http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070815/ap_o n_el_pr/edwards_nevada_1;_ylt=AkFwfDmQa7 GZjLCazCc69S0b.3QA

The AP is reporting that John Edwards is moving some staff out of Nevada, choosing to concentrate on the early constests of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.  

Those involved haven't reported an exact number, but are saying a handful.

I find this surprising from the Edwards camp, given the large Union base of Nevada, a group figured to be big Edwards supporters given his economic populist messages and staunchly Pro-Union message.  Exactly HOW many he pulls out will be very telling, but until we get a number, I see several possible reasons behind this...

1) Edwards feels that with all the states moving up, Nevada will not have a prominent place in the nominating process and would that Iowa, NH and SC will make or break him.  

2) Edwards thinks that the polling showing she-who-will-not-be-named way ahead is accurate and is not going to compete as hard due to this.

3) Edwards thinks he is a shoo-in due to the union base of Nevada and doesn't think the resources are more important in other states.

4) Edwards doesn't have the money to compete against she-who-will-not-be-named and Obama and is choosing his battles carefully to fully maximize his dollars.

Of course this could be the media making mountains out of molehills but it will be interesting to watch as things continue and we continue to fight to have our party represented by someone other than she-who-must-not-be-named so we can take back the White House in 2008.  

Maybe we SHOULD be encouraging Bloomberg to run as an independent.

According to a Quinnipiac, a Bloomberg run has a positive effect on Democrats in 2008 in the key state of Ohio.

For example, Hillary enjoys a very slim lead in Ohio over Guiliani... 44-42%, which is within the margin of error.  However, add Bloomberg into the mix and suddenly Hillary develops a 40-35% lead.  

In a head to head matchup with Fred Thompson, Obama leads 44-34.  With Bloomberg in the mix, Obama leads Thompson 38-27, gaining another point.  

Other Head to Head matchups after the break...

Rasmussen released a new poll today.  The race is pretty much at the same place it has been over the last few months.

Clinton - 38%

Obama - 26%

Edwards - 13%

Richardson - 3%

Dodd, Biden, Kucinich - 2%

Gravel - less than 1%

13% are undecided.

791 LV taken July 9-July 12, MOE +/- 4

This is pretty much the status quo from the last few polls.  Edwards has been at 13% since the June 25 poll and Obama has been 26% for the last two polls.  Clinton dropped a statistically insignicant 1% from last weeks poll, which was up 2% from 37% the previous week.

More Below

If you are 18, the MAN doesn't want you to vote.  He wants you to stay at home and not make a difference.  See the PSAs he came up with to demotivate you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ex41r1zBP 4Y

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xmt9jY5Cy fA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HC7jajBlG vg

I was watching Assume the Position 201 with Robert Wuhl on HBO last night.  Outstanding take on American History that I highly recommend.  

One of the segments in the show was on the Worst Presidents Ever... Its a great laugh and I thought I'd share it.

Lousy Leaders are as American as Apple Pie is the saying...

Franklin Pierce - Got elected after Nathaniel Hawthorne wrote a biography about him... based on the true story.  Hawthorne was a friend of Pierce's and glossed over the negative while over inflating the positives.  Leaves out the fact he is pro-slavery and  an alcoholic, while painting him as the greatest man in the history of the world.  The book comes out in August and because of that in November Pierce wins the election overwhelmingly.  He was so bad, that he is the only major party sitting President to seek and not get his party's candidacy.  Even Gerald Ford managed to get the Republican nomination!  Before leaving office, he gets drunk and runs over a woman with a horse.

More after the break:

I wanted to ask two open questions to Hillary supporters.  While I can understand conservative Dems supporting her, I am at a loss how anyone who visits progressive blogs or views themselves as a progressive would support her.  

I can understand people supporting Edwards given his strong rhetoric on progressive issues this time around, his apology and his unwaivering work with the poor.  I can understand people supporting Obama, given that he was against the war from the start and preaches about a new breed of politics where we compromise without compromising our values and calls for change in the system.  

What I want to know is why the Hillary supporters back her?  She doesn't have a plethora of elected experience... only 8 years come 2008.  Counting all levels of elected experience, she is quite on the low end... if that was a main requirement, one would think Richardson would be your dog.  She isn't Bill, as much as it seems like people continue to link the two together; in fact with the exception of during the Lewinski scandal, She was always the Foil to him in the public's eye... similiar (not comparing her to the evil fuck just the relationship) to the way Cheney was a foil and lightning rod for Bush earlier in the presidency.  
There isn't a lot of major legislation she has passed and she is responsible for pushing the unconstitutional video game legislation... and I've yet to see her give a hardcore political philosophy that will give us a true idea what she plans.  

These are reasons I won't support her... so I ask, Hillary Supporters, why do you support her?

And my second question... If Bill were dead, would you still feel the same way?

Scooter Libby was sentenced to 2 and a half years in Prison today.  While the judge had harsh words to say to Libby, I think he got off easy with this sentence.  I was hoping for at least 5 years... I am guessing he could be out even earlier with good behavior... and regardless will be out before Bush leaves office.  It remains to be seen if he can bargain testimony or Fitzgerald can extract testimony from him to nab some of the bigger players in this horrid government conduct.

I have to say... as a Democrat I feel extremely betrayed today.  I feel victimized. I feel hoodwinked, bamboozled.  

I donated time and money to helping the party take back congress i 2006.  As such, I expected certain things.  Most importantly an honest effort to end this war.  They did make the effort, which I appreciate, but this recent complete compitulation is hurtful and unacceptable to me.  All they added were some benchmarks?  I supported it in Obama's plan because it allowed for continuation of improving the country IF progress was being made otherwise we leave.  But to have benchmarks and no real action if the benchmarks aren't achieved is ridiculous.

Given polling, I'm not sure how ANY non-Presidential candidate who isn't in the reddest of red areas could vote for this?  The people want withdrawal and the people want Congress to do damn near anything in their power to do so.