Wolfson: Edwards' Cover-up Cost Clinton the Nomination

[dysfunctional press]

Source: abc news

Sen. Hillary Clinton would be the Democratic presidential nominee if John Edwards had been caught in his lie about an extramarital affair and forced out of the race last year, insists a top Clinton campaign aide, making a charge that could exacerbate previously existing tensions between the camps of Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama.

"I believe we would have won Iowa, and Clinton today would therefore have been the nominee," former Clinton Communications Director Howard Wolfson told ABCNews.com.

Clinton finished third in the Iowa caucuses barely behind Edwards in second place and Obama in first. The momentum of the insurgent Obama campaign beating two better-known candidates -- not to mention an African-American winning in such an overwhelmingly white state -- changed the dynamics of the race forever.

Obama won 37.6 per cent of the vote. Edwards won 29.7 per cent and Clinton won 29.5 per cent, according to results posted by the Iowa Democratic Party.

Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=5553013&page=1

---

is this how she's going to get her foot in the door to open up the convention..?

[mzmolly]

1. Some would argue Bill Clinton cost Gore the election.

I don't buy the latest talking point from the Hillary camp. Polls indicate that Edwards supporters moved to Obama after he dropped out, myself included.

[Jackpine Radical]

16. Me too-from Edwards to Obama.

I think that was true of most Edwards supporters.

Had ther been no Edwards, Obama's win in IA would have been even bigger.

Caucus voters are generally tuned in to things like right-left dimensions, and the more liberal Edwards voters would not have mistaken Clinton for one of their own.

[mzmolly]

22. Hey JR!

:hi:

[Jackpine Radical]

32. Yo, Mzmolly!

:toast:

[Zuiderelle]

2. Well, it's pretty stupid to talk about it now, but it is a valid point.

Without Edwards, who knows how the chips would have fallen? He took away a lot of support that might have gone to Hillary. Great, thanks... one more reason to be disappointed in him.

[AllentownJake]

8. Seeing that most former Edwards supporters

Ended up with Obama that is an unlikely scenario.

The only way Edwards cost her the nomination was not staying in till March.

[Zuiderelle]

9. Yes, you might be right.

Guess we'll never know. Doesn't even matter at this point. Obama is it, and I hate this kind of conjecture. Edwards shouldn't have been in the race at all, and no one from Hillary's campaign should be making stupid comments like this.

[AllentownJake]

10. Olbermann said it best

Refighting the civil war if Lee had modern weapons.

[sofa king]

42. Harry Turtledove thanks you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Guns_of_the_south.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guns_of_the_South

[goddess40]

39. if the infidelity had come out it would have reminded people of Clinton's escapades

It would have hurt H Clinton more than helped her. Granted she's not the one that screwed around but we still have plenty of people that think a man cheats because his wife is (insert excuse) If Edwards had not run at all and no one knew of his extreme stupidity, it might have made a difference.

I was a Kucinich supporter first and than switched to Edwards and finally to Obama. H Clinton was never in the mix because of the boneheads she chose to surround her self with. Terry McCauliff gave horrible advice to our last two presidential candidates and in the end it cost them the win, at least the win with enough votes so that it couldn't be tampered with. Mark Penn, union buster, also made it impossible to back her. She was not in the line up for me, although had she prevailed I would have done what I could to help get her elected.

[Mojambo]

3. Well then at least some good came from this affair.

:evilgrin:

[JustAnotherGen]

4. Ditto MzMolly

I moved to Obama after Edwards dropped out - and gave financially to both Kucinich and Obama at that point.

[fascisthunter]

5. what a bunch of useless garbage

we could be on the brink of WWIII and this shit is circulating...

[knixphan]

24. exactly.

Voice of sanity!

[AllentownJake]

6. No Wolfson

You and the rest of Team Clinton cost her the nomination.

[eggplant]

7. And if big rocks fell from the sky...

...and crushed all of the other candidates, she'd be the nominee as well.

Enough of this shit. We have a candidate, we're all Democrats, let's just vote already. Sheesh.

[FreakinDJ]

11. "And the Sky opened up - and out fell Bill"

with his foot in his mouth

It was said many many times - The nomination was her's to lose.

and she lost it

[PassingFair]

12. That is SOME bullshit from the land of Gennifer Flowers!

What incredible GALL!!

[stray cat]

13. How dare anyone run against Hillary. She would have been elected if she were the only candidate!

[bunkerbuster1]

14. Whiny. Ass. Titty. Baby.

wahh! wahh! wahhhhh!

(Wolfson, that is.)

[w13rd0]

15. Wolfson?

Pfft...what the hell ever. Bad rain cost Biden the nomination. And if Dodd would have just died his hair. And if Kucinich had been about a foot taller... And... And....

[UrbScotty]

17. Something tells me Obama would've won by a bigger margin

Much bigger, in fact.

[lurky]

18. Aww, Wolfson wanted a White House job!

But he burned the Obama bridge during the primary... Poor Wolfson!

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

19. Howie needs to...

Get the glue bag off his nose. The article over at The Atlantic that shows the campaign emails shows, far more clearly, what the problems were with that campaign. Edwards cannot be blamed for them, either.

[Pavlovs DiOgie]

20. Well now that's funny

Wasn't it Clinton herself who said, just after she lost Iowa, that everyone knew that Iowa never chose the dem nominee? Interesting how Wolfson now claims Iowa is the gateway to the nomination.

[WhiteTara]

21. with asshats like Pen and Wofson, no wonder

she lost! God, boys, give it up. You lost the race.

[patrice]

23. I like Senator Clinton well enough, but a statement about how we got into this war HAD to be made

and she turned out to be THE example of what went wrong. I considered her for a few weeks, but kept coming back to the necessity of making it clear to the nation that the People are not cannon fodder for political ambitions.

Edwards protected himself from being the scapegoat for the IWR by advocating Economic Justice, something Senator Clinton would be somewhat less effective because because of her strong contingent of insane Hillary haters and something the Obama is somewhat less effective at than Edwards, because of Obama's strong contingent of Racists who are against everything he says. Edwards was the man because he carried the Economic Justice message well and promoted Unions.

If Edwards had been outed earlier I would only have moved to Obama earlier, because he would be just as effective as she on the economic issues and he wasn't my only chance to demonstrate how COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE a Yes vote on the IWR is/was.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

25. So he admits she lost.

:think:

[jimlup]

26. I think Wolfson cost Clinton the nomination

What an ass!

[Zhade]

27. Oh fucking well. clinton lost, period. It's over.

Cry me a river - scoring political points off this fiasco, how utterly tactless.

[krabigirl]

28. Nah. The Iowa voters would have gone for Biden or Richardson instead. They weren't into Clinton.

[CrazyDude]

29. Bullshit, no way to know n/t

[area51]

30. Disagree.

HRC had more negatives than Obama, that's why she lost, with her war-mongering and GingrichCare healthcare plan that was to force people to buy insurance.

[Jackpine Radical]

33. The DLC just couldn't imagine that Hill was less than wildly popular among

us boobs in the hinterlands--who are, after all, incapable of distinguishing a liberal from ahawkish corporate sellout.

[fla nocount]

48. I preferred Edwards to Obama and Obama to Clinton.

Maybe that's just me but if something is pulled to give the nomination to, She Who Better Not Be Named, get used to the term, President McCain.

[Jackpine Radical]

55. Gore--> Edwards--> Obama was my sequence.

And it may be McCain anyway. I see another theft shaping up, with the Dems seemingly in denial, acquieescence or complicity. (That complicity speculation is mindblowing, but when you look at all the evidence, they seem to be doing nothing when they've got to know better!)

[Zhade]

49. Her repeated, proven lies didn't help her any either.

NT!

[Jackpine Radical]

56. How an you say that about a woman who has been under enemy fire in Bosnia?

[still_one]

31. I will tell you what wolfson's speculation does, it trys to divide the party

trys to paint a picture that Obama isn't the legitimate nominee

What a flaming jerk wolfson is

Maybe the reason Hillary lost the nomination was because of the people she surrounded herself with, like wolfson

[robcon]

34. I think the analysis/logic of Wolfson's argument is weak.

More importantly, I think bringing that argument up now is treachery against the party. I was a Hillary supporter - Edwards second choice - but Wolfson should be castigated by all Democrats for bringing this up just before the convention.

[w4rma]

38. Thank you, robcon. (nt)

[Zhade]

50. Surprisingly, we agree.

Oh well, broken clocks and all that...

[EstimatedProphet]

35. No

No, it didn't cost clinton the nomination.

No, the big scary Hillary isn't going to try and take over the election.

[mdmc]

36. something of benefit to America came out of this affair after all

The Clintonistas have found the silver lining for me. :)

[Peace Patriot]

37. I don't care if Edwards had an affair. And I don't care if he lied about it. It is...

NOBODY'S GODDAMN BUSINESS! When are we going to throw off the war profiteering corporate 'news' monopolies' goddamn hypocritical puritanism by which they blackmail and destroy good leaders and create self-serving 'narratives' for the profit of the super-rich and global corporate predators? WHEN? This is ridiculous. Affairs are nothing, nothing, nothing, NOTHING! They are of NO IMPORTANCE! For all we know, Elizabeth approved of the affair. But whether she did or she didn't, it is NONE OF OUR GODDAMN BUSINESS! Godammit!

Well, I guess I shouldn't rail against us--we poor suckers of Diebold & brethren, we mere persons who pay our income taxes while Exxon Mobil et al get 'personhood' without responsibility, we the slave laborers and cannon fodder, we the gouged, we the bankrupt, we the homeless, we the pension-robbed, we the lucky ones with jobs who can't make it even then, we who lost limbs or our sanity in Iraq. I don't blame we, the victims, for this crap. I know how hard it is to overcome it, and how thorough, tenacious and ruthless the fascist/corporate powers have been in achieving rule over us. But we've got to start by SEEING THROUGH their phony narratives, NOT PLAYING their games, RESTORING transparent vote counting and then electing whoever we goddamn please, outside of their loony bin media.

[goddess40]

41. What matters is Edwards KNEW how this would blow up if exposed

and he did it anyway.


As far as your statement "Affairs are nothing, nothing, nothing, NOTHING! They are of NO IMPORTANCE!" First, I feel for your spouse or significant other. Second, Edwards knew how the media and the right wing would twist this information and to believe he could keep it secret is extremely arrogant and stupid.

Affairs also show how far struggle for women's rights need to go. Women are still trapped in marriages because of financial and now health care coverage. If you've stayed at home to raise children you're earning potential will never catch up to what it would have been had you stayed in the work force and when added to the fact that women still make less then men. It's hard for a woman to make it on her own. And a women in Elizabeth's health status (and the first Mrs. McCain) really aren't in the position to "throw the bum" out.

[PassingFair]

43. "Glass House" behavior from the Clinton camp. nt

[Ramius]

47. grain of salt

Problem is, most polls/studies indicate that women are not far behind in engaging in affairs compared to men.

Secondly, most polls studies indicate around a 50% infidelity rate. Considering that cheaters often lie about their infidelity, I would submit that the actual numbers are likely higher.

So, without marginalizing or dismissing infidelity, at the same time, it might be wise to keep in mind that the odds are that 1 out of 2 of the people being hyper-judgmental of Edwards have likely engaged in infidelity themselves.

Excuse me if I take much of your outrage with a grain of salt.

[Peace Patriot]

51. There you go, making it personal. You "feel for" my spouse. I'm talking about PUBLIC POLICY.

PUBLIC and PRIVATE are separate. You have no business judging me or my spouse in any respect, let alone with respect to my opinion on a matter of public policy. Criminy, our political life has become no better than the front page of a tabloid. Why does this matter? It shouldn't matter. And there was a time in this country when it didn't. The press respected the privacy of politicians and their families. It was NOBODY'S BUSINESS who public office holders' sexual partners were. Where the hell did this vicious PURITANISM come from that makes public office holders' or candidates' private lives into public property? It is coming from the far right, who always have a prurient interest in other peoples' sex lives for purposes of control--blackmail, intrusion, scapegoating and witch-hunting.

You have no right to make assumptions about Elizabeth Edwards' health care or anything else in her private life. If SHE complains of abuse or neglect or breach of contract, that is one thing. But you have no idea what she thinks. None! And you wrongfully assume you know what it's all about. This intrusion into HIS life is as much an abuse of HER as it is of him. I hate this so much! It is a serious, serious abuse privacy and freedom. It began with the Gary Hart campaign (can't think of the year--mid-1970s) and gathered steam in the '80s under Reagan when rightwing think tanks began seriously to manipulate and gain monopoly control of the 'news.' It is sick. We are sick society to be treating public leaders this way. Or, I should say, the corporate media is sick. I don't think ordinary people give a goddamn who is sleeping with whom. Is their son or daughter going to die in Iraq? Is Social Security going to be bankrupted by the war? Are we facing Great Depression II? How can I make my house payments when I'm laid off? How can I pay for my kid's dialysis? These are the things that concern people--not politicians' sexual affairs! It's the Hollywoodization of politics, and it's a RIGHTWING technique for trivializing and marginalizing peoples' real concerns.

How can we stop this? That's what we should be asking. Not blaming Edwards, or making all kinds of assumptions about his marriage. We should sympathize with him, in the face of the HORRIBLE power of the corporate/fascist media to destroy popular leaders over something that is NONE OF OUR BUSINESS and that DOESN'T MEAN SHIT.

[joeglow3]

52. Bush is a flat out liar

And yet, you have no concern about a Religious Democrat flat out lying and breaking one of the single greatest vows a Christian can make. I know we are not all perfect, but I want to know if the person I am voting for will take the vows of the office seriously and if they will lie to the public.


On a more simple level, if he was too stupid to not realize this would come out, he is too stupid to be president.

[Peace Patriot]

54. A "Religious Democrat"? What the hell is that? No, I have ZERO concern about

what John Edwards does in bed, or what he says about it IN PUBLIC. His partners have a right to privacy. HE has a right to privacy. His wife has a right to privacy. And his children have a right to privacy.

And I felt this way about Clinton's indiscretions as well. He has a right to privacy, and he has a right to lie about it IN ORDER TO INSURE HIS PRIVACY.

The wrongness here is in the Kenneth Starr's and in the mindbogglingly hypocritical rightwing, who tolerate killing one million people to get their oil, but let a Democratic politician have an affair, or pay a prostitute--that's a crime!

BULLSHIT! We mustn't let the fascist media tyrannize us this way. It is NOBODY'S BUSINESS what consenting adults do in private.

I want to revise something I said above--that obsession with politicians' sex lives is a new phenomenon, and that the press used to be protective of their privacy. This was true pre-70s/80s with regard to heterosexual sex, but homosexuals were more vulnerable to scandal. The press looked the other way on Eisenhower's affair, on JFK's affairs, on Hubert Humphrey's affairs, and I think FDR had an affair as well--on all such affairs. (The press also respected FDR's privacy concerning his need for a wheelchair, since there was a lot more prejudice against the crippled then, than there is now, and they kept his disability out of photographs.) These things were considered PRIVATE. However, a homosexual could be blackmailed and could be politically destroyed--because homosexuality was truly verboten. The press wouldn't destroy anyone over a heterosexual affair--it just wasn't done. But they might over a homosexual affair. They did, in England--the famous Profumo scandal. I can't recall it being done here--but the threat was real. Heterosexual affairs? Having mistresses? Using prostitutes? All off limits to the press, out of concern for privacy.

[pokercat999]

59. I have a biological instinct to agree with you about

public/private except; the people we are talking about are public OFFICIALS and their interactions with ANYONE should be subject to scrutiny by the press and public. When as in the case of McSame, his (alleged) affair is with a lobbyist with clients and issues that their partner may help/hinder in their public capacity?

Your private life, my private life are and should be just that private, right up until the time we run for public office then all bets are off.

Now, do I care if Edwards had an affair? I do not and am not interested UNLESS it impacted his ability to govern, and that is the ONLY legitimate question for the press, IMHO.

Same for Bill Clinton and McSame, does the affair have an impact on their official decisions. If it MAY then we have a problem, if not then have fun and good luck, you'll need it.

[Anarcho-Socialist]

40. umm, no. Wishful thinking

Given that Edwards' original platform positions were probably closer to Obama, I don't think so.

[wishlist]

44. Not Late Breaking News, just unfounded political speculation n/t

[tabasco]

53. Definitely not LBN that Wolfson is a dipshit.

Hillary lost because she is a flawed candidate.

Her lack of judgment in hiring idiots like Wolfson merely illustrates her incompetence.

[MBS]

58. . . . . n/t

[knitter4democracy]

45. Bullshit. No way would Edwards voters have gone for Hillary.

That's a huge stretch.

[Generator]

46. I think we will soon find out he's also responsible

for global warming and this Georgian crisis. In fact, I somehow think there is nothing that the dastardly Edwards hasn't ruined. OH JUST SEX, indeed. I love the smell of a scapegoat in the morning.

[MBS]

57. Wolfson is in fantasyland.

More Edwards voters in Iowa had Obama as second choice , rather than Hillary. (see today's MoDo column in NYT)

Why won't these people give it up?