%

Clinton leads by 5%, Obama leads by 4%, Edwards leads by 11%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 43%
Giuliani - 46%

Obama - 40%
Giuliani - 47%

Edwards - 41%
Giuliani - 44%

Clinton trails by 3%, Obama trails by 7%, Edwards trails by 3%

Vs. John McCain

Clinton - 44%
McCain - 43%

Obama - 42%
McCain - 42%

Edwards - 42%
McCain - 40%

Clinton leads by 1%, Obama is tied, Edwards leads by 2%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 2.75%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 1.00%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 6.00%

Rasmussen - National: October 2007 (Most recent match-ups)

Favorable / Unfavorable

Hillary Clinton - 49/49 - 54/45 - 47/51 - 46/52 - 50/49
Barack Obama - 47/45 - 55/39 - 51/42 - 47/48 - 48/50
John Edwards - 49/44 - 46/47 - 48/44 - 46/43

Ideology

Hillary Clinton

Conservative - 8%
Moderate - 34%
Liberal - 51%

Barack Obama

Conservative - 7%
Moderate - 34%
Liberal - 49%

John Edwards

Conservative - 10%
Moderate - 34%
Liberal - 44%

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 47%
Romney - 41%

Obama - 48%
Romney - 39%

Edwards - 52%
Romney - 35%

Clinton leads by 6%, Obama leads by 9%, Edwards leads by 17%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 47%
Thompson - 45%

Obama - 44%
Thompson - 43%

Edwards - 48%
Thompson - 39%

Clinton leads by 2%, Obama leads by 1%, Edwards leads by 9%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 44%
Giuliani - 46%

Obama - 43%
Giuliani - 45%

Edwards - 44%
Giuliani - 45%

Clinton trails by 2%, Obama trails by 2%, Edwards trails by 1%

Vs. John McCain

Clinton - 44%
McCain - 43%

Obama - 44%
McCain - 45%

Edwards - 47%
McCain - 40%

Clinton leads by 1%, Obama trails by 1%, Edwards leads by 7%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 1.75%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 1.75%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 8.00%

The entire month, in order of release...

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 47%
Romney - 41%

Obama - 48%
Romney - 39%

Edwards - 52%
Romney - 35%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 52%
Thompson - 37%

Obama - 47%
Thompson - 41%

Clinton - 47%
Thompson - 45%

Edwards - 48%
Thompson - 39%

Obama - 44%
Thompson - 43%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 48%
Giuliani - 41%

Obama - 46%
Giuliani - 41%

Clinton - 44%
Giuliani - 46%

Edwards - 44%
Giuliani - 45%

Obama - 43%
Giuliani - 45%

Vs. John McCain

Clinton - 44%
McCain - 43%

Obama - 44%
McCain - 45%

Edwards - 47%
McCain - 40%

Quinnipiac University - OH, FL, PA: October 10, 2007

Swing States - Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania

Out of 12 match-ups

Edwards Outperforms Clinton 8 times. Clinton Outperforms Edwards 4 times.

Edwards Outperforms Obama 11 times. Obama Outperforms Edwards 1 time.

Ohio

Favorable / Unfavorable

Hillary Clinton - 49/42
Barack Obama - 45/26
John Edwards - 47/26

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 51%
Romney - 34%

Obama - 47%
Romney - 31%

Edwards - 50%
Romney - 28%

Clinton leads by 16%, Obama leads by 16%, Edwards leads by 22%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 48%
Thompson - 36%

Obama - 44%
Thompson - 33%

Edwards - 48%
Thompson - 31%

Clinton leads by 14%, Obama leads by 11%, Edwards leads by 17%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 46%
Giuliani - 40%

Obama - 44%
Giuliani - 38%

Edwards - 46%
Giuliani - 36%

Clinton leads by 6%, Obama leads by 6%, Edwards leads by 10%

Vs. John McCain

Clinton - 48%
McCain - 38%

Obama - 43%
McCain - 39%

Edwards - 46%
McCain - 35%

Clinton leads by 10%, Obama leads by 4%, Edwards leads by 11%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 11.50%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 9.25%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 15.00%

Florida

Favorable / Unfavorable

Hillary Clinton - 49/41
Barack Obam - 47/27
John Edwards - 46/32

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 48%
Romney - 37%

Obama - 43%
Romney -36%

Edwards - 47%
Romney - 33%

Clinton leads by 11%, Obama leads by 7%, Edwards leads by 14%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 48%
Thompson - 39%

Obama - 45%
Thompson - 36%

Edwards - 44%
Thompson 36%

Clinton leads by 9%, Obama leads by 9%, Edwards leads by 8%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 46%
Giuliani - 43%

Obama - 39%
Giuliani - 42%

Edwards - 41%
Giuliani - 43%

Clinton leads by 3%, Obama trails by 3%, Edwards trails by 2%

Vs. John McCain

Clinton - 46%
McCain - 42%

Obama - 39%
McCain - 41%

Edwards- 42%
McCain - 40%

Clinton leads by 4%, Obama trails by 2%, Edwards leads by 2%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 6.50%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 2.75%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 5.50%

Pennsylvania

Favorable / Unfavorable

Hillary Clinton - 51/42
Barack Obama - 48/22
John Edwards - 49/27

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 49%
Romney - 37%

Obama - 49%
Romney - 33%

Edwards - 49%
Romney - 32%

Clinton leads by 12%, Obama leads by 16%, Edwards leads by 17%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 50%
Thompson - 39%

Obama - 45%
Thompson - 37%

Edwards - 47%
Thompson - 34%

Clinton leads by 11%, Obama leads by 8%, Edwards leads by 13%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 48%
Giuliani - 42%

Obama - 45%
Giuliani - 43%

Edwards - 43%
Giuliani - 44%

Clinton leads by 6%, Obama trails by 2%, Edwards trails by 1%

Vs. John McCain

Clinton - 48%
McCain - 41%

Obama - 45%
McCain - 41%

Edwards - 47%
McCain - 39%

Clinton leads by 7%, Obama leads by 4%, Edwards leads by 8%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 9.00%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 6.50%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 9.25%

Survey USA - Series of state wide polls: September 20 - October 4, 2007

Out of 51 match-ups…

Edwards outperforms Clinton 35 times. Clinton outperforms Edwards 15 times. They tie once.

Edwards outperforms Obama 46 times. Obama outperforms Edwards 4 times.They tie once.

Ohio

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 52%
Romney - 42%

Obama - 45%
Romney - 46%

Edwards - 56%
Romney - 36%

Clinton leads by 10%, Obama trails by 1%, Edwards leads by 20%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 48%
Thompson - 47%

Obama - 42%
Thompson - 50%

Edwards - 52%
Thompson - 43%

Clinton leads by 1%, Obama trails by 8%, Edwards leads by 9%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 47%
Giuliani - 48%

Obama - 39%
Giuliani - 52%

Edwards - 47%
Giuliani - 48%

Clinton trails by 1%, Obama trails by 13%, Edwards trails by 1%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 3.33%
Obama trails the Republicans by an average of 7.00%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 9.33%

Iowa

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 50%
Romney - 43%

Obama - 51%
Romney - 41%

Edwards - 54%
Romney - 38%

Clinton leads by 7%, Obama leads by 10%, Edwards leads by 16%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 50%
Thompson - 44%

Obama - 51%
Thompson - 41%

Edwards - 54%
Thompson - 37%

Clinton leads by 6%, Obama leads by 10% Edwards leads by 17%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 50%
Giuliani - 42%

Obama - 50%
Giuliani - 42%

Edwards - 53%
Giuliani - 39%

Clinton leads by 8%, Obama leads by 8%, Edwards leads by 14%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 7.00%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 9.33%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 15.66%

Missouri

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 51%
Romney - 40%

Obama - 51%
Romney - 40%

Edwards - 56%
Romney - 32%

Clinton leads by 11%, Obama leads by 11%, Edwards leads by 24%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 48%
Thompson - 45%

Obama - 48%
Thompson - 45%

Edwards - 50%
Thompson - 40%

Clinton leads by 3%, Obama leads by 3%, Edwards leads by 10%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 45%
Giuliani - 48%

Obama - 46%
Giuliani - 44%

Edwards - 47%
Giuliani - 42%

Clinton trails by 3%, Obama leads by 2% Edwards leads by 5%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 3.66%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 5.33%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 13.00%

New Mexico

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 54%
Romney - 39%

Obama - 55%
Romney - 36%

Edwards - 54%
Romney - 34%

Clinton leads by 15%, Obama leads by 19%, Edwards leads by 20%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 53%
Thompson - 42%

Obama - 52%
Thompson - 41%

Edwards - 52%
Thompson - 37%

Clinton leads by 11%, Obama leads by 11%, Edwards leads by 15%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 51%
Giuliani - 43%

Obama - 46%
Giuliani - 46%

Edwards - 48%
Giuliani - 44%

Clinton leads by 8%, Obama is tied, Edwards leads by 4%

Average

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 11.33%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 10.00%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 13.00%

Kentucky

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 46%
Romney - 46%

Obama - 43%
Romney - 45%

Edwards - 48%
Romney - 38%

Clinton is tied, Obama trails by 2%, Edwards leads by 10%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 45%
Thompson - 50%

Obama - 37%
Thompson - 54%

Edwards - 45%
Thompson - 44%

Clinton trails by 5%, Obama trails by 17%, Edwards leads by 1%

Vs. Rudy Giuluiani

Clinton - 41%
Giuliani - 51%

Obama - 36%
Giuliani - 54%

Edwards - 43%
Giuliani - 50%

Clinton trails by 10%, Obama trails by 18%%, Edwards trails by 7%

Average

Clinton trails the Republicans by an average of 5.00%
Obama trails the Republicans by an average of 12.33%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 1.33%

Virginia

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 53%
Romney - 38%

Obama - 50%
Romney - 38%

Edwards - 52%
Romney 33%

Clinton leads by 15%, Obama leads by 12%, Edwards leads by 19%,

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 50%
Thompson - 43%

Obama - 45%
Thompson - 47%

Edwards - 49%
Thompson - 39%

Clinton leads by 7%, Obama trails by 2%, Edwards leads by 10%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 50%
Giuliani 44%

Obama - 46%
Giuliani - 45%

Edwards - 48%
Giuliani - 43%

Clinton leads by 6%, Obama leads by 1%, Edwards leads by 5%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 9.33%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 3.66%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 11.33%

Florida

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 51%
Romney - 41%

Obama - 44%
Romney - 46%

Edwards - 50%
Romney - 37%

Clinton leads by 10%, Obama trails by 2%, Edwards leads by 13%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 50%
Thompson - 42%

Obama - 42%
Thompson - 48%

Edwards - 46%
Thompson - 43%

Clinton leads by 8%, Obama trails by 6%, Edwards leads by 3%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 49%
Giuliani - 43%

Obama - 41%
Giuliani - 50%

Edwards - 43%
Giuliani - 48%

Clinton leads by 6%, Obama trails by 9%, Edwards trails by 5%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 8.00%
Obama trails the Republicans by an average of 5.66%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 3.66%

Minnesota

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 56%
Romney - 33%

Obama - 53%
Romney - 33%

Edwards - 55%
Romney - 28%

Clinton leads by 23%, Obama leads by 20%, Edwards leads by 27%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 52%
Thompson - 39%

Obama - 49%
Thompson - 41%

Edwards - 51%
Thompson - 35%

Clinton leads by 13%, Obama leads 8%, Edwards leads by 16%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 52%
Giuliani - 41%

Obama - 47%
Giuliani - 43%

Edwards - 48%
Giuliani - 40%

Clinton leads by 11%, Obama leads by 4%, Edwards leads by 8%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 15.66%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 10.66%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 17.00%

Wisconsin

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 50%
Romney - 41%

Obama - 52%
Romney -37%

Edwards - 52%
Romney - 34%

Clinton leads by 9%, Obama leads by 15%, Edwards leads by 18%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 47%
Thompson - 45%

Obama - 48%
Thompson - 43%

Edwards - 49%
Thompson - 40%

Clinton leads by 2%, Obama leads by 5%, Edwards leads by 9%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 48%
Giuliani - 44%

Obama - 46%
Giuliani - 43%

Edwards - 44%
Giuliani - 45%

Clinton leads by 4%, Obama leads by 3%, Edwards trails by 1%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 5.00%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 7.66%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 8.66%

Oregon

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 51%
Romney 38%

Obama - 53%
Romney - 35%

Edwards - 52%
Romney - 34%

Clinton leads by 13%, Obama leads by 18%, Edwards leads by 18%,

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 49%
Thompson - 42%

Obama - 48%
Thompson - 43%

Edwards - 51%
Thompson - 36%

Clinton leads by 7%, Obama leads by 5%, Edwards leads by 15%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 46%
Giuliani - 44%

Obama - 46%
Giuliani - 46%

Edwards - 47%
Giuliani - 44%

Clinton leads by 2%, Obama is tied, Edwards leads by 3%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 7.33%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 7.66%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 12.00%

Washington

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 54%
Romney 40%

Obama - 57%
Romney - 35%

Edwards - 55%
Romney - 31%

Clinton leads by 14%, Obama leads by 22%, Edwards leads by 24%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 52%
Thompson - 42%

Obama - 54%
Thompson - 40%

Edwards - 51%
Thompson - 36%

Clinton leads by 10%, Obama leads by 14%, Edwards leads by 15%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 47%
Giuliani - 47%

Obama - 52%
Giuliani - 41%

Edwards - 45%
Giuliani - 44%

Clinton is tied, Obama leads by 11%, Edwards leads by 1%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 8.00%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 15.66%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 13.33%

Oklahoma

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 47%
Romney 44%

Obama - 40%
Romney - 46%

Edwards - 53%
Romney - 32%

Clinton leads by 3%, Obama trails by 6%, Edwards leads by 21%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 44%
Thompson - 50%

Obama - 35%
Thompson - 55%

Edwards - 47%
Thompson - 41%

Clinton trails by 6%, Obama trails by 20%, Edwards leads by 6%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 44%
Giuliani - 47%

Obama - 33%
Giuliani - 54%

Edwards - 49%
Giuliani - 40%

Clinton trails by 3%, Obama trails by 21%, Edwards leads by 9%

Averages

Clinton trails the Republicans by an average of 2.00%
Obama trails the Republicans by an average of 15.66%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 12.00%

California

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 63
Romney - 30%

Obama - 51%
Romney - 36%

Edwards - 58%
Romney - 27%

Clinon leads by 33% Obama leads by 15%, Edwards leads by 31%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 60%
Thompson - 34%

Obama - 53%
Thompson - 37%

Edwards - 53%
Thompson - 32%

Clinton leads by 26%, Obama leads by 16%, Edwards leads by 21%

Vs. Rudy Guilaini

Clinton - 57%
Giuliani - 37%

Obama - 48%
Giuliani - 44%

Edwards - 46%
Giuliani - 44%

Clinton leads by 20%, Obama leads by 4%, Edwards leads Giuliani by 2%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 26.33%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 11.66%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 18.00%

New York

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 67%
Romney - 27%

Obama - 58%
Romney - 30%

Edwards - 58%
Romney - 24%

Clinton leads by 40%, Obama leads by 28%, Edwards leads by 34%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 64%
Thompson - 30%

Obama - 53%
Thompson - 38%

Edwards - 54%
Thompson - 32%

Clinton leads by 34%, Obama leads by 15%, Edwards leads by 22%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 59%
Giuliani - 35%

Obama - 49%
Giuliani - 44%

Edwards - 45%
Giuliani - 46%

Clinton leads by 14%, Obama leads by 5%, Edwards trails by 1%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 29.33%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 16.00%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 18.33%

Alabama

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 45%
Romney - 46%

Obama - 36%
Romney - 53%

Edwards - 45%
Romney - 39%

Clinton trails by 1%, Obama trails by 17%, Edwards leads by 6%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 41%
Thompson - 54%

Obama - 34%
Thompson - 60%

Edwards - 38%
Thompson - 50%

Clinton trails by 13%, Obama trails by 26%, Edwards trails by 12%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 41%
Giuliani - 52%

Obama - 32%
Giuliani - 59%

Edwards - 40%
Giuliani - 50%

Clinton trails by 11%, Obama trails by 27%, Edwards trails by 10%

Average

Clinton trails the Republicans by an average of 8.33%
Obama trails the Republicans by an average of 23.33%
Edwards trails the Republicans by an average of 5.33%

Kansas

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 46%
Romney - 45%

Obama - 47%
Romney - 41%

Edwards - 48%
Romney - 34%

Clinton leads by 1%, Obama leads by 6%, Edwards leads by 14%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 40%
Thompson - 53%

Obama - 40%
Thompson - 50%

Edwards - 39%
Thompson - 46%

Clinton trails by 13%, Obama trails by 10%, Edwards trails by 7%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 40%
Giuliani - 52%

Obama - 40%
Giuliani - 51%

Edwards - 40%
Giuliani - 50%

Clinton trails by 12, Obama trails by 11%, Edwards trails by 10%

Average

Clinton trails the Republicans by an average of 8.00%
Obama trails the Republicans by an average of 5.00%
Edwards trails the Republicans by an average of 1.00%

Massachusetts

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 65%
Romney - 31%

Obama - 57%
Romney - 35%

Edwards - 57%
Romney - 32%

Clinton leads by 34%, Obama leads by 22%, Edwards leads by 25%,

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 61%
Thompson - 32%

Obama - 53%
Thompson - 36%

Edwards - 56%
Thompson - 31%

Clinton leads by 29%, Obama leads by 17% Edwards leads Thompson by 25%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 59%
Giuliani - 34%

Obama - 48%
Giuliani - 43%

Edwards - 48%
Giuliani - 40%

Clinton leads by 25%, Obama leads by 5%, Edwards leads by 8%

Averages

Clinton leads by an average of 27.33%
Obama leads by an average of 14.66%
Edwards leads by an average of 19.33%

Quinnipiac University - Ohio: September 6, 2007

Favorable / Unfavorable

Hillary Clinton - 51/ 43
Barack Obama - 47/ 25
John Edwards - 54/ 26

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 50%
Romney - 37%

Obama - 46%
Romney - 32%

Edwards - 50%
Romney - 30%

Clinton leads by 13%, Obama leads by 14%, Edwards leads by 20%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 49%
Thompson - 37%

Obama - 46%
Thompson - 34%

Edwards - 50%
Thompson - 32%

Clinton leads by 12%, Obama leads by 12%, Edwards leads by 18%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 47%
Giuliani - 40%

Obama - 42%
Giuliani - 41%

Edwards - 47%
Giuliani - 38%

Clinton leads by 7%, Obama leads by 1%, Edwards leads by 9%

Vs. John McCain

Clinton - 46%
McCain - 41%

Obama - 41%
McCain - 42%

Edwards - 46%
McCain - 38%

Clinton leads by 5%, Obama trails by 1%, Edwards leads by 8%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 9.25%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 6.50%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 13.75%

Quinnipiac University - Pennsylvania: August 23, 2007

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 50%
Romney - 35%

Obama - 46%
Romney - 31%

Edwards - 53%
Romney - 29%

Clinton leads by 15%, Obama leads by 15%, Edwards leads by 24%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 50%
Thompson - 36%

Obama - 46%
Thompson - 34%

Edwards - 51%
Thompson - 32%

Clinton leads by 14%, Obama leads by 12%, Edwards leads by 19%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 46%
Giuliani - 44%

Obama - 40%
Giuliani - 45%

Edwards - 43%
Giuliani - 45%

Clinton leads by 2%, Obama trails by 5%, Edwards trails by 2%

Vs. John McCain

Clinton - 47%
McCain - 41%

Obama - 43%
McCain - 40%

Edwards - 46%
McCain - 38%

Clinton leads by 6%, Obama leads by 3%, Edwards leads by 8%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 9.25%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 6.25%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 12.25%

Rasmussen - National: August 2007 / September 2007

Note: During the month of August, some match ups were updated numerous times, while others were not updated at all. For this reason, we grouped August and September together.

Here is what Rasmussen had to say about their general election polling in late September 2007...

One interesting twist to this year's early Presidential polling is that Edwards typically outperforms other leading Democratic hopefuls in general election match-ups...

Still, Edwards currently leads the top four Republican candidates by an average of nearly nine points. Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton leads the top GOP hopefuls by an average of six points, while Barack Obama holds an average lead of five points.

Favorable / Unfavorable

Hillary Clinton - 49/48 - 50/48 - 45/54 - 47/50 - 49/49 - 49/49 - 49/50 - 52/48
Barack Obama - 48/45 - 48/42 - 47/45 - 50/43 - 46/47 - 49/45 - 47/45 - 53/41
John Edwards - 54/39 - 52/42 - 49/46 - 48/44 - 52/41 - 52/41 - 51/41 - 48/43

Vs. Mitt Romney

Round One

Clinton - 51%
Romney - 40%

Obama - 47%
Romney - 38%

Edwards - 49%
Romney - 38%

Round Two

Clinton - 49%
Romney - 40%

Obama - 46%
Romney - 43%

Round 1 - Clinton leads by 9%, Obama leads by 9%, Edwards leads by 11%
Round 2 - Clinton leads by 9%, Obama leads by 3%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Round One

Clinton - 45%
Thompson - 46%

Obama - 46%
Thompson - 39%

Edwards - 47%
Thompson - 41%

Round Two

Clinton - 46%
Thompson - 43%

Obama - 45%
Thompson - 41%

Edwards - 49%
Thompson - 35%

Round Three

Clinton - 48%
Thompson - 44%

Obama - 46%
Thompson - 42%

Edwards - 49%
Thompson - 39%

Round Four

Clinton - 48%
Thompson - 43%

Obama - 47%
Thompson - 41%

Round Five

Clinton - 49%
Thompson - 41%

Obama - 49%
Thompson - 38%

Round 1 - Clinton trails by 1%, Obama leads by 7%, Edwards leads by 6%
Round 2 - Clinton leads by 3%, Obama leads by 4%, Edwards leads by 14%
Round 3 - Clinton leads by 4%, Obama leads by 4%, Edwards leads by 10%
Round 4 - Clinton leads by 5%, Obama leads by 6%
Round 5 - Clinton leads by 8%, Obama leads by 11%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Round One

Clinton - 45%
Giuliani - 46%

Obama - 44%
Giuliani - 43%

Edwards - 46%
Giuliani - 44%

Round Two

Clinton - 40%
Giuliani - 47%

Obama - 45%
Giuliani - 43%

Edwards - 49%
Giuliani - 41%

Round Three

Clinton - 44%
Giuliani - 47%

Obama - 44%
Giuliani - 45%

Edwards - 50%
Giuliani - 41%

Round 4

Clinton - 45%
Giuliani - 46%

Obama - 47%
Giuliani - 42%

Round 5

Clinton - 48%
Giuliani - 43%

Obama - 47%
Giuliani - 42%

Round 1 - Clinton trails by 1%, Obama leads by 1%, Edwards leads by 2%
Round 2 - Clinton trails by 7%, Obama leads by 2%, Edwards leads by 8%
Round 3 - Clinton trails by 3%, Obama trails by 1%, Edwards leads by 9%
Round 4 - Clinton trails by 1%, Obama leads by 5%
Round 5 - Clinton leads by 5%, Obama leads by 5%

Vs. John McCain

Clinton - 45%
McCain - 43%

Obama - 46%
McCain - 40%

Edwards - 45%
McCain - 41%

Round Two

Clinton - 46%
McCain - 44%

Obama - 46%
McCain - 41%

Round Three

Clinton - 46%
McCain - 45%

Round 1 - Clinton leads by 2%, Obama leads by 6%, Edwards leads by 4%
Round 2 - Clinton leads by 2%, Obama leads by 5%
Round 3 - Clinton leads by 1%

Quinnipiac University - National: August 13, 2007

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 49%
Thompson - 38%

Obama - 46%
Thompson - 35%

Edwards - 49%
Thompson - 32%

Clinton leads by 11%, Obama leads by 11%, Edwards leads by 17%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 46%
Giuliani - 43%

Obama - 42%
Giuliani - 42%

Edwards - 43%
Giuliani - 42%

Clinton leads by 3%, Obama is tied, Edwards leads by 1%

vs. John McCain

Clinton - 47%
McCain - 41%

Obama - 43%
McCain - 39%

Edwards - 45%
McCain - 37%

Clinton leads by 6%, Obama leads by 4%, Edwards leads by 8%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 6.66%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 5.00%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 8.66%

Rasmussen - National: July 2007

Favorable / Unfavorable (at months end)

Hillary Clinton - 52/46
Barack Obama - 53/41
John Edwards - 54/39

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 46%
Romney - 42%

Obama - 47%
Romney - 38%

Edwards - 52%
Romney - 36%

Clinton leads by 4%, Obama leads by 9%, Edwards leads by 16%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 45%
Thompson - 45%

Obama - 46%
Thompson - 40%

Edwards - 50%
Thompson - 39%

Clinton is tied, Obama leads by 6%, Edwards leads by 11%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 44%
Giuliani - 43%

Obama - 47%
Giuliani - 41%

Edwards - 49%
Giuliani - 42%

Clinton leads by 1%, Obama leads by 6%, Edwards leads by 7%

Vs. John McCain

Clinton - 47%
McCain - 38%

Obama - 47%
McCain - 38%

Edwards - 45%
McCain - 38%

Clinton leads by 9%, Obama leads by 9%, Edwards leads by 7%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 3.50%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 7.50%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 10.25%

Rasmussen - National: June 2007

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 50%
Romney - 41%

Obama - 49%
Romney - 37%

Edwards - 51%
Romney - 33%

Clinton leads by 9%, Obama leads by 12%, Edwards leads by 18%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 45%
Thompson - 45%

Obama - 43%
Thompson - 41%

Edwards - 50%
Thompson - 41%

Clinton is tied, Obama leads by 2%, Edwards leads by 9%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 44%
Giuliani - 43%

Obama - 41%
Giuliani - 44%

Edwards - 45%
Giuliani - 45%

Clinton leads by 1%, Obama trails by 3%, Edwards is tied

Vs. John McCain

Clinton - 46%
McCain - 42%

Obama - 46%
McCain - 38%

Edwards - 49%
McCain - 36%

Clinton leads by 4%, Obama leads by 8%, Edwards leads by 13%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 3.50%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 4.75%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 10.00%

Gallup - National: June 20th, 2007

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 53%
Romney - 40%

Obama - 57%
Romney - 36%

Edwards - 61%
Romney - 32%

Clinton leads by 13%, Obama leads by 21%, Edwards leads by 29%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 50%
Giuliani - 46%

Obama - 50%
Giuliani - 45%

Edwards - 50%
Giuliani - 45%

Clinton leads by 4%, Obama leads by 5%, Edwards leads by 5%

Vs. John McCain

Clinton - 49%
McCain - 46%

Obama - 48%
McCain - 46%

Edwards - 50%
McCain - 44%

Clinton leads by 3%, Obama leads by 2%, Edwards leads by 6%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 6.66%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 9.33%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 13.33%

Public Policy Polling - North Carolina: June 21, 2007

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 47%
Romney - 41%

Obama - 47%
Romney - 43%

Edwards - 51%
Romney - 37%

Clinton leads by 6%, Obama leads by 4%, Edwards leads by 14%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 43%
Thompson - 46%

Obama - 44%
Thompson - 45%

Edwards - 47%
Thompson - 43%

Clinton trails by 3%, Obama trails by 1%, Edwards leads by 4%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 43%
Giuliani - 47%

Obama - 42%
Giuliani - 46%

Edwards - 46%
Giuliani - 45%

Clinton trails by 4%, Obama trails by 4%, Edwards leads by 1%

Vs. John McCain

Clinton - 45%
McCain - 44%

Obama - 44%
McCain - 45%

Edwards - 48%
McCain - 40%

Clinton leads by 1%, Obama trails by 1%, Edwards leads by 8%

Averages

Clinton averages a tie against the Republicans
Obama trails the Republicans by an average of .50%
Edwards leads the Republicans an average of 6.75%

Rasmussen - National: May 2007

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 47%
Romney - 44%

Obama - 52%
Romney - 37%

Edwards - 55%
Romney - 29%

Clinton leads by 3%, Obama leads by 15%, Edwards leads by 26%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 48%
Thompson - 43%

Obama - 47%
Thompson - 44%

Edwards - 51%
Thompson - 38%

Clinton leads by 5%, Obama leads by 3%, Edwards leads by 13%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 45%
Giuliani - 46%

Obama - 39%
Giuliani - 51%

Edwards - 47%
Giuliani - 43%

Clinton trails by 1%, Obama trails by 12%, Edwards leads by 4%

Vs. John McCain

Clinton - 42%
McCain - 48%

Obama - 46%
McCain - 42%

Edwards - 48%
McCain - 41%

Clinton trails by 6%, Obama leads by 4%, Edwards leads by 7%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of .25%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 2.50%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 12.50%

Newsweek - National: May 3rd, 2007

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 57%
Romney - 35%

Obama - 58%
Romney - 29%

Edwards - 64%
Romney - 27%

Clinton leads by 22%, Obama leads by 29%, Edwards leads by 37%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 49%
Giuliani - 46%

Obama - 50%
Giuliani - 43%

Edwards - 50%
Giuliani - 44%

Clinton leads by 3%, Obama leads by 7%, Edwards leads by 6%

Vs. John McCain

Clinton - 50%
McCain - 44%

Obama - 52%
McCain - 39%

Edwards - 52%
McCain - 42%

Clinton leads by 6%, Obama leads by 13%, Edwards leads by 10%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 10.33%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 16.33%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 17.66%

Survey USA - Series of state wide polls: May 2nd, 2007

Vs. Fred Thompson

Ohio

Clinton - 53%
Thompson - 38%

Obama - 43%
Thompson - 43%

Edwards - 57%
Thompson - 33%

Clinton leads by 15%, Obama is tied, Edwards leads by 24%

Iowa

Clinton - 46%
Thompson - 44%

Obama - 51%
Thompson - 41%

Edwards - 58%
Thompson - 35%

Clinton leads by 2%, Obama leads by 10%, Edwards leads by 23%

Missouri

Clinton - 49%
Thompson - 41%

Obama - 47%
Thompson - 41%

Edwards - 53%
Thompson - 32%

Clinton leads by 8%, Obama leads by 6%, Edwards leads by 21%

Virginia

Clinton - 43%
Thompson - 47%

Obama - 40%
Thompson - 46%

Edwards - 48%
Thompson - 38%

Clinton trails by 4%, Obama trails by 6%, Edwards leads by 10%

Kentucky

Clinton - 53%
Thompson - 40%

Obama - 42%
Thompson - 48%

Edwards - 56%
Thompson - 34%

Clinton leads by 13%, Obama trails by 6%, Edwards leads by 22%

Wisconsin

Clinton - 46%
Thompson - 43%

Obama - 45%
Thompson - 42%

Edwards - 50%
Thompson - 37%

Clinton leads by 3%, Obama leads by 3%, Edwards leads by 13%

Minnesota

Clinton - 53%
Thompson - 37%

Obama - 48%
Thompson - 40%

Edwards - 56%
Thompson - 32%

Clinton leads by 16%, Obama leads by 8%, Edwards leads by 24%

Alabama

Clinton - 44%
Thompson - 49%

Obama - 37%
Thompson - 53%

Edwards - 42%
Thompson - 44%

Clinton trails by 5%, Obama trails by 16%, Edwards leads by 2%

Texas

Clinton - 49%
Thompson - 43%

Obama - 42%
Thompson - 46%

Edwards - 49%
Thompson - 38%

Clinton leads by 6%, Obama trails by 4%, Edwards leads by 11%

Kansas

Clinton - 42%
Thompson - 49%

Obama - 46%
Thompson - 42%

Edwards - 50%
Thompson - 37%

Clinton trails by 7%, Obama leads by 4%, Edwards leads by 13%

New Mexico

Clinton - 51%
Thompson - 41%

Obama - 47%
Thompson - 40%

Edwards - 52%
Thompson - 34%

Clinton leads by 10%, Obama leads by 7%, Edwards leads by 18%

Oregon

Clinton - 48%
Thompson - 41%

Obama - 50%
Thompson - 36%

Edwards - 49%
Thompson - 34%

Clinton leads by 7%, Obama leads by 14%, Edwards leads by 15%

Washington

Clinton - 54%
Thompson - 37%

Obama - 53%
Thompson - 37%

Edwards - 57%
Thompson - 32%

Clinton leads by 17%, Obama leads by 16%, Edwards leads by 25%

California

Clinton - 57%
Thompson - 36%

Obama - 53%
Thompson - 36%

Edwards - 54%
Thompson - 31%

Clinton leads by 21%, Obama leads by 17%, Edwards leads by 23%

New York

Clinton - 64%
Thompson - 30%

Obama - 50%
Thompson - 38%

Edwards - 59%
Thompson - 29%

Clinton leads by 34%, Obama leads by 12%, Edwards leads by 30%

Massachusetts

Clinton - 60%
Thompson - 31%

Obama - 48%
Thompson - 37%

Edwards - 61%
Thompson - 25%

Clinton leads by 29%, Obama leads by 11%, Edwards leads by 36%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Ohio

Clinton - 48%
Giuliani - 45%

Obama - 40%
Giuliani - 51%

Edwards - 50%
Giuliani - 42%

Clinton leads by 3%, Obama trails by 11%, Edwards leads by 8%

Iowa

Clinton - 45%
Giuliani - 48%

Obama - 49%
Giuliani - 44%

Edwards - 54%
Giuliani - 40%

Clinton trails by 3%, Obama leads by 5%, Edwards leads by 14%

Missouri

Clinton - 45%
Giuliani - 48%

Obama - 42%
Giuliani - 50%

Edwards - 48%
Giuliani - 43%

Clinton trails by 3%, Obama trails by 3%, Edwards leads by 5%

Virginia

Clinton - 44%
Giuliani - 49%

Obama - 38%
Giuliani - 53%

Edwards - 45%
Giuliani - 45%

Clinton trails by 5%, Obama trails by 15%, Edwards is tied

Kentucky

Clinton - 46%
Giuliani - 48%

Obama - 38%
Giuliani - 54%

Edwards - 47%
Giuliani - 44%

Clinton trails by 2%, Obama trails by 16%, Edwards leads by 3%

Wisconsin

Clinton - 44%
Giuliani - 45%

Obama - 43%
Giuliani - 45%

Edwards - 49%
Giuliani - 39%

Clinton trails by 1%, Obama trails by 2%, Edwards leads by 10%

Minnesota

Clinton - 48%
Giuliani - 45%

Obama - 43%
Giuliani - 49%

Edwards - 49%
Giuliani - 41%

Clinton leads by 3%, Obama trails by 6%, Edwards leads by 8%


WNBC/Marist - National: May 1st, 2007

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 48%
Giuliani - 43%

Obama - 41%
Giuliani - 43%

Edwards - 49%
Giuliani - 43%

Clinton leads by 5%, Obama trails by 2%, Edwards leads by 6%

Vs. John McCain

Clinton - 47%
McCain - 42%

Obama - 39%
McCain - 46%

Edwards - 49%
McCain - 39%

Clinton leads by 5%, Obama leads by 7%, Edwards leads by 10%

Rasmussen - National: April 2007

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 50%
Romney - 41%

Obama - 51%
Romney - 36%

Edwards - 55%
Romney - 29%

Clinton leads by 9%, Obama leads by 15%, Edwards leads by 26%

Vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 47%
Thompson - 44%

Obama - 49%
Thompson - 42%

Edwards - 53%
Thompson - 32%

Clinton leads by 3%, Obama leads by 7%, Edwards leads by 20%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 45%
Giuliani - 45%

Obama - 43%
Giuliani - 44%

Edwards - 49%
Giuliani - 43%

Clinton is tied, Giuliani trails by 1%, Edwards leads by 6%

Vs. John McCain

Clinton - 44%
McCain - 48%

Obama - 48%
McCain - 42%

Edwards - 47%
McCain - 38%

Clinton trails by 4%, Obama leads by 6%, Edwards leads by 9%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 2.00%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 6.75%
Edwards leads the Republican by an average of 15.25%

Newsweek - National: March 1st, 2007

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 53%
Romney - 38%

Obama - 54%
Romney - 34%

Edwards - 58%
Romney - 30%

Clinton leads by 15%, Obama leads by 10%, Edwards leads by 28%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 46%
Giuliani - 47%

Obama - 43%
Giuliani - 48%

Edwards - 45%
Giuliani - 47%

Clinton trails by 1%, Obama trails by 5%, Edward trails by 2%

Vs. John McCain

Clinton - 47%
McCain - 46%

Obama - 45%
McCain - 43%

Edwards - 48%
McCain - 43%

Clinton leads by 1%, Obama leads by 2%, Edwards leads by 5%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 5.00%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 2.33%
Edwards leads the Republicans by ab average of 10.33%

Newsweek - National: January 18th, 2007

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 47%
Giuliani - 48%

Obama - 47%
Giuliani - 45%

Edwards - 48%
Giuliani - 45%

Clinton trails by 1%, Obama leads by 2%, Edwards leads by 3%

Vs. John McCain

Clinton - 48%
McCain - 47%

Obama - 46%
McCain - 44%

Edwards - 48%
McCain - 43%

Clinton leads by 1%, Obama leads by 2%, Edwards leads by 5%


Ohio House Chief of Staff (R): Edwards Has the Best Chance of Winning Ohio in a General Election. During June 2007 interview, Scott Borgemenke, chief of staff for the Republican-controlled Ohio House of Representatives, predicted that Edwards was the Democratic presidential candidate most likely to carry Ohio in a general election. "I think if John Edwards wins Iowa and gets some steam and ends up being the candidate, Ohio could go with an Edwards type of Democrat, or an Edwards-looking Democrat, meaning he looks like every other Ohioan," Borgemenke said. "I think Ohio is very much in play for the Republicans if Hillary or Obama is the candidate." [OhioPols.com, Borgemenke Interview, 6/8/07]

Democratic Strategist: Edwards Can Win Virginia ; Clinton Can't. In September 2007, a Democratic strategist told National Review columnist Jim Geraghty, "Edwards would win Virginia straight up, but with Hillary, even Mark Warner revving everybody up couldn't help her." [National Review Online, Jim Geraghty Column, 9/20/07]

Edwards Has Received Strong Support from Members of Congress from Red States and Rural Areas. Senator Edwards has been endorsed by 15 members of Congress, many of whom hail from so-called "red states" or rural districts. His congressional supporters include every Democratic member of the North Carolina congressional delegation, as well as Reps. Raul Grijalza of Arizona , Charlie Gonzales and Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas , Jim Oberstar of Minnesota , David Obey of Wisconsin , Bart Stupak of Michigan and Stephanie Herseth Sandlin of South Dakota . [The Hill, Congressional Endorsements ]

Former Georgia Governor Roy Barnes: "John Edwards Is the Best Positioned to Win All Across the Country—Not Just Part of It." In March 2007, former Georgia Governor Roy Barnes endorsed Edwards. "I proudly support John Edwards for President of the United States ," said Barnes. "He will fight to improve the lives of every American. He has detailed plans and bold ideas to change America . And John Edwards is the best positioned to win all across the country—not just part of it." [John Edwards for President Press Release, 3/23/07]

Former Kentucky US Rep. Ken Lucas: Edwards "Understands the South." In March 2007, former Kentucky Representative Ken Lucas endorsed Edwards. "John Edwards not only understands the South, but he will be a president we can trust and who will put our country back on track," Lucas said. [John Edwards for President Press Release, 3/30/07]

Former Georgia Lt. Governor Mark Taylor: John Edwards "Is Definitely the Most Electable Candidate." In June 2007, former Georgia Lieutenant Governor Mark Taylor endorsed Edwards. " John Edwards was my candidate in 2004 and I am endorsing him again in 2008," Taylor said. "He is definitely the most electable candidate in 2008 and we need a southerner who is committed to providing good paying jobs with benefits for all Americans." [John Edwards for President Press Release, 6/5/07]

Former Texas US Rep. Chris Bell: "We Need a Candidate Who Can Fight and Win Everywhere in the Country, Including Here in Texas ." In March 2007, former Texas Representative Chris Bell endorsed Edwards. "If we want to take back the White House, we need a candidate who can fight and win everywhere in the country, including here in Texas ," Bell said. "I am convinced that nobody will work harder for the values that Texas Democrats believe in, especially by fighting every day for people who work for a living." [John Edwards for President Press Release, 3/8/07]

Texas Rep. Charlie Gonzales: Edwards is "the Strongest Candidate We Can Nominate for President in 2008." In March 2007, Texas Representative Charlie Gonzales endorsed Edwards. "I am convinced that John Edwards is both the strongest candidate we can nominate for President in 2008, and also the candidate who will fight hardest to implement an agenda that will improve the lives of the citizens in my district, and in the nation," Gonzales said. [John Edwards for President Press Release, 3/7/07]

Los Angeles Times: In the West, "Party Officials Across the Region Are Increasingly Anxious That Their Congressional Candidates May Get Dragged Under by Hillary Rodham Clinton's Presidential Campaign." In September 2007, the Los Anegles Times reported, "Despite recent gains by Democrats in the Rocky Mountain West, party officials across the region are increasingly anxious that their congressional candidates may get dragged under by Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential campaign." [Los Angeles Times, 9/30/07]

Polls Show Clinton Is the Most Unpopular Democratic Presidential Candidate. According to the Los Angeles Times, "The New York senator and Democratic front-runner was by a wide margin the most unpopular of 13 potential presidential candidates in Montana , according to a June survey by Mason-Dixon Polling & Research for the Billings Gazette … Recent polls in Colorado , Nevada and Arizona have found similar distaste for Clinton ." [Los Angeles Times, 9/30/07]

Arizona Poll: One Third of Independents Would Not Vote for Clinton. According to the Los Angeles Times, "In Arizona, where Democrats hope to pick up at least one congressional seat next year, 37% of the respondents in a recent Cronkite/Eight Poll said they would never vote for Clinton ; 3% said they would never vote for Obama. Opposition to Clinton was strongest among Republicans, but a third of independents, who were crucial to many Democratic congressional victories in 2006, said they would never vote for the former first lady. Clinton 's unfavorable ratings also far outpaced other Democratic candidates in recent polls in Nevada and Colorado , two states where Democrats hope to make gains next year." [Los Angeles Times, 9/30/07 ]

Colorado Pollster: Clinton Is "Carrying Huge Negatives Out Here;" Expects Udall to Distance Himself from Clinton if She Is the Nominee. According to the Los Angeles Times , "Floyd Ciruli, an independent Colorado pollster who said Democratic congressional candidates would have to highlight their differences with the national party to be successful next year." "She's carrying huge negatives out here," he said. "It's that liberal East Coast image that is so hard to sell in the West." The Times also noted, "Ciruli and others familiar with Colorado politics expect Rep. Mark Udall, the leading Democratic contender for the state's open Senate seat, to distance himself from Clinton , if she wins the nomination." [Los Angeles Times, 9/30/07]

Democratic Strategist: Clinton Is "a Disaster for Western Democrats … It Keeps Me Up at Night." According to the Los Angeles Times, "One key advisor to a prominent Democratic congressional candidate, who asked not be to identified discussing tensions within the party, went even further. 'It's a disaster for Western Democrats,' he said. 'It keeps me up at night.'" [Los Angeles Times, 9/30/07]

Democratic Strategist: Clinton Will Drag Down Democrats in Republican Areas. In September 2007, a Democratic strategist told National Review columnist Jim Geraghty, "I'd say outside of Arkansas , any marginal southern races are gone [for Democrats] if Hillary's the nominee." The strategist then cited numerous examples of places where Democratic incumbents would suffer with Senator Clinton at the top of the ticket. [National Review Online, Jim Geraghty Column, 9/20/07]

Georgia: According to a Democratic strategist. "[Rep. Jim Marshall] is in a district where Bush carried 60 percent; if Hillary's the nominee, he's toast ... For [Rep. John] Barrow's district, it was a little closer (Bush carried 50.4 percent). But it's a race Democrats will have to spend money on to keep. I mean, it's Georgia, man." [National Review Online , Jim Geraghty Column, 9/20/07 (emphasis in original)]

Texas: According to a Democratic strategist. "Lampson, [Tom Delay's old seat in TX-22], he'd be toast with Hillary as the candidate. Chet Edwards [TX-17] survived John Kerry, but I'm not sure he can survive Hillary if he gets a serious opponent. It's Bush's home district [for his Crawford ranch]. It's a tough thing even for a Ciro Rodriguez [TX-23]." [National Review Online, Jim Geraghty Column, 9/20/07]

Florida and Alabama : According to Geraghty, "Other southern targets include Alabama 's fifth district, and Tim Mahoney in Florida 's 16th District (Mark Foley's seat). 'That's going to be a tough one in any race, and with Hillary, I'm pretty sure we'll lose,' the strategist laments." [National Review Online, Jim Geraghty Column, 9/20/07]

South Dakota: According to a Democratic strategist. "[Senator Tim] Johnson, between the physical ailments and thin margin of victory last time, is going to have a tough time, and Hillary would just knock him out it." [National Review Online, Jim Geraghty Column, 9/20/07]

Louisiana: According to a Democratic strategist. "[Senator Mary] Landrieu is gonna have a fight no matter who nominee is, but I think Edwards is the only one who gives her a chance." [National Review Online, Jim Geraghty Column, 9/20/07]

Associated Press: Democrats Across the Country Worry that Senator Clinton Would Hurt Down-Ballot Candidates. In August 2007, the Associated Press reported, "Looking past the presidential nomination fight, Democratic leaders quietly fret that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton at the top of their 2008 ticket could hurt candidates at the bottom. They say the former first lady may be too polarizing for much of the country. She could jeopardize the party's standing with independent voters and give Republicans who otherwise might stay home on Election Day a reason to vote, they worry. In more than 40 interviews, Democratic candidates, consultants and party chairs from every region pointed to internal polls that give Clinton strikingly high unfavorable ratings in places with key congressional and state races." [Associated Press, 8/12/07 ]

Indiana State Representative: Clinton "Would Be a Drag" on Candidates in His State. According to the Associated Press, Indiana State Rep. David Crooks said of Clinton being the Democratic presidential nominee, "I'm not sure it would be fatal in Indiana , but she would be a drag" on down-ballot candidates. The report also said, "Crooks said Clinton would be a burden in districts like his full of 'gun-toting, bible-carrying, God-loving, church-attending' voters. 'She is just so polarizing,' the state lawmaker said. Clinton would drag any candidate down 3 or 4 percentage points, he said." [Associated Press, 8/12/07]

Midwest State Democratic Party Chairman: Clinton Would be a "Nightmare" for Down-Ballot Races. According to the Associated Press, "The chairman of a Midwest state party called Clinton a nightmare for congressional and state legislative candidates." [Associated Press, 8/12/07]

Western Democratic Congressman: Clinton "Most Likely to Cost Him His Seat." According to the Associated Press, "A Democratic congressman from the West, locked in a close re-election fight, said Clinton is the Democratic candidate most likely to cost him his seat." [Associated Press, 8/12/07]

Greenville, South Carolina , Party Chairman: Clinton Will Turn out Republicans to Vote Not Likely to Vote Otherwise. According to the Associated Press, "'The argument with Hillary right now in some of these red states is she's so damn unpopular,' said Andy Arnold, chairman of the Greenville, S.C., Democratic Party. 'I think Hillary is someone who could drive folks on the other side out to vote who otherwise wouldn't. Republicans are upset with their candidates ... but she will make up for that by essentially scaring folks to the polls.'" [Associated Press, 8/12/07]

West Virginia House Leader "Has Some Legitimate Reservations" About Clinton at the Top of the Ticket. According to the Associated Press, Carrie Webster, a West Virginia state House leader, said of having Senator Clinton at the top of the ticket, "I'm one of these Democrats who has some legitimate reservations, because the Clintons have in the past invigorated the Republican base." [Associated Press, 8/12/07]

Pollster John Anzalone: "For Edwards, He's a Southern Guy and There's a Comfort Level There." In May 2007, Alabama-based Democratic pollster John Anzalone explained Edwards' early fundraising advantage the South, saying, "For Edwards, he's a Southern guy and there's a comfort level there." He said that in the case of Senator Clinton and Mayor Giuliani, "it's kind of like the Pace Picante Sauce commercial: They're from New York City ." [AP, 5/1/07]

Strategist Rick Dent: Many Southern Democrats "See Edwards as the True Southerner and the One Who Can Win." In May 2007, Atlanta-based Democratic strategist Rick Dent said Edwards' "strong support illustrates that many Southern Democratic leaders would prefer to see Edwards atop the party ticket. 'They see Edwards as the true Southerner and the one who can win,' said Dent." [AP, 5/1/07]

OneCorps Online - Join Today

OneCorps Online: Weaving the Tapestry of the Fifty State Strategy via Online Community Building

"We all participate in weaving the social fabric; we should therefore all participate in patching the fabric when it develops holes--mismatches between old expectations and current realities." - A. Weisberg.

The Grassroots Edwards Chat Room founded OneCorps Online to connect Edwards supporters around the globe. The profile of OneCorps Online was developed to represent our mission and our goals as well as the tasks we are accomplishing while we work to bring our nation together in support of John Edwards for President.

This is our profile: "We are a friendly and dedicated group of John Edwards for President supporters from around the globe, organized via a Grassroots Edwards Chat Room . We coordinate online and community activities, including discussion forums about planks of JRE's platform, strategizing grassroots and netroots outreach through letter writing activism and blogging, creating hand-outs for "flyering" and "tabling" in your local community OneCorps chapters, as well as providing a forum for OneCorps chapters from every state to meet virtually. The forum is an innovative setting for an information database and communication hub for OneCorps chapters nationwide, putting the "50-state campaign strategy" into action. Longtime supporters, newcomers and seekers are all welcome to join OneCorps Online. GO JRE!"

Please join -- http://blog.johnedwards.com/chapter/1542 To find our chapter on the OneCorps page, you may also search using the zip code 20500.

Our chapter will conduct e-meetings in the Grassroots JRE Chatroom at this link: http://www.blucentury.com/chat/. Our agenda includes a 'mythbusting' team to research and combat the propaganda spread by JRE's swiftboaters. We have helpful voter education candidate comparisons, and offer assistance in creating resources for canvassing and tabling - to demonstrate the superiority of Edwards' platform and his electability. Persuasive and enlightening JRE information will continue to be compiled and saved by subject in OCOmotion: a blog 'library' available for members to access and utilize in campaign efforts. Chapter members participate in letter-writing campaigns to the main stream media as well as efforts to persuade influential endorsements. Events also include "Debate Watching ChatHome Parties", "Virtual House Parties for Change" and action alerts to online response teams to respond to media pieces about Edwards.

To build a stronger chapter and knit the social fabric of this movement, we need YOU to join and contribute your strengths. If you are curious and want to know more, or if you have any questions, please visit the Grassroots JRE Chatroom at http://www.blucentury.com/chat/

How Green Is Your Candidate? - Updated

Grist Magazine has updated it's "How Green Is Your Candidate?" section. It's very useful for comparing the candidates. Click here to check it out.

Here's a preview of what they say about Senator Edwards...

John Edwards is running left. What mixture of genuine sentiment and political calculation is behind that strategy only he knows, but it's translated into far and away the strongest, most comprehensive climate and energy plan among the three Democratic front-runners. He's stumping for 80 percent cuts in greenhouse-gas emissions by 2050, and fleshing that goal out with detailed proposals for big boosts in renewables and fuel efficiency, changes to the energy grid and efficiency standards (the only front-runner to emphasize these), a green-jobs program, and more. On these issues, Edwards has done his homework and he's not trimming his sails

Two Essays

This first essay was posted on the front page of MyDD as part of a series of essays written by supporters of different presidential candidates. I think that "desmoinesdem" did an outstanding job. I consider this a must read.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/8/14/141110/755

Why I Support John Edwards by "desmoinesdem"

Tuesday Aug 14, 2007

Listening to John Edwards speak outside his Des Moines campaign headquarters yesterday, I was as proud as ever to support his candidacy. My reasons for supporting Edwards are too numerous to discuss in one diary, but I want to introduce myself and tell part of that story.I am a 38-year-old mother of two young boys, living in an older suburb of Des Moines. I grew up here, left Iowa for college, grad school and work, and returned in 2002 when my husband and I were ready to start a family. I've been a Democrat my whole life and been interested in politics since I was a kid. I was proud to fly back to Iowa my freshman year of college to caucus for Paul Simon.

Deciding which candidate to support in a Democratic primary is rarely simple for me. I am not looking for one overriding quality (best policy plans, most reliably progressive, most experienced, best temperament for the job, best ability to communicate, most electable), but for the candidate who has the best combination of these qualities.I saw most of the Democratic field speak in Iowa more than once in 2002 and 2003. My initial leanings were toward Florida Senator Bob Graham. What he lacked in the charisma/communication department I thought he made up for in other areas. I still think he would have been a good general-election candidate and president. When he failed to catch fire and dropped out of the race early, it took a while for me to decide. I had ruled out Dean earlier in the year. John Edwards was the best speaker in the field and connected well with audiences. However, I ended up in the John Kerry camp in large part because of his lengthy background (outstanding record on environmental and other progressive issues, Senate Foreign Affairs Committee service).

The Edwards campaign of 2003 was touching on a lot of important themes, but I didn't see enough specific proposals about how to address the big problems facing the country.As I witnessed the tidal wave of momentum toward Edwards in the final weeks before the Iowa caucuses, I noticed a few things. First, when people saw Edwards in person, he was often able to seal the deal, even if people had been leaning toward a different candidate earlier. Second, he seemed to do especially well with suburbanites in their 30s and 40s (a critical swing group). Third, my friends in the sustainable agriculture community told me that he was making the best connection by far with people in the smaller towns and rural areas.Kerry held on to win Iowa and the nomination. I don't think he ran as bad a campaign as people say he did (and I still think he won Ohio), but no one can deny that his communication problems, and his identity as a northeast liberal, hurt us badly, especially in down-ticket races in much of the country.Going into this election cycle, I had no idea who I would support for president. I went to hear a lot of the candidates when they came to central Iowa in 2006. When I saw Edwards a couple of times, the way he talked about economic and labor issues caught my attention.

I wrote diaries about those speeches here and here.

This diary by RDemocrat lays out a strong case for why Edwards is the best candidate to strengthen organized labor in this country.

Academics who study voting behavior have repeatedly shown that belonging to a labor union both makes people more likely to vote and more likely to vote for Democrats.But those weren't the only things that impressed me when Edwards talked about the disparity between how we tax work and wealth, and the need to strengthen labor unions in this country. He used simple but powerful language. In a different context, I thought jsamuel did a great job articulating Edwards' ability to talk about issues in accessible language:John Edwards is capable of not only turning progressive ideals into wonderful realistic plans, but he is also capable of advocating for them so that they become mainstream.Since I decided to support Edwards late last year, he has shown repeatedly that he has outstanding ideas to offer voters, such as: A detailed, universal health care plan, which has been praised by many who follow this issueclosely (including Ezra Klein and Paul Krugman).An ambitious energy plan, analyzed well here by BruceMcF.

He has not just committed to decrease CO2 emissions, he has committed to concrete proposals and is not afraid to say no more subsidies for coal, and no new coal-fired power plants (even when speaking in Marshalltown, Iowa, the site of a proposed new coal-fired power plant).

A detailed proposal to reform the tax system, which would have particular benefits for working people, as RDemocrat has shown.

A commitment to take on abusive lenders, a growing problem.

And of course, a 30-year plan for ending poverty.Several of Edwards' proposals address issues that particularly important for Democrats as we try to win over swing demographics:

His rural recovery plan addresses the biggest problems affecting those who live in rural or small-town America. In this context, I recommend ManfromMiddletown's excellent diary on electability, complete with lots of maps that show how a candidate who connects well in rural areas puts many more states into play for Democrats.

Edwards' balanced approach to trade is good policy and good politics, which will help in the midwestern swing states.

He has taken a strong stand on food safety and country-of-origin labeling, one of those no-brainers that Congress can't manage to get done because of the undue influence of certain industries. I believe this issue will become more salient, especially with parents of young children.

I have confidence in Edwards' ability to make the case for these policies with the general public as well as with Democrats.I will write more about Edwards' campaign in Iowa in future posts. For now, I'll just say that as a volunteer precinct captain, I am happy with the resources Edwards has invested in building up an organization here. His focus on substantive, progressive policies is well-suited to the Iowa caucus-goer. His campaign events have been balanced geographically, hitting counties where he did very well in 2004 as well as counties where he will need to improve his showing considerably.

The events have been managed well; yesterday, as I waited with many others in the 90-degree heat to kick off Edwards' bus tour of Iowa, campaign staff repeatedly wandered through the crowd offering cool, bottled water. Those details matter. For more on the first day of the bus tour, see diaries by cosbo and by NCDemAmy (both with video).

Thanks to all who are reading, to Jerome for the invitation to advocate on Edwards' behalf. I look forward to everyone's diaries in this series.

_______________________________________________

The following is an essay I wrote a few months ago. Though it is slightly outdated I think it makes some important points.

Here is the link to view the essay on MyDD http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/6/10/165415/060

Note: The group mentioned in the essay, "Team Edwards" is now a part of Edwards Supporter Central. To recieve updates from Edwards Supporter Central just e-mail us at EdwardsSupporterCentral@gmail.com

Why John Edwards (Part 1)

My name is Michael Conrad. I am a General Director with Team Edwards, a coalition of supporters working together to nominate and elect John Edwards. I am writing this for two reasons. One is to introduce Team Edwards to other supporters of John Edwards. The second, and far more important reason, is to lay out a few reasons for supporting John Edwards that I feel have been overlooked. There many reasons to support John Edwards. Instead of listing all of them here I think it would be best if I did this in a series. Consider this the first part.

For the first time in a long time the Democrat who best represents our values is also the most electable. That is just one of the reasons why I feel it is so important for the progressive movement to come together and support John Edwards' campaign. This diary would be far too long if I went into detail about all the reasons to support John Edwards, but after the jump I'll list some of the things he has done that make it clear that he is the bold progressive leader that both our party and our country desperately needs. If you dispute the point that John Edwards is the most electable Democrat I would like for you to check out the latest post on our blog. If you are already a John Edwards supporter you will be able to find information that will help you when engaging fellow Democrats about supporting John Edwards.

So why John Edwards?

Like I said before, he is the Democrat who best represents our values and is also the most electable Democrat in the race. For far too long we have had to weigh our desire to see our convictions represented in our candidate against our need to win. Finally we can throw that scale away.

John Edwards is the best communicator of progressive values. He does not need to tear down the party in a pathetic attempt to build himself up. Whether by enforcing myths about fighting terrorism, taxes, or trade, every other major Democratic candidate (Senator Clinton, Senator Obama, and Governor Richardson) have at one time in this campaign thrown the party under a bus when it suited the image that they wanted to project. When John Edwards criticizes our party he focuses on the need for our party to have more backbone and political courage. And he often does it to the face of Democratic leaders. The moment I knew that this was the campaign that I and many other progressive populists had been waiting for was when John Edwards told the DNC that now is the time to stop trying to reinvent the Democratic Party, now is the time to reclaim the Democratic Party.

At both of the recent debates it was clear to me that John Edwards is the best communicator in our party. I am obviously biased, but I am confident that if you watch the recent debate when it is replayed tonight on CNN you will see exactly what I am talking about.

We need to remember that the ability to communicate effectively is what gets people elected. I am clearly not a Ronald Reagan fan. He did terrible things to this country as well as others and shrugged it all of by stuffing his face with jelly beans. But he was able to communicate. And that is why, not some conservative fantasy that the country loved his policies, he won two elections by wide margins. Bill Clinton is a very effective communicator. While I am glad that President Clinton was in the oval office instead of a Republican I think that he squandered an opportunity to be a truly great president instead of just a good president. NAFTA, Ricky Ray Rector, his support for the huge amounts of money wasted on "Missile Defense", and his failure to act with regards to Rwanda are my reasons for not being the biggest fan on President Clinton. But, he was a very effective communicator and for this reason was, and still is, a very popular president.

Immediately after he learned that President Bush had won re-election Clinton was quoted as saying that Democrats need to remember to speak to people who are concerned about social issues. Personally, I believe that national security concerns (another issue that John Edwards has recently showed bold leadership on) was the main reason why Bush was re-elected. But Clinton is right about the need to speak to people who are concerned about these issues. Clinton also was right to point out that we should not change our positions on these issues, but we do need to address them. And no one speaks with more candor about social issues than John Edwards.

I would like to wrap up this diary by pointing out the need for a nominee who puts political courage ahead of political calculation. John Edwards has also run a very bold campaign and displayed the type of political courage that will be needed when a Democratic president attempts to make the end of the War in Iraq, Universal Health Care, Energy Independence, or any of the other things that are being focused on in the primaries a reality.

John Edwards' recent confrontation of the Bush doctrine of a "War on Terror" is a great example of this. Confronting one of the most widely used and effective political frames in recent memory was not an easy task but it was something that someone, for the long-term well being of both our party and our country, needed to do. What makes this decision even more important is how it was made. Edwards had a few seconds at the most to decide whether to raise his hand when the question about a "war on terror" was asked. Not only was he the only major candidate not to raise his hand, he did not stop there.

He showed progressive Democrats why engaging conservative myths is important, that it is possible, and how it can be done. Every counter-terrorism/national security expert that I have seen speak (usually on C-Span's "Book TV") has made it clear that the Bush administration has made us less safe, increased the number of terrorists, and fueled their hatred for us. As Edwards himself pointed out, we need to give those on the fence (and there are many) a hand to our side, not a shove to the other. Edwards confronted this conservative myth publicly and vigorously and he offered a substantive alternative to the Bush doctrine.

Leading On The Issues: Ending The War In Iraq

We all know where the candidates stood when the war started. But what have they tried to do to end it?

Kerry - Feingold Amendment (2006)
The Kerry - Feingold amendment was one of two amendments that that were voted in 2006. Kerry-Feingold set a timetable for withdrawal. The other amendment was Reed (RI) - Levin, which did not set a timetable for withdrawal. Clinton and Obama both voted no on Kerry-Feingold. When asked about this amendment and Reed-Levin, John Edwards said, "I support both amendments."

Clinton - Voted No.
Obama - Voted No.
Edwards - Supported.

Lieberman vs. Lamont Connecticut Senate Race (2006)
This was the a choice between a Conservative, Warmonger "Democrat", and a progressive Democrat who opposed the war.

Clinton - Endorsed Lieberman in the primary. Did not campaign for Lamont
Obama - Endorsed Lieberman in the primary. Did not campaign for Lamont.
Edwards - Did not endorse Lieberman in the primary. Was first major Democrat to campaign for Lamont.

The Gregg Amendment
This was seen by most as a pledge not to cut off funds to end the war in Iraq, no matter what.

Clinton - Voted yes.
Obama - Voted yes.

Cutting off Funds to Stop the Escalation of the War

Clinton - Stopped short of supporting it.
Obama- Stopped short of supporting it.
Edwards - Supported and vocally called for it.

Jim Webb's Iran legislation
This was the first attempt by Jim Webb to pass legislation that would be a roadblock to President Bush if he were to attempt to attack Iran.

Clinton- Not on the record.
Obama - Not on the record.
Edwards - Immediately released a statement supporting

Feingold - Reid (NV)

Clinton - Had to be prodded into supporting it.
Obama - Had to be prodded into supporting it.
Edwards - Supported it as a first step, but wanted to go further.

Capitulation Bill #1
This was the funding bill for the war that became known as the "capitulation" bill.

Clinton - Was silent about how she would vote until the vote. Was among the last to vote.
Obama - Was silent about how he would vote until the vote. Was among the last to vote.
Edwards - Clearly and repeatedly opposed the bill from the start.

Capitulation Bill #2
When reports surfaced that Senate Democrats were considering a compromise on another funding bill Edwards stepped up his already very vocal opposition to any timetable without withdrawal. He made "No timetable, funding. No excuses." a theme of his campaign. A few weeks later Obama said that he would also oppose a any bill without a timetable for withdrawal. Weeks later, Clinton also took that position.

Lieberman - Kyl
This was seen by many as something President Bush could someday use as the basis for one of his "Unitary executive"arguments that he had the authority to attack Iran. At the very least it was a significant step in the wrong direction.

Clinton - Voted Yes
Obama - Missed Vote
Edwards - Opposed

MoveOn.org Virtual Town Hall: Environment Poll

The second MoveOn.org "Virtual Town Hall" dealt with Envrionmental Action. Both global warming and energy independence were discussed. Here is a clip from MoveOn's press release

Edwards Wins Straw Poll on Climate Change
Print Ads to Run in NH and IA Next Week

Largest MoveOn Event Since 2004; Over 100,000 People Joined at 1,300 House Parties and Online to Watch Virtual Town Hall

Former Senator John Edwards won MoveOn.org Political Action’s poll on the climate crisis which asked, “Which candidate’s position on dealing with the climate crisis do you prefer?” Of the field of eight Democratic hopefuls, Edwards received 33% of the total votes cast–more than twice the support of the next two candidates, Rep. Kucinich and Senator Clinton, who each garnered 15.7%.

MoveOn member vote results:

John Edwards - 33.10%
Dennis Kucinich - 15.73%
Hillary Clinton - 15.71%
Barack Obama - 15.03%
Bill Richardson - 12.60%
Joe Biden - 3.06%
Chris Dodd - 3.01%
Mike Gravel - 1.78%

MoveOn will run print ads in newspapers in early primary states Iowa and New Hampshire next week, announcing the results of the straw poll on the climate crisis. Fundraising for the ads begins today.

“The enormous response we got from our members on this issue emphasizes how important it will be for our next president to make solving the climate crisis a top priority in 2008,” said Eli Pariser, Executive Director of MoveOn.org Political Action.

“MoveOn members want leaders who will take on the oil and coal industry and create a clean energy economy. That’s probably why Sen. Edwards’ support of cap and auction systems – which force polluters to pay citizens—and his call for more green collar jobs received such strong backing,” added Ilyse Hogue, Campaign Director of MoveOn.org Political Action.

The membership vote began immediately after the organization’s Saturday night Virtual Town Hall and concluded on Tuesday, at midnight PST. The Virtual Town Hall, at which, the candidates answered members’ questions about climate change and global warming, coincided with the Live Earth concerts around the world.

MoveOn members who watched the Town Hall at one of the parties voted differently from those who did not.

Votes by MoveOn members who attended house parties:

John Edwards - 25.53%
Bill Richardson - 20.19%
Dennis Kucinich - 17.55%
Hillary Clinton - 13.80%
Barack Obama - 10.18%
Joe Biden - 6.15%
Chris Dodd - 3.63%
Mike Gravel - 2.96%

MoveOn.org Virtual Town Hall: Iraq Poll

MoveOn.org is holding a series of "Virtual Town Halls" that allow the candidates a chance to answer questions from MoveOn members regarding the three key issues of the campaign. Each town hall is dedicated to a different issue. The three issues they are covering happen to be the three issues that John Edwards (who is most definitely shaping the debate) has focused his campaign on. The issues are...

Ending the War in Iraq
Universal Health Care
Environmental Action

The first town hall was about ending the war in Iraq.

This town hall was done differently from the second one. Members voted for the candidates that they wanted to see at the town hall and then the candidates answered via phone interviews.

The first number is the poll of all voters who took part in the poll. Because the videos were put on You Tube individually as the poll was open many of those who voted in the poll likely did not watch all of the candidate's videos. Nevertheless John Edwards did very well.

MoveOn (All voters)

Obama - 28%
Edwards - 25%
Kucinich - 17%
Richardson - 12%
Clinton - 11%
Biden - 6%
Dodd - 1%


A second poll was done just of those who actually attended the "Town Hall". This meant that they streamed the Town Hall on their computer as it aired. John Edwards won this poll.

MoveOn (Town Hall Viewers Only)

Edwards - 25%
Richarson - 21%
Obama - 19%
Kucinich - 16%
Biden - 10%
Clinton - 7%
Dodd - 4%

Feeling The Love From The Grassroots

Daily Kos (August)

Edwards - 34%

Obama - 29%

Clinton - 8%

Richardson - 7%

_

Daily Kos (July)

Edwards - 38%

Obama - 25%

Clinton - 8%

Richardson - 6%

_

Daily Kos (June)

Edwards - 40%

Obama - 22%

Clinton - 6%

Richardson - 5%

_

Daily Kos (May)

Edwards - 39%

Obama - 24%

Richardson - 8%

Clinton - 6%

_

Daily Kos (April)

Edwards - 42%

Obama - 25%

Richardson - 13%

Clinton - 3%
_

MyDD (April)

Edwards - 43%

Obama - 34%

Richardson - 8%

Clinton - 4%
_

Democrats.com

Edwards - 41%

Kucinich - 24%

Obama - 18%

Clinton - 9%

Richardson - 6%
_

Daily Kos (March)

Edwards - 38%

Obama - 26%

Richardson - 8%

Clinton - 2%

I am a Woman & I Choose Edwards by "sarahlane"

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/7/25/114228/247

This is an excellent diary that "sarahlane" posted on Daily Kos. It underlines the importance to nominate someone who will fight for ALL Americans no matter their gender, race, faith, economic status, or sexual orientation.

I am a Woman & I Choose Edwards

by sarahlane

Wed Jul 25, 2007 at 08:42:28 AM PDT

There has been lots of back and forth about remarks made by Elizabeth Edwards where she said she believes her husband is the best women's advocate in the race. She also addressed the perception that a woman should naturally vote for a woman candidate because they are a woman. I believe, as Elizabeth does, that it's not gender that matters most, but how much a candidate would affect women as a whole in America. All of candidates in the race have great record on women's issues. Hillary Clinton has a long history of fighting for equal pay, and both Hillary and Obama have done their fair share to help with reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies by way of education. The reality is, all of our candidates are pro-choice, are adamant about doing something to fight physical abuse of women, and want to make sure women get the same opportunities that men do. It's not a matter of which candidate is better than any other on women's issues, it's which candidate you think will affect the most women's lives if they are elected POTUS. Everybody has their opinion on the matter, and here's mine........

Now, for a little backtrack, let's look at Edwards record on women's issues when he represented North Carolina in the Senate. For some reason his advocacy for women's issues have gone largely unnoticed in the blogosphere. Yes, he got a 100% rating from NARAL and Planned Parenthood, and has been endorsed by Kate Michelman for POTUS, but that's just the icing on the cake. Even though Edwards was only in the Senate for one term, his positions on a woman's right to choose couldn't be more clear:

Woman's Right to Choose

Edwards is for a Federal Freedom of Choice Act, which would protect a woman's right to choose no matter if Roe is eventually overturned. He came out in favor of this publicly back in 2003.

Edwards opposes the Global Gag Rule, which Bush reinstated during his tenure, the gag rule would prevent an organization receiving federal or UN dollars if they perform abortions, or counsel people about abortions.

When Edwards had the chance to vote for or against AG nominees or SCOTUS nominees such as Priscilla Owen, John Ashcroft and Bill Pryor, he did. He also was a very vocal opponent against the nominations of Alito and Roberts after he had left the Senate.

When the Senate pulled a fast one of many politicians with the passage of the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, Edwards was not one of them. He knew that the passage of this act would put Roe V Wade into jeopardy, so he voted against it.

Back in October of 1999, Edwards voted to lift the ban on women having abortions on military bases. He also voted to allow military women overseas to have abortions.

Edwards also voted against restrictions for funding abortions for federal employees and other residents of DC. He also voted against a ban on partial birth abortion five times while in the Senate. So, now it's pretty obvious to you all where he has stood when it comes to choice. Let's review other legislation he sponsored and co-sponsored that would have helped women all across America...

Women in Trauma Act

In 2002, Edwards introduced this act which would have funded shelters all across America, and helped them improve mental health and substance abuse services for women who are affected by domestic or sexual violence.

Counseling in Shelters Act

Edwards introduced this act to provide federal funding to enable shelters and other `community-based` providers to hire mental health and substance abuse counselors to help victims.

Funding Breast Cancer Research

Edwards co-sponsored several bills to provide additional funding for breast cancer research and to promote awareness of the disease. Edwards also authored a bill to increase awareness of the link between periodontal disease in pregnant women and birth defects.

Supporting Equitable Coverage of Contraceptives

In 1999, and in 2001 Edwards co-sponsored two bills to require health insurance companies provide equitable coverage of contraceptives. When a bill finally hit the floor back in 2003, he voted to require insurance companies cover contraceptives.

What about equality in the workplace? Or, lending a helping hand to working families who have just had a baby? Or allowing women to choose their OBGYN as their primary care provider?

Paycheck Fairness Act

Edwards co-sponsored this act which would penalize employers for not giving women equal pay for equal work.

Family Leave Tax Credit

Edwards proposed a 2,500 tax credit for working families who have a baby but cannot afford to take off work. It would have helped 3.5 million families each year.

Patients Bill of Rights

Edwards co-sponsored this bill which would have forced the HMO's to pay up for the health care they're supposed to cover. Edwards also was an advocate for allowing women to choose their OBGYN as their primary care provider as well as providing inpatient care after any mastectomy, lumpectomy, or lymph node dissection.

There's plenty more bills he authored and co-sponsored that would have helped women, but what about his proposals today? How will Edwards become a champion for women? Right now, women make nearly .77 to every man's dollar. There are 18 million women who do not have health insurance. Women make up over 61% of the American workforce working for minimum wage. Who will best represent these women? IMO, it's a no-brainer, Edwards has the boldest policy proposals on the table that will directly affect millions of America women.

Ending Poverty for Women

Right now 21 million women live in poverty. Edwards has multiple proposals to help lift them out of poverty. His Stepping Stones Jobs Program will lift 1 million Americans each year out of unemployment and get them to work. Edwards has proposed raising the minimum wage to $9.50 by the year 2012, which will directly help millions of Americans who are suffering from low wages. Edwards is also a proponent of the card check, expanding the SEIU and other unions as well as creating new ones, and is wholeheartedly trying to reignite the labor movement in this country. Edwards has also proposed Work Bonds, which would match savings up to $500 a year for a low income worker. Lastly, and maybe most importantly his Universal Health Care Plan will be a welcome relief to single mom's who can't afford insurance, or even if they can afford it, it will be cheaper monthly and help them financially in a big way. Insurance is expensive, and if a single mom cannot afford to pay a dime, her insurance and her children's will be covered through subsidies.

Helping Women by way of Taxes

Edwards will also expand the EITC, and triple it for low income workers without children. Edwards will also reduce the marriage penalty for families struggling to make ends meet.

Reining in on Predatory Lending, Credit Card Co. & Mortgage Company Abuses

Women make up a large portion of the population who end up being victims of predatory lending, and all too often, they are elderly women on fixed incomes. These three industries need more regulation, and with Edwards that's exactly what you will get. Whether it's his proposal for a Home Rescue Fund to help women facing foreclosure, or enacting a national law against predatory lending or reinstating the 10 day grace period on credit card bills to give people relief from high late fees, he's got our back.

Protecting a Woman's Right to Choose

Here's a statement by Edwards on a woman's right to choose:

"I strongly support a woman's right to privacy & reproductive choices. It is essential to the full equality and dignity of women, and today it is under attack. I will guarantee this right."

Edwards is for a Federal Freedom of Choice Act which would ensure that a woman's right be protected no matter who gets elected to SCOTUS. This is a biggie for me, because we never know who can and will be elected to SCOTUS in the future, and Roe will always be threatened. This is a way to protect Roe from a conservative President and a conservative court.

Edwards opposes the Child Custody Protection Act, because it puts a woman's health in danger and burden's a woman's right to choose. Edwards opposes Gag Rules and Global Gag Rules that prevent organizations from getting funding if they perform abortions or counsel women about abortions. Edwards opposes a ban on partial birth abortion as well.

Preventing Unwanted Pregnancies

Edwards supports sex education for kids of the appropriate age, and Title X family planning services. He is for forcing insurance companies to cover contraceptives. He is also for improving access to emergency contraceptives.

The Supreme Court

Edwards will nominate judges who have demonstrated a commitment to full range of constitutional protections. This is also a biggie for me, I don't want the next Democratic President to nominate a moderate who could end up voting conservatively later in life.

Just briefly, here's a few more things that Edwards will do to help women:

Expand the Family and Medical Leave Act

Strongly Support the Paycheck Fairness Act

Expand Resources for Women Entrepreneurs through his REACH Fund

Edwards Pledges to Protect Davis Bacon Act

Edwards will create a Families Savings and Credit Commission to protect families

There are plenty more proposals on the table that will directly affect women, whether it's his College For Everyone Initiative which would help over 2 million students go to college, or his plans to create second chance schools for high school dropouts. I'm sure there are plenty of single moms out there who could use a helping hand sending their kid to college. Even though Edwards is incredibly strong on a woman's right to choose, that's not the biggest issue affecting women in our country. It's a sad fact that 50% of women headed households are renting and not owning their homes. It's a sad fact that 18 million women in America do not have health insurance, or that women only make 77 cents to every dollar a man makes. It shows that we need to do something about women living in poverty, we need to do something to equal the playing field, and we need to lend a helping hand to single mom's by providing Universal Health Care. That said, this is my reasoning for why Edwards is a great advocate for women in America. He will protect our rights, and will make sure to lift millions of American woman up out of poverty. That's why, as a woman I choose to support Edwards for President of the United States!

I'll leave you with a statement by Kate Michelman, the former head of NARAL....

"I believe in John's deep and profound commitment to the issues that matter most in women's lives. From health care, to Iraq, to poverty, to our environment, I know John is the most effective national messenger for the values we share and I have complete confidence that—with our help—he will win the White House and improve the lives of women everywhere."

The Heat Is On!

http://www.heatison.org/content/blank/candidate_chart

This is taken from the The League of Conservation Voters' chart that describes where the candidates currently stand.

CANDIDATE: Hillary Clinton
CARBON CAP AND TARGETS: Supports 80% reductions by 2050
FUEL EFFICIENCY: Supports 35 mpg fleetwide standard by 2020
RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY STANDARD: Supports 20% standard by 2020
EFFICIENCY TARGETS: Suppors 10% reduction in energy consumption by 2020
NEW COAL PLANTS AND LIQUID COAL: Supports investing in liquid coal if it reduces carbon pollution by 20%


CANDIDATE: Barack Obama
CARBON CAP AND TARGETS: Supports 80% reductions by 2050
FUEL EFFICIENCY: Supports 45 mpg standard by 2020
RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY STANDARD: Supports 20% standard by 2020
EFFICIENCY TARGETS: Supports 10% reduction in energy consumption by 2020
NEW COAL PLANTS AND LIQUID COAL: Supports investing in liquid coal if it reduces carbon pollution by 20%


CANDIDATE: John Edwards
CARBON CAP AND TARGETS: Supports at least 80% reductions by 2050
FUEL EFFICIENCY: Supports 40 mpg fleetwide standard by 2016
RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY STANDARD: Supports 25% standard by 2025%
EFFICIENCY TARGETS: Supports 15% decrease in electricity consumption by 2018
NEW COAL PLANTS AND LIQUID COAL: Supports ban on new coal plants unless they capture and store carbon emissions


CANDIDATE: Bill Richardson
CARBON CAP AND TARGETS: Supports 90% reductions by 2050
FUEL EFFICIENCY: Supports 50 mpg fleetwide standard
RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY STANDARD: Supports 30% standard by 2020 and 50% by 2050
EFFICIENCY TARGETS: Supports 20% increase in energy productivity by 2020
NEW COAL PLANTS AND LIQUID COAL: Opposes liquid coal. Supports ban on new coal plants unless they capture and store emissions


CANDIDATE: Joe Biden
CARBON CAP AND TARGETS: Supports 80% reductions by 2050
FUEL EFFICIENCY: Supports 40 mpg fleetwide standard by 2020
RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY STANDARD: Supports 20% standard by 2020
EFFICIENCY TARGETS: Supports 10% reduction in energy consumption by 2020
NEW COAL PLANTS AND LIQUID COAL: Opposes investment in liquid coal


CANDIDATE: Chris Dodd
CARBON CAP AND TARGETS: Supports 80% reductions by 2050
FUEL EFFICIENCY: Supports 50 mpg for cars by 2017
RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY STANDARD: Supports 20% standard by 2020
EFFICIENCY TARGETS: Supports 15% decrease in electricity consumption by 2018
NEW COAL PLANTS AND LIQUID COAL: New coal plants must capture and store carbon emissions

CANDIDATE: Dennis Kucinich
CARBON CAP AND TARGETS: Supports 80% reductions by 2050
FUEL EFFICIENCY: Supported 33 mpg in 2005
RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY STANDARD: Supports 20% standard by 2010
EFFICIENCY TARGETS: General support for efficiency; no target specified
NEW COAL PLANTS AND LIQUID COAL: No articulated position

Grist Magazine's How Green Is Your Candidate?

http://www.grist.org/news/maindish/2007/07/06/candidates/index.html

How Green Is Your Candidate? (Original Version)
Where the presidential candidates stand on climate and energy issues

By David Roberts
06 Jul 2007

All of the Democratic presidential candidates put energy independence and climate change among their top-tier issues. They all support carbon cap-and-trade systems of varying strengths. They all at least gesture at renewable energy and hybrid cars. Most support ethanol and "clean coal." The aggressiveness of their climate and energy plans rises inversely with their chances of winning -- the better the chances, the weaker the plan. Here's a quick and dirty rundown of some of the Democratic contenders' stances. These descriptions of candidates' positions are not and should not be perceived as endorsements. Grist does not endorse political candidates.

Hillary Clinton dutifully toes the Democratic line on climate change and energy independence, seeing the former as a way to reach young people and the latter as a way to sound tough. She's been somewhat vague on the details. Her distinctive contribution is the notion of a "Strategic Energy Fund" financed by repealed tax breaks and royalties from oil companies. Where she mentions specific solutions, she tends to focus on "clean coal" and ethanol. She signed on to the Sanders-Boxer climate bill, the most ambitious climate bill in the Senate, but only in May, after Edwards had endorsed bold emissions targets. On these issues, Clinton is studious and solid, but not out front.

Barack Obama's take on energy and climate is, well, Obaman: the rhetoric is soaring and high-minded, the policy proposals consensus-seeking and incremental. With the exception of showy gimmicks like his "Healthcare for Hybrids" bill, he's largely been a follower, signing on to multiple cap-and-trade bills and copping Schwarzenegger's low-carbon fuel standard. His main splash in the energy world happened when he came out cheerleading for liquified coal, which coal barons (especially in his home state of Illinois) loved but plenty of other folks hated; he later "clarified" his way back to safety. On these issues, Obama is largely platitudinous and reserved.

John Edwards is running left. What mixture of genuine sentiment and political calculation is behind that strategy only he and Elizabeth know, but it's translated into far and away the strongest, most comprehensive climate and energy plan among the three front-runners. He's stumping for 80 percent cuts in greenhouse-gas emissions by 2050, and fleshing that goal out with detailed proposals for a renewable portfolio standard, big boosts in fuel efficiency, changes to the energy grid and efficiency standards (the only front-runner to emphasize these), a green-jobs program, and more. On these issues, Edwards has done his homework and he's not trimming his sails.

Bill Richardson wants to be the "energy president" and the plan he's put forward is a humdinger. He wants to cut oil demand 50 percent by 2020, cut greenhouse-gas emissions 80 percent by 2040, and generate 50 percent of U.S. energy from renewables by 2040. Though he kisses ethanol butt in speeches like all the candidates, there's next to nothing about ethanol in his plan, nor about nuclear power (a subject with which he has a complicated history). At least on paper, his plan calls for straight-up renewables and efficiency, aggressively pursued. On these issues, Richardson has an appropriate sense of urgency.

Chris Dodd's climate and energy plan has largely been overlooked, much like, um, Chris Dodd. But if anything, it's more ambitious than even Richardson's. It's got similar aggressive targets, plus an item only Dodd has had the stones (or lack of anything to lose) to endorse: a corporate carbon tax. The revenue from the tax would be put in a fund devoted to renewables and efficiency. There's also a ban on new coal plants with no carbon sequestration (a bold plank he shares with Edwards), good stuff about public transit, hybrid cars, and green buildings, and much more. On these issues, Dodd is forward-thinking and aggressive.

Dennis Kucinich has long supported restructuring the electric power industry, and he backs instituting a 20-percent-by-2020 renewable portfolio standard. He would institute a Global Green Deal to share cheap renewable-energy technology with developing countries, cut off subsidies to dirty energy companies, vastly increase public investment in clean energy, and institute a Works Green Administration (modeled on FDR's WPA) that would put young people to work retrofitting buildings for wind, solar, and efficiency. Despite -- or perhaps because of -- these ambitious plans, he is not taken seriously as a viable presidential candidate by anyone but his core band of supporters, who take him very, very seriously indeed.

Joe Biden has a fairly reliable Democratic voting record on environmental issues, but hasn't shown much indication that climate and energy are animating passions. His tough talk on energy security manifests, for the most part, in lamentably enthusiastic support for biofuels. Like Clinton and Obama, he signed on to the Sanders-Boxer cap-and-trade bill when it became the safe thing to do. He also supports a new round of international negotiations on climate change. He's not an obstruction on climate and energy, but he's not particularly distinguished either.

The John Edwards "First and Often Only" List

1st candidate to respond to DFA (Democracy For America) with a clear plan for ending the war in Iraq.

1st candidate to respond to DFA with a clear, detailed plan for environmental action on issues like energy independence and global warming.

1st and only of the "big 3" candidates to publicly support the 2006 Kerry - Feingold amendment to set a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq. When asked about the amendemnt on ABC News' This Week Edwards said that he supported the amendment. Both Senator Obama and Senator Clinton voted against it.

1st and only of the "big 3" candidates to support stopping the escalation of the war in Iraq by cutting of the funding for the "surge". Both Senator Obama and Senator Clinton stopped short.

1st and only of the "big 3" candidates to make it clear from the outset where he stood on the recent vote on the recent Senate funding bill, also known as the "Capitulation Bill". Edwards made it clear from the start that he opposed any bill without timetables. Meanwhile Senators Obama and Clinton did not indicate which way they were going to vote. They engaged each other in a cheap game of "chicken" instead of showing leadership. In the end they were among the last to vote. Senator Obama voted first and the Senator Clinton, in typical fashion, followed.

1st major candidate to support Jim Webb's important Iran legislation.

Only one of the "big 3" who chose not to endorse Joe Lieberman in the 2006 Connecticut Senate primary.

1st major candidate to endorse and campaign for Ned Lamont against Joe Lieberman in the Connecticut Senate race. Edwards was also one of the first candidates to call for Lieberman to drop out of the race. Both John and Elizabeth Edwards said that because Lieberman had just run in the Democratic primary and lost to Lamont, Lieberman should honor the result of the primary.

Only major candidate to spend no money on polling in the first quarter of 2007.

1st and only major candidate to release a truly Universal Health Care plan.

1st candidate to release a comprehensive plan for Energy Independence / to combat Global Warming.

1st and only candidate to release a plan for Rural Recovery.

1st candidate to release a detailed and specific national security doctrine ("Smart Power") as well as a comprehensive plan specifically to stop terrorism (often referred to as "Cast Fear Aside").

1st candidate to say no to debate on FOX News. This happened not once but twice. Both times FOX news was scheduled to host a Democratic debate John Edwards was the first candidate to say no. He was also the only one to make it clear that he did so because FOX News is bias and he did not want to legitimize a Republican spin machine.

1st candidate to call for the resignation of Alberto Gonzales.

1st candidate to call for the resignation of Paul Wolfowitz.

1st candidate to accept the offer from the SEIU to work a union job for a day. He is also the only candidate to actually work the job of a union worker. The other candidates gave an interview to union workers.

1st candidate to appear on Meet the Press’ hour long interview series Meet the Candidate. Edwards has made it clear throughout the campaign that he wants every American to know where he stands on the issues and what he would do as president. While other candidates have shied away from hard questions Edwards has made it clear that he believes that it is his duty to answer them.

1st and only candidate to mention the passing of the late great Molly Ivins during his speech to the DNC's Winter Meeting. You cannot knock the other candidates for not mentioning her. They stick closely to their prepared remarks and just because they didn't mention her doesn't mean that they don't respect her. But in brining attention to her passing John Edwards displayed an important respect for powerful progressive voices.

1st and only candidate to lead a major effort to reform the Democratic party by encouraging Democrats running for office at all levels to reject money from DC lobbyists.