Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why Edwards didn't endorse...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
AGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 10:00 PM
Original message
Why Edwards didn't endorse...
But now two months have passed since Edwards dropped out—tempus fugit!—and still no endorsement. Why? According to a Democratic strategist unaligned with any campaign but with knowledge of the situation gleaned from all three camps, the answer is simple: Obama blew it. Speaking to Edwards on the day he exited the race, Obama came across as glib and aloof. His response to Edwards’s imprecations that he make poverty a central part of his agenda was shallow, perfunctory, pat. Clinton, by contrast, engaged Edwards in a lengthy policy discussion. Her affect was solicitous and respectful. When Clinton met Edwards face-to-face in North Carolina ten days later, her approach continued to impress; she even made headway with Elizabeth. Whereas in his Edwards sit-down, Obama dug himself in deeper, getting into a fight with Elizabeth about health care, insisting that his plan is universal (a position she considers a crock), high-handedly criticizing Clinton’s plan (and by extension Edwards’s) for its insurance mandate.

http://nymag.com/news/politics/powergrid/45604/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 10:02 PM
Response to Original message
1. no good choice? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 10:03 PM
Response to Original message
2. Perhaps A Lack Of A Cash Payoff?
Things are probably not going well at the Fortress hedge fund - a fella's gotta make a living, you know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PurityOfEssence Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 10:29 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. Maybe he just doesn't like opportunistic corporatist messiahs
Meanness begets meanness.

The air of privilege around this campaign is overwhelming, and the cocksure hubris doesn't bode well for the rest of us peons.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #9
27. I'd say Edwards is the opportunistic corporate candidate. LOL! God his supporters are blind.
Edited on Sat Mar-29-08 11:24 PM by cryingshame
with a capital "O".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoFerret Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 04:04 AM
Response to Reply #9
44. "Our time"?
Exactly who is in that "our" and who is not?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 10:04 PM
Response to Original message
3. the talk for months has been that he will endorse Hillary Clinton
so the question should be why he hasn't endorsed her yet.

as i said before, Obama got his endorsement that he wanted with Richardson.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maribelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. For months? Say honest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abacus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 10:30 PM
Response to Reply #3
11. Seems like the rumors change every two weeks
about who he will endorse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greguganus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 02:45 AM
Response to Reply #3
35. Pretty boy is holding his endorsement for the best deal he can get.
Which candidate will give him the best job in their cabinet, and if anyone believes he wouldn't endorse Corporate Clinton if she promised him a job, they are fooling themselves. He would toss his "anti-corporation/I'm for the little guy" spiel out the window in a New York minute.
I don't see how an endorsement from him would matter much anyway. He's a has-been and an also-ran.
I wish edwards would just fade away into the sunset. Why doesn't he go back to SC anyway? Hasn't he done enough damage here in NC after pretending to be our senator? There's no future here for him in local or state politics, after he used us as a stepping stone to try to become president. Surely the taxes on his fortress would be cheaper in SC. Maybe the haircuts are cheaper here? He's a joke here and should move some place where he's not played out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inspired Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 08:45 AM
Response to Reply #35
58. Are you a closet Republican? You talk like a freeper. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greguganus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #58
64. Nope...just a North Carolinian who is still pissed at him
for spending more time campaigning than spending his time in NC, and then after he loses TWICE he still stays in the state. I voted for him I can talk shit about him all I want. And fu with your freeper crap.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inspired Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #64
67. Get over yourself. Most US Senators spend their time in DC, not their home state anyway.
Why does that piss you off? Did you expect dinner plans or something? How lame.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 10:05 PM
Response to Original message
4. Thank you. This is why this former Edwards supporter switched to Hillary
Because Clinton's policies are deep and knowledgeable and real. Certainly not pat or shallow.

(and if she had better campaign managers instead of the one she has, she may have clinched the nomination long time ago).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 10:11 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Judgement
I hate that fucking talking point. Go to his website. His policies are clear and articulate. I'm sorry he is charismatic and does good speeches and inspires people and doesn't talk detail policy in his stump speeches. Wait I'm not because that is why he's winning.

Anyway the judgement issue comes up so much.

The Oval Office is bigger than the President. Its the advisors and cabinet. If she can't find good people to run her campaign what makes you think she is going to find good people to run her administration. She sucks as an exectuive and that is what the President is...sorry.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maribelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 10:29 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. Yes, judgement to select his cabinet - Rezko 'I didn't know' Wright 'I didn't know'
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Give me a break here
How many people who have donated to Bill and Hillary over the year are in jail.

You guys have no room to stand on there.

BTW your losing...did you notice that you are losing ha ha ha ha ha

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maribelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 10:42 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. Minimizing Obama's relationships with Rezko and Wright is foolish.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anonymous171 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 11:08 PM
Response to Reply #16
24. Of course, Hillary and her husband have NEVER associated with shady characters.
:sarcasm: And Rezko really isn't even an issue anymore. Seriously, drop it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 02:45 AM
Response to Reply #16
36. Minimizing the number of crooked Clinton associates is foolish
Hsu,Giustra,Gupta, Paul and so many more. Don't think the pukes would have had a field day? Please. Don't be a fool.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knixphan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 02:47 AM
Response to Reply #16
37. as is throwing stones in glass houses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoFerret Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 04:09 AM
Response to Reply #16
46. Minimizing his mealy-mouthed
health coverage proposal is even more so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gabeana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 11:17 PM
Response to Reply #10
26. How about Rubin and greenspan
"Her nomination of Rubin and Greenspan scarcely encourages confidence in Mrs C's oft-proclaimed capacity to hit the ground running in times of crisis. Rubin was the arch deregulator in Bill Clinton's second term. It was Rubin who successfully pushed for repeal in 1999 of the Glass Steagall Act which, amidst financial collapse in early 1933 (when Roosevelt closed down the banking system altogether) placed regulatory barriers between commercial and investment banking.

As fed chairman in the Clinton and early Bush years Greenspan deliberately encouraged the growth of speculative bubbles. He chose in 1996 not to set margin requirements on stock market speculators and in later years fiercely advocated the deregulation of the financial system. His fingerprints are all over the sub-prime disaster."

counterpunch.org
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 10:43 PM
Response to Reply #6
17. Yes, its the advisers. Which is why we had Reagan and Bush Jr. as pretty faces
sitting in the Oval Office while PNAC and other powers behind the scene really ran the country.

And we know that the powers that be in the Democratic party have selected Obama to run against Hillary, whom, and Bill, they loathed since day one.

As posted on another thread

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/3/29/134039/323

Mrs. Clinton is a strong candidate for many reasons. She was part of the Clinton administration and had a front-row seat for the power decisions that were made in her husband's presidency. She's been an effective senator for more than a full term, and she's passed bi-partisan legislation that helped real people. She's genuinely nice and people she works with like her. Much of the best talent from her husband's administration admired her intelligence, passion, focus and stamina, and most endorsed her. She's friends with retired military officers and diplomats, and she has close connections to serving military. She's liked and respected by professionals and experts and in turn she's able to appreciate their talents and intelligence. She knows many world leaders and she's well versed in the language of diplomacy and international relations. She started her run earlier than he and she has detailed her plans for the reforms and changes that are her priorities. She was considered the front-runner even before anyone voted, as she was qualified, prepared, funded and had a rational and appealing platform. She could speak on any issue, with intelligence, thoughtfulness and detail, and debate with accuracy and acumen. She is a formidable obstacle to Mr. Obama's ambition.

She also has vulnerabilities. The media mainly disliked her and many in the media had tried to sabotage her candidacy, starting when she was still first lady, when some rightly suspected she might go into politics once her husband's political career had ended. There were those in the Senate who didn't want her to succeed for personal reasons, they felt disrespected by her husband's administration and didn't want him back in any position. One example is John Kerry, who invited Mr. Obama to give the keynote speech at the 2004 convention, and who kept Mrs. Clinton from having any formal role in the convention, while allowing his wife a long and self-serving speech. Additionally, Mrs. Clinton, as the first woman to make a credible run for the presidency, receives the `envy' any `outsider' trying to break forbidden ground encounters. As to the extent her sex would be an advantage, Obama also runs as `an outsider,' but still a man.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
usrbs Donating Member (583 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #6
21. Running a good campaign does not promise a thing
Or do you think that our idiot-in-chief is a better president Than Kerry or Gore, because, after all, he outmaneuvered both in the 2 campaigns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 02:13 AM
Response to Reply #21
30. You can't be President if you don't win eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 02:47 AM
Response to Reply #4
38. Alll you do is make it clear that you're wholly unfamiliar with
Obama's policy proposals. And sorry,it's not just her campaign advisors, it's the candidate herself, and how she presents herself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoFerret Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 04:10 AM
Response to Reply #38
47. Universal health coverage?
What's not to like?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 04:13 AM
Response to Reply #47
49. Evidently you don't realize
how similar the healthcare plans from Edwards, Clinton and Obama, are. Or what the roots of those plans are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoFerret Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 04:16 AM
Response to Reply #49
51. Actually
Yes I do.
And my own preference is for a single payer system. Sigh!

Yours?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krawhitham Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 03:00 AM
Response to Reply #4
42. So appalled was Edwards at Clinton’s gaudy corporatism
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoFerret Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 04:07 AM
Response to Reply #4
45. The POLICIES
yes indeed. It's the policies. Plus the actual thought they could be enacted.

I made a similar switch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
samdogmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 10:07 PM
Response to Original message
5. Thanks for the update...as a former Edwards supporter...I'm glad I moved on!
Can I have my money back, please????

He disappoints me tremendously if this is still about "him" and "his ideas" and not about what is right for our country!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MindMatter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #5
13. Bingo
Our future does not depend on the small differences between the Obama and Clinton health plans. Neither of those plans will be enacted as presented. The issues we face are so much more monumental that this story trivializes it.

I admire Edwards, and truly hope that this story is not true. Or at least that he has a sense of the momentous nature of the Obama candidacy, such that he will not endorse against it.

He has already lost half of his Iowa delegates. As time passes, his endorsement is becoming irrelevant. At this point, the only way he can have a significant impact is to endorse Obama, which would help bring this divisiveness to an end.

He will not endorse Clinton. If he were going to do that, it would have happened a month ago. There is no point jumping on that train as it is leaving the tracks. His endorsement would not put the train back on the tracks.

So John, for the hundreds of thousands of us who supported you and still respect you, please do the right thing. NOW!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anamandujano Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 02:26 AM
Response to Reply #13
33. If Obama couldn't persuade him, what makes you think you can?
Obama probably used the same haughty preachy tone that you just did. Apparently it doesn't work with Mr. Edwards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
my3boyz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 10:23 PM
Response to Original message
7. Well, I'm glad Obama
did not kiss his butt just to get an endorsement. He stated what he believes and he stuck by it. He did not try to change his whole focus to kiss up to John and Elizabeth (as Hillary did..she only did it to hopefully get his supporters...it is about the bottom line for her). Anyway, I really do like John. I would prefer to have him as the one that was up against Obama now. Then I would not be so sick at the thought of Obama not winning. Mainly because I know Edwards would also be good for the country. Even though Edwards was strong in his beliefs about how to improve this country, he knew how to disagree without being nasty (as the Clintons are). Somehow when he pointed differences out I did not get angry. He disagreed in a respectful way. I also have no doubt that he would put the party before his own political ambitions. He demonstrated that when he dropped out earlier.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SwampG8r Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 10:37 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. lets not go hillary on edwards
hes a decent guy with good ideas and we need to be mindful that we are not the "hes dead to me now " bunch.
i look at him as one of many good advisors obama will need as time passes
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blonndee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 10:38 PM
Response to Original message
15. Yes, this criticizes Obama but ALSO tells us why he didn't endorse Hillary:
Here's the paragraph that precedes the one you posted:

In the days after John Edwards’s withdrawal from the Democratic race, the political world expected his endorsement of Barack Obama would be forthcoming tout de suite. The neo-populist and the hopemonger had spent months tag-teaming Hillary Clinton, pillorying her as a creature of the status quo, not a champion of the kind of “big change” they both deem essential. So appalled was Edwards at Clinton’s gaudy corporatism—her defense of the role of lobbyists, her suckling at the teats of the pharmaceutical and defense industries—that he’d essentially called her corrupt. And then, not least, there were the sentiments of his wife. “Elizabeth hasn’t always been crazy about Mrs. Clinton” is how an Edwards insider puts it; a less delicate member of HRC’s circle says, “Elizabeth hates her guts.”

http://nymag.com/news/politics/powergrid/45604/

Perhaps Edwards will eventually endorse Hillary, or maybe not. But since the thread is "Why Edwards Didn't Endorse," this provides a little proper balance. The article, by the way, is titled "Who’ll Stop the Pain?" and answers itself, "Gore and Edwards may have the most party clout. But there’s only one person Hillary will finally listen to. Her name isn’t Bill."


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tatiana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 10:44 PM
Response to Original message
18. Discussed here:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Life Long Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 10:45 PM
Response to Original message
19. Oh gawd... Obama blew it is as far as I read. Alienating both Hill and O is why n/t
Edited on Sat Mar-29-08 10:47 PM by Life Long Dem
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoldieAZ49 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 10:46 PM
Response to Original message
20. Good for the Edwards!
I am glad they held to their principals!

The arrogance of Obama really is a turn off, I wouldn't want to associated with his campaign either.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Johnny__Motown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 11:04 PM
Response to Original message
22. So, he can't endorse Barrack because his wife won't let him??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pawel K Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 11:13 PM
Response to Reply #22
25. What a stupid thing to say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Garbo 2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 11:06 PM
Response to Original message
23. previous thread on same article:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigbrother05 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 11:38 PM
Response to Original message
28. If Obama was such a turn off, what's this say about Clinton?
So John & Elizabeth couldn't bring themselves to back Obama after their meetings. Fair enough, it's their endorsement to give or not.

Without questioning the source, Clinton made all the right noises and still couldn't get Edwards' endorsement. How badly must they disagree with her being the party candidate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orangepeel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 11:38 PM
Response to Original message
29. so who is this strategist with "knowledge gleaned"? why should I believe him/her?
over the other unidentified sources who claimed that Edwards liked Obama but thought he wasn't enough of a fighter?

As someone with admiration for both John and Elizabeth, I am disinclined to believe that he didn't endorse because he felt personally insulted by a candidate. He didn't endorse because he didn't see that picking one over the other would do more to further his agenda, which I believe is helping him fulfill his goals of working to end poverty.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 02:15 AM
Response to Original message
31. that sucks even more that Hillary didn't get it then
so she isn't even under consideration or what ?

i'm wondering if this is Clinton supporters way to deal with what they hoped would be an endorsement for her. how it was talked up Edwards will endorse her including on Leno and then it didn't happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 02:17 AM
Response to Original message
32. Sounds plausible...but enough with anonymous insiders
Hannity could have planted the whole thing just to screw with us.

Until someone talks on record, its a non-story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cornermouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 02:43 AM
Response to Original message
34. My fear about Obama all along has been that he is
a democratic version of George Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoFerret Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 04:15 AM
Response to Reply #34
50. Enough with the born-again presidental candidates
Yes - I know that is a VERY intolerant view.
But put it down as a personal prejudice. it will not stop me voting for the democrat.
I just wish we could stop all the religiosity that infects us.

(Jimmy Carter is a born-again I can live with.)

Obama as the democrat W? Aaaaargh!
There are similarities but I can't go that far.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cornermouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 05:10 AM
Response to Reply #50
53. The born-again isn't what I've been worried about.
It's the appearance of superficiality that has bothered and worried me. If true that would preclude the born-again aspect much as it has for Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoFerret Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 10:33 AM
Response to Reply #53
62. That's very true
...and a better way to put it and better expression of the concern.

When shallowness and deep religious conviction coincide however....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LTR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 02:51 AM
Response to Original message
39. I don't buy it
Many of these democratic strategists don't know what they're talking about. There's some that claim that Gore will sweep in and take the nomination.

My guess all along is that Edwards is giving himself some clout by holding off on an endorsement. Keep in mind there are people that feel the same way about Edwards as he and his wife allegedly feel about Obama. Russ Feingold himself all but said Edwards is a fraud, though I don't believe that (I initially supported Edwards).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
2rth2pwr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 02:54 AM
Response to Original message
40. Obama's famed unity skillz on display once more.
Edited on Sun Mar-30-08 02:54 AM by 2rth2pwr
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue-Jay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 04:11 AM
Response to Reply #40
48. Is 'z' easier to type than 's'?
Juzt azking...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
2rth2pwr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #48
66. n00b
skillz



1. describing someone's above average proficency at a given activity

2. in l337, the "z" implies something not quite legit, so the activity described may be illegal or against the rules.

1. Michael is the best basketball player in town. He has mad skillz.

2. Tina hacked into the school's computer system to change her grades using her hacking skillz.
by Lipstick Nov 1, 2004 email it
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=skillz

skillz



slang for "skills", a set of competencies that enable one to be well versed and very proficient at accomplishing a goal

Beastie Boys lyric: I got the skillz to pay the bills


skillz



'Skillz' was once used mainly by l33t-speakers, rappers, and their admirers, to describe being extra-skilled. It is now mainly used sarcastically, especially by those with tendancies towards being a geek or hipster.

1. Having 'skillz' or 'mad skillz' can be used to describe being extra successful at something computer-related that you've embraced. In this case, it's intended to acknowledge or satirize the silliness of l33t (either to highlight your contempt for sincere l33t-speakers, or because you enjoy l33t including its silliness).

2. It can be used to describe being good at something that you don't actually want to be good at, such as something embarassing.

3. Also you can use it to draw attention to your lack of actual skill, implying that your clumsiness stems from membership in a particular demographic that isn't associated with skill in that area (especially if members of your demographic rarely say 'skillz' with any sincerity).

1. "pwnz0r3d, n00b!!1! f3@r my l33t skillz!!!one!"

2. "I've got mad nose-picking skillz."

3. (after missing an easy shot) "Well, we all know that little Jewish girls like me have all the basketball skillz." (after missing another one) "Mad skillz, even."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krawhitham Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 02:57 AM
Response to Original message
41. Would you rather endorse a person that says what you want to hear or one that stands by what they...
believe


But he will end up endorsing whoever claims to give him the better position if they win

I never did trust Edwards once an ambulance chaser always an ambulance chaser

Edwards is a lawyer turned one term senator (he quit because he could not win re-election) who has made a career out of being Kerry's VP pick and thought he could ride this wife's illness all the way to the White House

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 03:29 AM
Response to Reply #41
43. He'll endorse Hillary before NC.
Bank on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 04:20 AM
Response to Reply #43
52. no way, he would have endorsed her by now if he was going to do it
incidently, I would like to remind you that in 2004 Kerry did not win NC, and Edwards was his VP


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greguganus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #41
65. I agree! 100 percent! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
susankh4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 05:23 AM
Response to Original message
54. K&R!
Thanks!!

I think he is waiting to endorse anyone..... til Al gets drafted and John is his VP choice.

:headbang:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cleveramerican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 05:33 AM
Response to Original message
55. His window of oppurtunity has closed
if you hold your cards too long you end up just sitting there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yy4me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 06:01 AM
Response to Original message
56. 'Suppose he knows something we don't? That maybe.....,
just maybe, there is some truth in the talk of a different ticket?

GORE/EDWARDS

Someone has to save the country from itself. I truly believe Al Gore and John Edwards would do the job. We, the people, cannot afford to make or allow another mistake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orsino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 08:37 AM
Response to Original message
57. Rumor. I doubt that Edwards is that petty.
His endorsement will carry significant weight, and I presume that he will use it craftily.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OzarkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 08:58 AM
Response to Reply #57
61. Arguing w/ Elizabeth about universal health care isn't petty
Edited on Sun Mar-30-08 08:59 AM by OzarkDem
Obama's plan is not universal and will, in fact, set the effort to get universal care back by several years.

Like it or not, getting real health care reform in the next few years is absolutely essential for US health and our economy.

Edwards needs to make his opinions public about problems with Obama's health care reform plans. The issue is far too critical to not voice his opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EffieBlack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 08:54 AM
Response to Original message
59. He may have waited too long . . .
Edwards is in a difficult spot now. Had he endorsed right before or right after Super Tuesday, he may have had some real impact. But now, he's in a bit of a bind.

His choices:

Endorse Clinton BEFORE the North Carolina primary - if she wins the state, he's in good shape. But right now, she's so far behind and he's so unpopular there that it is unlikely that his endorsement will help her much there. If he were to endorse and she doesn't carry the state, his inability to help a candidate in his own home state will make him appear very weak and could well bury any chance he has in the future of being an important political player.

Endorse Clinton AFTER the North Carolina primary - if Clinton loses North Carolina and THEN he endorses her, it may be too little too late - not to mention the fact that Clinton and her supporters might be unhappy that he waited rather than getting behind her in the state when he might have helped her there.

Endorse Obama BEFORE the North Carolina primary - if these press reports are correct, that seems like the last thing he wants to do.

Endorse Obama AFTER the North Carolina primary - this would make sense only if Obama wins the primary. But if he endorses at that point, he'll look spineless and appear to be jumping on the bandwagon after the fact

None of these options seem to work well for Edwards at this point.

I think he waited to long for an endorsement to be meaningful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OzarkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 08:56 AM
Response to Original message
60. So why doesn't he endorse Hillary, it sounds as though he should
and thanks very much for the insight about Obama. Its exactly as I suspected.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ronnykmarshall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-30-08 10:51 AM
Response to Original message
63. Under the bus for Edwards!
How DARE he!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 01:28 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC