John Edwards Gets It (Taylor Marsh in Huffington Post)

[JohnLocke]

John Edwards Gets It
By Taylor Marsh--Huffington Post
Thursday, December 14, 2006
----
There's a reason John Edwards is way ahead of the Democratic presidential pack in a recent Iowa poll, and even leads John McCain in a national trial heat. Edwards is reaching people on issues that impact a segment of this country that have been left behind by Mr. Bush: the middle class.
Democratic populism is back, baby. Just in time, if you ask me.
Senator-elect James Webb talked about it during the campaign, then offered a stunning piece on "class struggle" in the Wall Street Journal after the election.
Senator-elect Sherrod Brown ran on it. His next target is BigPharma.
So did Senator-elect Claire McCaskill, as did Senator-elect Jon Tester.
So having Edwards up front and center on the subject simply takes their 2006 campaigns to the next logical level.
Edwards is on a roll. He's got his patter down on Iraq. He's got Elizabeth Edwards next to him, which is a secret campaign weapon as far as I'm concerned. But when he starts talking about poverty, the middle class and how to fix the problem, that's when his rhetoric meets the road.
Card check is just one part of the union story that Edwards favors. What is it? It's part of the Employee Free Choice Act, which has a lot of support in Congress already. There's more about from PaulVA's Kos diary. No doubt the "National Right to Work" people will fight it.
(...)
John Edwards is talking about something that matters, not only to people struggling, but to the entire American way of life. As the middle class goes so goes this country. With the new Congress elected and so many populists now in office, John Edwards is telling a tale that will have many people jumping on board; mainly because they're already waiting for that train to visit their state.
This is going to get interesting.
----
Read the rest here.

[diane in sf]

1. I'm a union member--AFLCIO

I work at two private universities because I am an adjunct faculty member without hope of tenure--the sharecropper of the academic world.

One of my schools has a union, one doesn't.

Guess which one pays me 70% more and will offer healthcare with a certain level of seniority?

[silverojo]

2. I love John Edwards!

I prefer him over the other candidates for the exact reasons listed in the article: He cares about the middle class and the working poor. America NEEDS him in 2009.

Actually, we need him NOW, but (for the time being, anyway), we're stuck with that son of a Bush. :mad:

[diane in sf]

3. I would like to see John Edwards

as the President or Vice Presidential candidate

[az chela]

4. ME TOO

[SmellsLikeDeanSpirit]

5. Edwards isn't VP material.

I thought this back in 2004. His star overshadowed Kerry everytime they were together. At times I remember wishing the ticket was flipped. Edwards on Hardball a few days ago said being VP isn't any fun. I like Edwards, he isn't my first pick, but he isn't too far off. The problem I see with an Edwards candidacy is his foreign policy credentials, especially going up against a John McCain.

[elemming]

6. Not too early

I am thinking of starting a Harris County Texas for Edwards group.

I remember I joined the Dean group at the end of June and i think we learned we could have been organizing earlier.

There was a study where college professors were conducting an experiment of providing voters information and videos and debates of all the Democratic candidates to Democratic voters and at the end Edwards had emerged as the clear Democratic favorite of these informed voters.

[Riddler]

7. An Edwards/Clark Ticket wold do exactly what this country needs....

and that's take America away from the wealthy, the big corporations and the politicians and give it back to its rightful owners, the American people in general, and the middle and lower classes in particular. Edwards speaks FOR the people as well as TO the people with his message of hope and optimism.

[Clark2008]

10. Sorry - Clark will not be Edwards' Dick Cheney.

[Catchawave]

13. You speak for Clark ?

:shrug:

[Pithy Cherub]

18. Check Wes Clark Jr's posts here.

Not happening. Wes Clark is not going to fill the holes in someone else's resume.

[Catchawave]

22. Wes Clark Jr sez....

Dad's not going to be a Team Player, right? I think I remember those posts. How rude he was too :(

[Pithy Cherub]

23. Nope he told the truth. You are assuming

that Edwards gets to choose or be in a position to choose as well as if there is a partnership with Clark now that any Clarkie would be excited by it. Edwards bores me, but what bores me more are people using the excellent skills of another candidate to show the glaring deficiencies in another. Edwards has made no compelling case for being president IMO, and for those that support him, support him fully on his own qualifications! Don't use a better candidate to shore up what Edwards doesn't come to the table with, it diminishes Edwards even more. That is the great irony when I see VP candidates carelessly bandied about, that the candidate needs to be able to persuade on his/her own. It is ultimately an insult to Edwards by his own supporters.

Support your guy and tout his accomplishments, but if you have to tout Clark as a VP, then Edwards is not ready for primetime or to be president. Support him on his own merits - that's the way to play for the best team.

[chimpymustgo]

26. I think the suggestion is a compliment to your guy. Geez.

Lighten up. It's just an idea somebody floated. Edwards doesn't NEED Clark if he gets the nomination. Someone thought it might be a good ticket.

[Pithy Cherub]

27. Then promote Edwards on his own, If he needs a crutch

and he does on national security, then he has to own his record through the process. It is an insult that Clark with all the valuable experience would work for somebody that wet behind the ears with a record of POOR judgment already on national security. Support your guy fully with the record he has, not the record you would like him to have. Wes will not be Edwards, Dick Cheney. As long as the point is clear, its all good. But there are many who want to keep insulting Edwards, you might wish to tell them support our guy and should he be able to get the nomination on his record, then choose. Clark, Clinton nor Gore need second bananas to shore up their creds right now.

[chimpymustgo]

30. LOL!! We'd rather not have OTHER candidate's names and supporters show up

in "Edwards is great" threads!

Oh, but you just can't stay away.

Edwards is a GREAT candidate, and it's quite presumptuous and ERRONEOUS to assert - that he needs any sort of CRUTCH.

Tsk, tsk. it's kinda sad, really.

[Pithy Cherub]

32. Then just stick to promoting Edwards, and leave

the Clark as VP stuff out of it. Edwards can use his I was Wrong op-ed to greater effect in future if people support him for his entire record, not just the parts he'd erase. It's all good! ;)

[chimpymustgo]

33. Why not just stay out of Edwards threads??? Bwaaaaaa!!!

Sorry you're pissed that some people think the General would be a great Number 2!!! You should be flattered...and gracious. Get your panties out of a knot and quit WHINING.

[Pithy Cherub]

36. Sorry you think Edwards is lame and needs a crutch.

Keep insulting your guy - you are great at it!

[venable]

44. unbelievable

just unbelievable.

As good a person as Clark is, he probably won't ever be asked to be anyone's VP, because he is not especially convincing on the stump. Fair or not, that's the common wisdom.

Methinks Clarkies doth protest too much re Edwards.

[venable]

43. Pithy this is just bizarre

Edwards is a fantastically appealing candidate, and there's not a whole lot you can do about that fact.

And, by the way, Clark, bless his heart, is most likely not going to be the nominee. Unless a whole lot changes a whole lot, it's just not very likely.

If the nominee, whoever it is, asks Clark to be his running mate...gosh, I don't know how to tell you this...he'd most likely accept.

Your antagonism is very odd.

[GreenArrow]

40. "Edwards is great" threads!

That's an assumption that won't work, because you see, every time there is an "Edwards is great" thread, there are going to be any number of people on the board who don't think that "Edwards is great" (present party included). Now, for those people, assuming they wish to share an opinion, there are two basic options: 1) respond to the contrary on the "Edwards is great" threads, or 2) start threads of their own about how Edwards is NOT great. It doesn't make any difference, since either way partisans and detractors are going to show up to say their piece.

If you want to participate in an Edwards love thread orgy, you should limit your reading and posting on Edwards to the Edwards room in DU groups. That's kind of an insulated environment, all sugar and candy and light all the time (appropriate enough for John Edwards) but it's a good place to love on Edwards all you want without any dissent as to how "great" Edwards is.

[Catchawave]

29. I didn't assume anything....

I know how politics "work" because it's the only sport that the spectators get to play (and I thank Craig Crawford for that!).

Some, not all, Clark supporters are claiming Clark will not "fill in the holes on someone else's resume"...Edwards'? Obama's? Clinton's? Gore's? Kucinich's? Vilsack's? Bayh's?

Clark deserves better support than that, here or in any other political forum. It's my problem why I support Edwards and if I can communicate that effectively, but it's not going to be using the "Rovian Astro-turfing Political Playbook for Dummies" tactics that if you repeat lies and misconceptions often, they become true.

Edwards is brilliant and very much a formidable candidate, as is your guy, and every other DUers GUY/GAL. 'nuf said.

[Pithy Cherub]

31. Nope not all equal, but

it is up to you to say WHY the candidate is the most qualified - not who he needs as backup. Would not have said anything if Clark wasn't repetively brought up. Keep to supporting your guy and what you perceive to be his assets. Clark's assets are his to distribute as he says not as others Hope - you yourself brought up the tem player stuff. So if you just support your candidate and have a ability to articulate why he should be first amongst the others, go for it. Just don;t use Clark as his knowledge gap. Refer back to Wes Jr.'s remarks, they still stand.

[Catchawave]

34. Wes Clark Jr doesn't speak for me

nor should he for you either.

You can read my DU journal for my Edwards support, otherwise, I don't play with bullies. :hi:

[Pithy Cherub]

35. Alas, honestly my only point is

Clark is a free agent who should he choose to run for president, is not interested in being Edwards's VP. That statement has my full support. Go forward and promote the daylights out of your guy as a stand alone stand up guy without the need to use Clark as a panacea, that is all. On to a 2008 primary that rests solely on a candidate's qualifications. :toast:

[chimpymustgo]

37. And I'll just say this one more time: Edwards does not need to associate himself

with ANY other candidate at this point. I think you're aiming for a target that's not there...and some sort of reflected glory by seemingly "putting down" Edwards in this way.

So Clark and his supporters sashay out in a snit insisting that they won't go to the dance with Edwards. Read my lips: Edwards ain't asking.

[cali]

38. You do realize, don't you, that Clark has his

own holes to fill? If you don't, you're not living in reality.

[1932]

42. Because this is not about what's best for the country?

[machka]

24. Texas for... :)

Check out the Texas OneCorps page at the OAC - looks like there's a Houston group you can join forces with!

There's also a Texas for Edwards presence on the web, if you're interested... Small, but willing to grow! :hi:

[Inspired]

12. Recent poll shows him leading McCain. n/t

[Catchawave]

17. Here's an interesting analysis from a GOP website

about McCain and the recent Edwards poll:

http://race42008.com/2006/12/14/nbcwsj-poll-mccain-would-lose-to-edwards/

[lildreamer316]

39. Gore/Edwards.

which gives Edwards PLENTY of clout to win the next time out as frontrunner.

[usregimechange]

8. kick

[Catchawave]

9. He's caught the GOP's attention too....

From a GOP blog:
http://race42008.com/2006/12/14/nbcwsj-poll-mccain-would-lose-to-edwards/

In this new NBC/WSJ survey, Edwards leads McCain by a margin of 43% to 41%. Obviously, two things immediately come to mind: A). Edwards’ victory is still very much within the margin of error; and B). Poll results just less than two years out from the election are subject to great changes and fluctuations as campaigns progress. However, this poll and others like it can not be merely tossed aside and dismissed–these polls pose a serious, serious problem to the very basic core reasoning of a McCain candidacy. For the past many months, and years even, McCain has had as much presidential support amongst Republican voters because they think he can win. Were it not for his perceived electoral power, McCain would be a nobody in terms of the presidential election–he would simply be a much older and feebler version of Chuck Hagel. The fact that John Edwards, someone with nowhere near the experience and qualifications of John McCain, can win at this point, considering that McCain is already at or near 100% name recognition and has very little wiggle room to change/develop opinions, is detrimental to the very fundamental logic of McCain’s run for the White House.

As we here have been predicting for weeks now, ever since the monumental change of dynamics created by the Democrats’ Senate takeover, McCain as a minority member is now stuck between a rock and a hard place. He has to, on the one hand, try to appease the same conservatives and Republicans he’s been infuriating for the past decade, but by doing so bleeds moderate/crossover support. On the other hand, he has to retain his image as a moderate, but by doing so bleeds conservative/GOP support. The major problem with this teeter-totter strategy is that as he flips back and forth, constantly trying to appease both ends of the political spectrum, he’s not actually making headway with either side. He’s only damaging his relationship with each side by constantly running back and forth to appease each one’s opposite side.

Where once McCain was the GOP’s “Ace,” now McCain is beginning to become a liability. For someone so immensely unpopular amongst grassroots conservative America, who also happens to be losing serious ground in the general election matchups, I just don’t see how McCain winds up with the nomination when all is said and done.

[Clark2008]

11. Groan.

No he does not.

He's a millionaire, not a populist.
He doesn't have any idea what to do in Iraq, since he helped cause it.

The only reason this man is popular is because some thing he's "cute."

Sad.

[citizen snips]

14. name politician who is not a millionaire?

Edwards position on Iraq is clear he wants to start withdrawing troops.

[Clark2008]

15. Just like he wanted to send them there in the first place?

No thanks. I'll take a pass. He wouldn't win in my state anyway, so I'll vote my conscious if he's the nominee.

[brentspeak]

28. Why wouldn't he win in Tenn.?

[Inspired]

16. Apparently you think I, and others,

support a candidate based on his being cute? THAT is sad...not to mention a little offensive but oh well. If that was true, I would probably start a 'Draft Clooney' movement. I guess then I would be supporting based on HOTNESS, not cuteness.

Edwards is leading Hillary right now in Iowa polls. Clark only is receiving around 4%. I think Clark is cuter than 4%. He's not cuter than Edwards but he is cuter than Hillary so he should at least be in 2nd place. Go figure.

[Pragmatic Pilgrim]

19. Yeah, everyone knows homely people are smarter, right?

Sorry, but I get tired of whatever it is (jealousy? a lack of other criticisms? wishful thinking?) that makes some folks accuse attractive people of being hollow. Talk about prejudicial stereotyping!

We tend to forget that anyone who gets within range of a presidential campaign has already climbed a long and steep slope. Their looks may have helped, along the way, but there had to be a whole lot more qualities working for them than that.

And incidentally, the same applies to movie stars who make it to the top. Take a look sometime at those books of head-shots in the office of any modeling agency, and you'll see thousands of anyonymous actors/actresses who are cuter than the few who win the Oscars.

[DaveinMD]

25. FDR was a millionnaire too

and was a populist. Edwards would be a great candidate.

[1932]

41. FDR's branch of the family was poorer than and looked down on by the Oyster

Bay Roosevelts. Also, I think he had a close relative from his branch of the family at Harvard who married a hooker, dropped out of school, and became an auto mechanic in NYC, which all the rich kids teased FDR about (IIRC, FDR's nickname became the name of this relative).

So, although he was richer than most Americans, he wasn't really accepted by the upper upper class.

When he met Eleanor, she was a volunteer for a charity that supported Jewish immigrant families and he would go on her rounds to Lower East Side tenements with her. He commented to her that he couldn't believe people lived like that and it does seem that his commitment to helping the poor might have been motivated by these first-hand experiences. Also, in America at the time there was a lot of casual antisemitism. Even Eleanor made antisemitic statements to others and in her diaries. But, FDR never did.

FDR really was quite different.

[DaveinMD]

46. and Edwards

has spent his entire career advocated for the powerless against the powerful. He understand the growing gap between righ and poor. He's a good man and will be a good candidate.

[venable]

45. very wrong

he is liked because he's a populist.

writing that he's not, in spite of all the evidence, doesn't make it true.

Look, Edwards is a vastly stronger candidate than yours. He just is. Face it, and leave these threads alone if you have nothing more substantial than 'the only reason people like him is that he's cute'.

the discussion - ie the op ed that inspired the OP - has moved quite a bit beyond your ken, I'm afraid.

[Morgana LaFey]

20. Where was this know-it-all 4 years ago?

Democratic populism is back, baby.

It was "back" back then, too. Howard Dean tapped into that vein, and offered authenticity and integrity to boot.

I think he's right about Edwards, but it's not that NEW. And Edwards sure as hell didn't invent it.

[Catchawave]

21. I give Dean credit for tapping the netroots surge....

He changed politics forever, and that's a good thing, because that's now part of the New Populism :D

[DaveinMD]

47. Edward ran as a populist 4 years agin

his two Americas theme is not new.