Latest NJ Poll: Clinton: 48%, Obama: 23%

Obama Election Spam (0.00 / 0)

I just started getting quite a LOT of election spam.  An incredible amount.  Now, don't get me wrong, I like Obama - I am hoping for him to VP next year.  What I DO NOT appreciate is the fact that John Kerry who has been spamming me since 2004, has now given over his entire email list to the Obama camp.  I am now getting email from the Obama campaign simply because I was on John Kerry's list from the last campaign when JOHN EDWARDS was also on the ticket.  

I lost a lot of respect for Mr. Kerry, when he refused to go after the Swift Boat liars and the record and cowardice of Dubya during the Vietnam era in the last election.  And that he did not IMMEDIATELY call to investigate the Ohio election travesty where he may have helped prevent Dubya from taking office 4 years ago.  Way to fight for us, sir.  I respect your years in the Senate, but I don't think you even know what it takes to be President when you give up so easily.  Now, you have taken MY email address and given it to the opponent of Mr. Edwards in the primary race - when I am registered to be a delegate candidate for EDWARDS.  I don't appreciate that kind of tactic.  Those lists are valuable and bloggers don't like information like that to be just traded like baseball cards among Democratic leaders.   It's bad enough, Hillary and Barack are stealing John Edwards message, but to steal his list of email contacts is pretty low.  

One Vote.  Yours.  It really does matter.

---

by: carolh @ Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 19:24:55 PM UTC

whose list was stolen? (0.00 / 0)

When someone endorses a candidate, it is very common for them to share lists.  Sometimes they will send an e-mail to their list, encouraging the people on the list to register with the endorsed candidate's campaign website.  Other times, they will just hand the list over to the endorsed candidate's campaign and let them do what they will with it.

Obviously, you would have preferred if Kerry had done the former instead of the latter, but it is John Kerry's decision to do what he wants to with his lists.

If you feel that because John Edwards was John Kerry's VP, he should have some say over what John Kerry does with that list, I guess that is fair, but unrealistic.  I would be curious to hear what other people think about an expectation like this.

If after Howard Dean left the 2004 race, you supported John Edwards against John Kerry, and as a result, John Kerry obtained your e-mail address from John Edwards, I think that you would probably have a stronger argument.

But even in that situation, there are no pre-nups in Presidential politics and after the campaign is over, there are no means, legal or otherwise, by which a Presidential candidate and a Vice-Presidential candidate can equitably divide the assets that they accumulated during the course of the campaign.

Thus, your only recourse is to follow the instructions on the Obama e-mails that you are receiving and unsubscribe from the list.  As far as Clinton and Obama stealing their messages from John Edwards goes, I would love to hear what Howard Dean thinks about that, since John Edwards has stolen most of Dean's 2004 campaign, including a large percentage of his supporters.

It is a shame that Dean is not in a position to tell us what he really thinks about John Edwards.  At the very least, it would help me determine once and for all if my belief that Edwards is the Democratic Party's Mitt Romney is correct or not.

It would also be interesting to know what John Edwards thinks about Howard Dean.  To the best of my knowledge, the only times that he has mentioned Dean is negatively to show how a front-runner's lead can disappear very quickly.

What I would love to know is whether or not John Edwards would ask Howard Dean to continue to serve as DNC Chair for at least another four years if Edwards wins the Democratic nomination and the Presidency.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 19:47:04 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I find it (0.00 / 0)

disappointing that John Kerry is using email addresses gained four years ago in the Presidential General election against his own former running mate.  Fair would be sharing that list with Edwards.  

One Vote.  Yours.  It really does matter.

---

by: carolh @ Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 20:16:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Dean as Chair (0.00 / 0)

FYI - at an event in New Jersey a few months back, Edwards was asked that very question - i.e., would he ask Dean to continue to serve as DNC Chair - and Edwards said immediately and without hesitation, emphatically YES.

---

by: Jeff Gardner @ Mon Jan 14, 2008 at 00:48:29 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Correction (0.00 / 0)

What appears to be mail from Obama's camp was actually sent from the John Kerry site.  

Forgive me for overreacting. Kerry didn't give away the list - just sent out mail FOR the Obama campaign.  However, I am an Edwards supporter who is already miffed about the complete lack of fairness in covering the race, because as Randi Rhodes put it - the mainstream media only covers candidates with enough cash to buy lots and lots of ads from them.  The MSM thought this was two person race from day one, because TO THEM it was.  99% of the electorate has not had their say, so the "stick a fork in him - he's done!" reports about Edwards by the MSM which remind me of the reports counting Hillary out are more than a wee bit premature.  

I am just asking John Kerry don't use my email address to send me campaign spam anymore.  Keep me up to date on what Dubya is up to, or what is going on in the Senate, but don't spam me.

One Vote.  Yours.  It really does matter.

---

by: carolh @ Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 20:28:48 PM UTC

You do have the right to unsubscribe from any list you don't want to be on. n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 21:05:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

also, (0.00 / 1)

overreacting can lead to things like calling me a "curmudgeon" which others have tried to beat me over the head with.  This has occurred even after you retracted the comment.  Nick, for instance, has used it repeatedly.

It would be good for you and the rest of the community to pause before firing.  Firing before aiming can lead to collateral damage or even shooting oneself in the foot.  :-)

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 21:09:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

"Firing before aiming can lead to collateral damage or even shooting oneself in the foot. :-)" n/t (0.00 / 0)

Nick, for instance, has used it repeatedly.

I had no recollection of ever having used the term, as alleged, at all, let alone "repeatedly".

Just to be sure; I did a search, using the term "curmudgeon" on the site's search engine and only 15 uses turned up; none from me.  The results follow...

1)    curmudgeon  by - rachael'sdad
Posted on: Thu Nov 22, 2007 at 23:15:19 PM CST
2) This isn't a curmudgeon comment??? :-) n/t by - Creed Pogue
Posted on: Wed Nov 28, 2007 at 22:53:14 PM CST
3) don't be so sure! :-D by - Creed Pogue
Posted on: Thu Nov 15, 2007 at 11:29:01 AM CST
4) Refresh My Memory by - Creed Pogue
Posted on: Thu Nov 29, 2007 at 13:24:49 PM CST
5) Libertarian by - Creed Pogue
Posted on: Sun Dec 02, 2007 at 23:04:00 PM CST
6) thanks, curmudgeon by - Anzana
Posted on: Sun Jan 01, 2006 at 09:43:49 AM CST
7) Voter verification in Warren County by - Mike Sedita
Posted on: Tue Jun 05, 2007 at 10:16:46 AM CDT
8) also, by - Creed Pogue
Posted on: Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 15:09:47 PM CST
9) Nick by - carolh
Posted on: Sun Nov 11, 2007 at 11:55:43 AM CST
10) A Strange Bird, Ol' Paul by - Tandalayo Scheisskopf
Posted on: Mon Nov 14, 2005 at 21:13:04 PM CST
11) curmudgeon by - rachael'sdad
Posted on: Mon Nov 26, 2007 at 06:40:20 AM CST
12) Carol is hardly a curmudgeon by - rachael'sdad
Posted on: Mon Nov 12, 2007 at 07:30:41 AM CST
13) Michael Scott Award Winner: Bertin Lefkovic??? ;-) by - Creed Pogue
Posted on: Mon Nov 26, 2007 at 09:27:49 AM CST
14) fuzzy math redux by - rachael'sdad
Posted on: Thu Nov 15, 2007 at 11:14:17 AM CST
15) Wow by - Creed Pogue
Posted on: Tue Dec 11, 2007 at 07:23:56 AM CST

'Nuff said.

---

by: Nick Lento @ Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 21:52:10 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Rhodes is right, but... (0.00 / 0)

...there is more to it than that.  

John Edwards chose to spend as much of his campaign time and other resources that he did solely on winning the Iowa caucus, knowing that it would give him the earned media that he needed to follow that up with a victory in South Carolina and possibly New Hampshire and Nevada as well.

While he was doing that, Clinton and Obama were splitting much more of their time between these early states as well as many, if not most of the February 5 states and probably some others as well.

They have been running national campaigns and have received the coverage that national candidates deserved.  Supporters of John Edwards did not have much sympathy for other candidates in the race who weren't as capable as he was at raising the millions that he was able to raise back then.

Nor did they think that the significantly greater coverage that his campaign received back then compared to others in the race were unfair.  So why complain now?

There are a lot of reasons why the MSM doesn't cover the Edwards campaign to the same degree as the Clinton and Obama campaigns and one of them is money, but that is just one of them.

John Edwards and other second-tier candidates put all of their chips on Iowa, hoping to win big and parlay that win into other victories.  When my preferred candidate, Joe Biden, and Chris Dodd lost big in Iowa and my second choice, Bill Richardson, lost  big in NH, they had the good sense to get out of the race and allow the voters to focus on the two serious candidates that remained.

Yes, Edwards did finish in 2nd place, ahead of Hillary Clinton, but all of his money was bet to win, not show.  Had he pulled off another 2nd place in New Hampshire instead of finishing a distant third with half as many votes as either Clinton or Obama, that should have been enough to tell him that his time to leave the race had come.

But of course, it wasn't, and as long as he continues to get 15-20% of the vote and neither Clinton nor Obama crack 50%, then Edwards is going to continue to run, thinking that the 15-20% of delegates that he claims will be enough to make him a kingmaker in Denver.

But that is a bad bet.  At some point going forward, either Clinton or Obama (most likely Clinton) will build up enough momentum to win the nomination without any help from Edwards and his delegates will be irrelevant.  I am sure that they will have a lot of fun in Denver, but they won't play any role in determining the Democratic Party's nominee.

The better bet for Edwards and his supporters is to drop out and unify progressives behind Barack Obama, the one candidate who Edwards claims shares his values.

But because Edwards is more driven by his ego than his values, that is not going to happen.  The main reason that the MSM is not covering the Edwards campaign is that it has ceased to be relevant.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 21:26:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]