How has the cash been coming in since the Iowa? It’s hard to tell, since the candidates aren’t required to file for a while. But according to this story, the candidates have raised roughly the following amounts since Monday:
Kerry $800,000
Dean $590,000
Edwards >$500,000
Each of these candidates claim to have enough to make it through February 3, but it will take considerably more to make it through Super Tuesday (March 2). Dean has the most cash on hand. Kerry may tap into his personal funds once again. But Edwards, the only of the three to claim public funding, will need to raise quite a bit more to go the distance.

By and large, last night’s N.H. Democratic presidential debate was uneventful. I didn’t detect anything which should have a significant impact on any candidate’s current inertia. No candidate hit a home run, but none struck out either.
That being the case, one could say that Kerry and Edwards were the “winners,” because their stock has been on the rise, while Dean and Clark were the “losers” because they failed to generate positive momentum.

• Kerry: With the New Hampshire wind in his sails, Kerry could afford to play it safe, and he did. No missteps which might have offered local voters misgivings. Kerry effectively stayed on his military record/foreign experience message. And, surprisingly, no one else really went after him. All things being equal, a tie goes to the front runner.
• Edwards: Capably handled the gun question and a real curve ball on Islam. Seemed less steady on the Defense of Marriage question, though this analysis suggests he was correct. Looked pretty good when he castigated Hume for continuing to harp on the devisive Republican gay marriage trap rather than turning to the real issues most Americans care about.
• Dean: Substantively, his answers were fine. But he didn’t appear to have much energy; he almost looked sedated. Undoubtedly a deliberate move to compensate for Monday’s meltdown. Dean may have stopped any further bleeding, but it might be too late.
• Clark: Some of his answers, such as the one on the PATRIOT Act, were fine. But some weren’t. When you have to burn time in a Democratic debate explaining how you really are a Democrat, that’s not a good thing. Clark really flubbed the Michael Moore “dissenter” question. Either distance yourself from the remarks or point out the problem with Bush’s military record. Don’t cop out with a free speech excuse.
• Lieberman: Sometimes came across as high-browed–nothing new there. Otherwise I thought he was fairly solid in conveying his positions. Problem was, he needed a spectacular showing to get back into this race. And he didn’t have one. I didn’t care much for his pandering response to the question about moving the New Hampshire primary. But I suppose they all would have had a similar response.
• Kucinich: Obviously, using the graph printout wasn’t a good idea, but Kucinich also struggled at other times trying to make his point. He did, however, offer one of the debate’s more refreshing moments when he conceded that Edwards and he had made their Iowa pact so each could get more votes.
• Sharpton: If you don’t know much about the Federal Reserve, you probably don’t belong in a meaningful presidential debate. Sharpton provided some comic relief in the early round debates, but he’s outlived his usefulness in that kind of forum.

• Perhaps things aren’t so rosy in Iraq:
  

  CIA officers in Iraq are warning that the country may be on a path to civil war, current and former U.S. officials said Wednesday, starkly contradicting the upbeat assessment that President Bush gave in his State of the Union address.

• Congressional Republican operatives break into confidential Democratic computer files, yet on the T.V. news channels yesterday I heard nary a word about it. Guess they couldn’t squeeze the story in with all the breaking news chaos of the Bennifer split and “Ben” getting kicked off “The Apprentice.”
• Appearing “presidential” as always, Bush tries to crack funnies at the rib joint. Perhaps he should take a nine-month White House sabbatical to work on his act.
• Tonight CNN’s “NewsNight with Aaron Brown” is supposed to have a Mars show in 3-D. I wonder if the rover knows about it. Someone better find it to make sure.

The Dagley Dagley Daily has this week’s Volunteer Tailgate Party.

As the 2004 election approaches, the United States is the world�s greatest dichotomy. America stands as an unparalleled world superpower, flexing military and economic might which touches every corner of the globe. By almost every measure, the U.S. dominates the globe.
Unfortunately, many Americans are not reaping the benefits of our national bounty. Millions of people–many working full-time–live in poverty. Over the past three years two million jobs have disappeared. Many workers have settled for jobs far below their capabilities, because that�s the best they can find. Health care, prescription, and college costs are skyrocketing. Many families live paycheck to paycheck, teetering on the edge of bankruptcy, unable to save for retirement.
Today America nears a crossroad. This November we will chart our government’s course for the next four years. Will we continue down the rocky, laissez-faire path we are traveling? Or will we forge trail which seeks to tap into the potential of all Americans, not just the privileged and the powerful?
Over the past few months I’ve examined the field of presidential candidates, trying to decide who I think is best suited to lead our nation toward a brighter, more-inclusive future. For the reasons outlined below, I support Senator John Edwards for president.
The Problem
Four years ago when he campaigned for president, George Bush promised many things. He claimed he would bring economic prosperity, that he would change the tone in Washington, that he would unite people rather than divide them. He offered the vision of a “humble” foreign policy in which the U.S. refrained from entangling nation building.
Nothing could have been further from the truth. On the international front, the Bush administration squandered a vast reservoir of post-9/11 goodwill by implementing a hardheaded preemptive policy which landed us in Iraq. On the domestic front, George Bush has failed to show any leadership on the economy or health care. He operates like a disinterested CEO, rubber stamping whatever industry lobbyists, corporate cronies, political strategists, or hardcore ideologues pass his way. Consequently, the federal budget and deficit are exploding, corporations have free reign to behave irresponsibly, our environment is deteriorating, and more and more people abroad dislike America.
Clearly, America can’t continue in this direction. We need a new executive.
The Candidates
For the first time since 1992, I began my assessment of the presidential candidates with a clean slate. Given the large field of capable candidates, it took me a few months to select a favorite. I spent many hours watching C-SPAN, news channels, and gathering information on the Internet. Each candidate has unique strengths. Wesley Clark is a bright leader with strong foreign policy credentials. I appreciate the energy and grassroots efforts of Howard Dean’s campaign, and, to some degree, his candid message. John Kerry is an articulate candidate who has an outstanding record of public service. Joe Lieberman is a strong champion of economic growth and traditional American values.
But over time Senator Edwards emerged as a clear favorite. I appreciate his personal story, his vision for America, his stance on the issues, and the way he has conducted his campaign. I believe he is the candidate who can and will pull our nation out of the doldrums.
The Story
To fully appreciate Senator Edwards’ vision for America, it’s important to view his positions in the context of his life experience. Unlike other candidates, he wasn�t born into a wealthy family. Instead, he�s the son of a mill worker who, thorough determination and hard work, became the first in his family to graduate from college. Although he has since became a successful attorney and no longer struggles to get by, he claims that has never forgotten where he came from. And watching the way he interacts with all types of people along the campaign trail, I�m inclined to believe him. He passionately discusses our nation’s moral duty to lift every American out of poverty.
More importantly, you can see the influence of his upbringing in his economic package, which is carefully crafted to assist working class America.
The Issues
Senator Edwards’ major positions are available in his comprehensive, 64-page policy outline, “Real Solutions for America.” Here are some highlights:

• Jobs
• Ensure that trade deals are fair and have strong labor and environmental protections.
• Enforce existing trade agreements.
• Offer tax incentives for corporations to keep jobs in America, rather than shipping them abroad.
• Enact the Rural Economic Advancement Challenge fund to bring venture capital and management expertise to entrepreneurs and small businesses in small towns and areas that are losing jobs today.
• Increase in the minimum wage by at least $1.50/hour.

• Health Care
• Provide refundable tax credits so parents can insure their children.
• A Small Business Support Program will give small businesses access to a range of high-quality health plans for their employees.
• Use the federal government’s power to reduce drug costs.
• Offer incentives to attract more workers to nursing.
• Eliminate Medicare mismanagement and waste.
• Invest in accessible primary care medical clinics.

• Education
• Increase teacher pay, particularly in areas with poor school districts.
• Expand Head Start.
• “College for Everyone” proposal will provide one year of free tuition to public universities and community colleges for any academically-qualified student who works 10 or more hours per week.

• Taxation
• Proposed American Dream Tax Credit offers a matching tax credit of up to $5,000 to help those who need it to cover a down payment on a first home.
• Matching savings accounts for retirement plan would allow a working family who saved from age 25 to retirement to accumulate a nest egg of $200,000 through tax credits, on top of other savings.
• Repeal of the Bush tax cuts for those earning $240,000 or more per year.
• Equalizing the tax rates for capital gains, dividends, and investments with those of earned income, so that middle class workers do not pay a higher tax rate than those receiving passive income.

• Foreign Policy
• Expand the size and scope of an international peacekeeping force in Afghanistan.
• Bring more nations and institutions into rebuilding Iraq.
• Strengthen America’s commitment to the Biological Weapons Convention and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, increase support for the dismantling and safeguarding of weapons-grade materials in Russia and the former Soviet states, and work with allies to solve urgent proliferation threats such as North Korea.
• Revitalize institutions like NATO and the United Nations.
• Take a more aggressive role in promoting peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians.
• Define how America uses its power–whether its defending against threats, promoting prosperity and freedom, or giving help to those who need it.

• National Security
• Maintain a strong commitment to national defense and our military personnel.
• Shift domestic intelligence responsibilities away from the FBI and into a new Homeland Intelligence Agency.
• Improve security at America’s borders, seaports, and step up protection at chemical and nuclear facilities.
• Provide greater funding for first responders.

Edwards v. Bush
A candidate can have the best policy platform in the world, but it all goes for naught if he or she isn�t elected. Senator Edwards is best equipped of all the Democratic contenders to defeat George Bush for the following reasons:
(1) Positive message: Edwards has run an optimistic campaign founded on the hope and potential of every American. This is a stark contrast to George Bush’s cynical, fear-based, orange-alert campaign which promotes the right wing�s politically divisive, every-man-for-himself agenda
The 20th century’s two most noted Democratic presidents–FDR and Kennedy–where largely successful due to their ability to inspire the nation. Americans can overcome great challenges if they are motivated to respond with a clear purpose. Edwards has the potential to this type of president. He can use the Oval Office to lead us in achieving a unifying national mission. Not merely as a forum to peddle vacations and shopping sprees.
(2) National campaign: Undoubtedly any of the Democratic contenders can poll well in the Northeast and along the West Coast. But to win in November, the Democratic nominee must be competitive in the South, or at least in the border states. I wish this weren�t the case, but the fact is that it will be very difficult for any of the New England candidates to challenge Bush in states such as Louisiana, Missouri, Tennessee, or North Carolina. Edwards has a real shot of winning at least two of those states and challenge Bush in several others.
(3) “Likeability“: Sometimes I wish America was a country where everyone is a policy wonk who make political choices using elaborate decision matrices. But it’s not. When selecting a presidential candidate, many Americas are swayed by subjective factors�first impressions, media buzz, gut feelings. For some, the presidential quandary boils down to a simple question: Who do I like? Who can I trust?
Judged on this count, Edwards scores very well. His charisma, coupled with his upbeat message, brings energy to any audience. And because his presentation is grounded in the issues ordinary voters are most concerned about, he connects with average Americans.
(4) Tough Campaigner: A presidential campaign is a marathon, not a sprint. A successful candidate must have the energy, passion, and discipline to go the distance.
I’ve been impressed in what I’ve seen from Edwards out on trail. He appears to be a tireless campaigner, attending five or six events a day, yet claiming, convincingly, that he�s having “the time of my life.” He performs well in both large and small venues. The senator effectively weaves his personal experience and his policy objectives into a stump speech which James Carville recently described as being the best he’s ever seen; a notable complement coming from the former Clinton campaign guru.
Edwards is quick on his feet. In voter question and answer sessions along the campaign trail, he really appears to make an effort to address individual voter concerns. Many candidates lazily respond to questions merely by popping off with pre-packaged talking points. But Edwards does a lot better job at connecting with the voter.
This skill is key on the debate platform. Imagine the following scene: this October two parties will be summoned to argue their case for the presidency in front of the greatest jury in the world–the American public. On the right stands a scripted, disinterested candidate, fresh off a season of reading the tele-prompter at ticketed events. On the left stands a skilled orator and long-time advocate who has spent the past year laying out his vision for America, face-to-face in front of average voters.
Which candidate would you want representing you? Case closed.
The Challenge
I invite you to join me in supporting Senator Edwards. Become part of the solution, not part of the problem.