Edwards: "I can campaign anyplace in America" (Hillary and Obama, not so much)

[Adelante]

Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards Sunday warned Iowa voters about what he perceives as the perils of nominating a candidate who down-ticket Democrats in some parts of the nation may decline to appear with in their own campaign events.

Speaking in Carroll, Edwards made the observation after saying there are "three of us who are most likely to be the Democratic nominee."

"It's not just a question of who you like," Edwards said. "It's not just a question of whose vision you are impressed with. It's also a question of who is most likely to win the general election. It's a pretty simple thing. Who will be a stronger candidate in the general election here in the State of Iowa? Who can go to other parts of the country when we have swing candidates running for the Congress and the Senate? Is the candidate going to have to say, 'Don't come here. Don't come here and campaign with me. I can't win if you campaign with me.'"

He added later, "I think it's just a reality that I can campaign anyplace in America."

http://www.iowaindependent.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=373


Nice to be a white man in America, eh?

[Demobrat]

1. And Hillary and Obama can't?

Last I heard we were still pretending racism and sexism didn't exist . So what's stopping them?

[draft_mario_cuomo]

33. Ask Kerry

HRC's issues are well-documented. As far as Obama is concerned, ask John Kerry why Obama will have trouble selling in some parts of the nation where "elitists" are frowned upon. If they could paint Kerry as an elitist they will have a field day with a Harvard undergrad, Harvard law educated former University of Chicago professor from liberal, cosmopolitan Chicago, Illinois...

[Freddie Stubbs]

40. Those are the same people who may be leery of a guy who get $400 haircuts

[The Backlash Cometh]

105. What's stopping them? Prejudice.

Driving through Park Avenue in Winter Park yesterday, I came to the stop sign and there was a "Hillary" sticker slapped in the middle of the Stop sign. This is the Rodeo drive of Central Florida.

Maybe what Edwards is trying to say is, that until you stop allowing White Christian males from stealing our elections by using caging lists, he's the only candidate left to appeal to those who ARE allowed to vote.

[Demobrat]

107. Prejudice may stop people from voting for them.

And it may stop people from showing up at their events, but last I heard we were still pretending this was a free country, and Hillary and Obama can campaign wherever they choose. If Edwards is going to play the prejudice card he should come right out and say it. Vote for me because I'm a white male and only a white male can win. Heck, if he had that kind of courage he might actually be a contender.

[The Backlash Cometh]

118. Give it time. I think he's being diplomatic.

Look what happened when Hillary called the Republican congress, plantation owners. She was right, but, oh, the uproar. Maybe it's best to let things seep into the crevices of mainstream America. Let them think they came up with the idea themselves.

[BeyondGeography]

2. First Elizabeth compares him with Jesse Helms, now this

Desperation makes a man do many things.

[Adelante]

3. I tell ya

Politics sure is fun :D

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NYCGirl]

38. That's why the article had to say this farther down the page:

"In an interview with Iowa Independent and The Carroll Daily Times Herald, Edwards strongly rejected the suggestion that his comments about being the most electable candidate in the Democratic field were a way of saying America won't vote for a black man (Obama) or woman (Clinton) without actually saying it - to a largely white, elderly rural audience in Carroll with no national media present."

So no one could have possibly thought it was referring to race or sex.

[DemDogs]

92. Not what Elizabeth said - enough of this nonsense

She said that you knew where Helms stood (which was 180 degrees from Edwards) but at least you knew where he stood. You also know where Edwards stands.

[rinsd]

4. Edwards' campaign is in trouble if he's making the most electable argument this early (nt)

[bluestateguy]

5. I want a nominee that can campaign in all 50 states

Put Republicans on the defensive everywhere. Make them earn every electoral vote. Concede nothing. Make them spread their resources thin. So far I sense that Edwards is the person who can do that.

[Adelante]

7. Actually he's running left this time around

There would be just as many conservative Dems who wouldn't want to appear with him as with a black man or a woman. So I think he's all wet with this tack.

[BootinUp]

18. yep. n/t

[Auntie Bush]

137. My, you're a man of many words!

But that is sufficient!

[NoodleBoy]

6. so apparently "anywhere" on John Edwards' map is 5 swing states and North Carolina

dude... just give up.

[NCarolinawoman]

81. I don't think he woud win North Carolna.

From an article dated May 21,2007


DEMOCRATS FALTER AS BUSH DIPS

North Carolinians don't like Bush very much, but they aren't that excited about the Democrats who might replace them.
---------snip--------

Asked if they would prefer a generic Democrat or generic Repblican, North Carolina voters preferred a Democrat over a Republican 47 per cent to 42 per cent.
---------snip--------

Those polled said they would be less likely to vote for the ticket if John Edwards, Barack Obama, and especially Hillary Clinton were on the ticket.
---------snip--------

http://www.newsobserver.com/674/story/576254.html

[NoodleBoy]

95. he didn't win NC in 2004-- I was referring to right after he was announced on the ticket, he went

around NC suddenly, as though adding a one-term junior Senator with no prior political experience to the ticket would suddenly recover the 20 point polling gap between Bush and Kerry in the state.

As history showed us, it didn't work. This time around--same as last time around-- I really wish both of our national slots were filled with candidates who could win their own states.

[nevergiveup]

8. I really like John Edwards

but this comment was made with very questionable judgment. The comment is ripe with all kinds of subtle prejudicial suggestions. I don't think Edwards probably has a prejudiced bone in his body. Perhaps he should have run this by Elizabeth first.

[NYCGirl]

9. She's the one who made the weird Jesse Helms comparison:

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/06/05/politics/p122550D27.DTL

[venable]

16. o for god's sake, that comment was not weird, unless you make it so

it is plain as day, and here and only here is everybody all up in arms and shocked.

read the statement - she makes the point that they are exactly opposite, which is how one points to the one similarity - they hid nothing. did you get the first part, the premise - they are ideological opposites, these two north carolinians.

the DU scream about this is absurd. ask any single person not predisposed to find something wrong with Edwards.

please, please don't start this again.

[NYCGirl]

19. I'm not up in arms or shocked. I just think it was a ridiculous statement. NT

[Beaverhausen]

122. Do you mean when she said Helms and Edwards didn't agree on a single issue?

that comment?
give me a break and stop repeating this "comparison" crap.

[NYCGirl]

141. Yeah, "But here's what they agreed on - that people should know where they stood."

As the article says, "His wife's favorable comparison aside, John Edwards has been known to speak critically of the longtime North Carolina lawmaker."

http://www.charlotte.com/559/story/148621.html

[Demobrat]

10. Subtle?

There was nothing subtle about it. He might just as well have said vote for me because I'm a white male and they're not.

[Colobo]

21. Maybe John doesn't like that a woman and a black man are whooping his ass so far

[Alamom]

110. Maybe so. eom

[Radical Activist]

11. That kind of reasoning is why Kerry was nominated last time.

He was supposed to be the most electable candidate and he lost. We have to stop picking candidates with that kind of guesswork.

I think Obama can campaign anywhere. He'll also increase turnout among black voters in the South and midwest better than Edwards can, which makes him more electable.

[Ethelk2044]

13. Edwards could not carry his own state last time please

[mnhtnbb]

99. Edwards was not top of the ticket. Kerry lost NC. I think he showed up once

in the state to campaign with Edwards, about a week after the convention.

[Beaverhausen]

123. when is the last time a democrat won NC?

[Inspired]

144. He did win his senate seat, didn't he?

I don't recall him being at the top of the ticket in '04. This rhetoric about him not winning his home state is quite lame.

What about Al Gore? He lost his home state in '00 but he appears to be the darling of Democrats.

[Awsi Dooger]

26. "Supposed to be the most electable..."

You ignored the most relevant aspect of your own post. Democrats wrongly assigned most electable to Kerry. That doesn't mean you jettison electability, simply because you botched the application the first time. You learn how to get it right.

Ignore electability at our own peril. A year ago at this time electability was a theme here in the Nevada governor's race. Our potential nominee Jim Gibson was widely considered more electable statewide than Dina Titus and her high disapproval numbers. But the base was content to ignore that, and overwhelmingly nominate Titus. Well, she lost by 4 points even against a bumbling scandal prone goof named Jim Gibbons.

I like Hillary but she'll be hard pressed to win a nail biter against any Republican. Edwards is absolutely correct to tout himself as most electable. We can't be stupid enough to pretend a woman or black man is not running slightly uphill even in 2008.

[Radical Activist]

29. Electability is unpredictable.

We should be willing to admit that we can only make guesses and who may or may not be electable. Edwards isn't more electable just because some people think he is.
You don't really know what would have happened with the more electable candidate in Nevada either.

[w4rma]

93. You know why Edwards can run to the left and Obama and Hillary can't? Because Edwards is electable

and the other two aren't.

[Radical Activist]

114. Obama doesn't need to run to the left.

He has always been there.

[w4rma]

116. Obama Agrees With Bill Clinton's Welfare Reform

His thoughts on domestic and foreign policy try to hew to this consensus-building line. Some of his recommendations devolve into little more than fuzzy statements of the obvious: i.e., that America’s “addiction to oil” is affecting the economy and undermining national security, or that the education system needs to be revamped and improved. Others echo Bill Clinton’s “third way,” methodically triangulating between traditionally conservative and traditionally liberal ideas.

Mr. Obama writes that “conservatives — and Bill Clinton — were right about welfare as it was previously structured: By detaching income from work and by making no demands on welfare recipients other than a tolerance for intrusive bureaucracy and an assurance that no man lived in the same house as the mother of his children, the old A.F.D.C. program sapped people of their initiative and eroded their self respect.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/17/books/17kaku.html?ex=1182398400&en=027739670ff475a8&ei=5070
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3325889

The Obama Illusion
Presidential ambitions from the start

• lent his support to the aptly named Hamilton Project, formed by corporate-neoliberal Citigroup chair Robert Rubin and “other Wall Street Democrats” to counter populist rebellion against corporatist tendencies within the Democratic Party
• lent his politically influential and financially rewarding assistance to neoconservative pro-war Senator Joe Lieberman
• supported other “mainstream Democrats” fighting antiwar progressives in primary races
• criticized efforts to enact filibuster proceedings against reactionary Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito.
• voted for a business-friendly “tort reform” bill that rolls back working peoples’ ability to obtain reasonable redress and compensation from misbehaving corporations
• oppose the introduction of single-payer national health insurance on the grounds that such a widely supported social-democratic change would lead to employment difficulties for workers in the private insurance industry
• expressed reservations about a universal health insurance plan recently enacted in Massachusetts, stating his preference for “voluntary” solutions over “government mandates.”
• voted to re-authorize the repressive PATRIOT Act
• voted for the appointment of the war criminal Condaleeza Rice to (of all things) Secretary of State
• opposed Senator Russ Feingold’s (D-WI) move to censure the Bush administration after the president was found to have illegally wiretapped U.S. citizens
• distanced himself from fellow Illinois Democratic Senator Dick Durbin’s forthright criticism of U.S. torture practices at Guantanamo
• refuses to foreswear the use of first-strike nuclear weapons against Iran
• makes a big point of respectfully listening to key parts of the right wing agenda even though that agenda is well outside majority sentiment
• joins victim-blaming Republicans in pointing to poor blacks’ “cultural” issues as the cause of concentrated black poverty
• he claims that blacks have joined the American “socioeconomic mainstream” even as median black household net worth falls to less than eight cents on the median white household dollar
• “If the Democrats don’t show a willingness to work with the president, I think they could be punished in ‘08”

http://zmagsite.zmag.org/Feb2007/street0207.html

Obama rallies state Democrats, throws support behind Lieberman
By Stephanie Reitz, Associated Press Writer | March 31, 2006
…
Lieberman, Connecticut's junior senator, is under fire from some liberal Democrats for his support of the Iraq War. He was key in booking Obama, who routinely receives more than 200 speaking invitations each week.
…
"The fact of the matter is, I know some in the party have differences with Joe. I'm going to go ahead and say it," Obama told the 1,700-plus party members who gathered in a ballroom at the Connecticut Convention Center for the $175-per-head fundraiser.

"I am absolutely certain Connecticut is going to have the good sense to send Joe Lieberman back to the U.S. Senate so he can continue to serve on our behalf," he said.
…
http://www.boston.com/news/local/connecticut/articles/2006/03/31/obama_rallies_state_democrats_throws_support_behind_lieberman

[Radical Activist]

127. I've read the book so I'm not falling for that spin.

I know that on a series of issues Obama talks about how both conservatives and liberals have failed, lost public support, and then writes about how things can be done better. Cherry picking the instances where Obama admits the historic mistakes of liberalism (while ignoring everything else he writes) is intellectually dishonest, and it doesn't make Obama a third way Clintonite.

Why not post the actual solutions Obama promotes in his book? Oh I know, because that would make him look like a sensible progressive that can receive public support while maintaining liberal values.

[w4rma]

139. "admits the historic mistakes of liberalism"? In other words, I'm right about Obama.

He does support Clinton's Welfare Reform and Clintonista DLC triangulation.

[Radical Activist]

145. Way to avoid a response!

If you think liberals have never made a mistake or done something wrong, ever, then you're a brainwashed missionary just as much as the Rush Limbaugh crowd. Anyone who has read the book knows how full of shit your last post is.

[jefferson_dem]

12. I respect Edwards but he is seroiusly losing it.

n/t

[rhombus]

14. This is insulting to the rest of the candidates. What's up with Edwards?

This is a disgraceful comment. So Edwards is making the case that a black or female candidate can't win the presidency, and he's the only one who can do it?


Very shamful especially coming from a Democrat. You'd expect this kind of talk from the rightwing.

:( :( :(

[Cameron27]

15. Pathetic.

[venable]

17. the pious ones are, once more, shocked, shocked I tell you, at Edwards.

there is nothing wrong with this statement. every single candidate says the same thing in shrouded terms. edwards speaks straight out.

if a candidate didn't believe this, why in the world would he/she run.

relax. he is not losing it. y'all are just not used to this kind of unfiltered speech.

[Colobo]

20. So a black man or a woman can't make it, but good ol' boy Johnny can...

Nice tactics, John.

[BluegrassDem]

30. You all are dancing around the issue

Basically John Edwards is saying "vote for me cause I'm the white guy...". He's starting to use Hillary's gender and Barack's race against them, which is really sickening and something I never thought he'd do. He's reminding voters that he's a white man, so that somehow makes him a more suitable nominee. So all those Democrat voters who are not yet down with women and blacks...he's letting them know that they can vote him cause he's a white male. I'm really disappointed that he would stoop this low.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

31. Where did he mention race or gender? nt

[Colobo]

32. He didn't have to, because he implied it.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

39. How? People don't realize how easily Obama can be painted as an "elitist"

He is a Harvard undergrad, Harvard law educated former University of Chicago professor from liberal, cosmopolitan Chicago, Illinois in the North. You couldn't script a candidate that is easier to paint as an elitist.

1) Harvard
2) Harvard law
3) Professor
4) Professor at an elite law school
5) From cosmopolitan Chicago, the third largest city in America
6) From the North

Dean and Kerry were painted as elitists. Obama can be painted as an elitist even more. It is sad. Being a professor alone will actually cost Obama some.

[NYCGirl]

43. Ummm....Chicago is in the Midwest, unless it's been moved recently. NT

[LBJDemocrat]

47. Chicago is a cosmopolitan city

Rural southerners have more in common with Iowa than a Chicagoan.

Obama makes John Kerry look like Huey Long.

[NYCGirl]

50. John Edwards is hardly a "rural" Southerner. NT

[LBJDemocrat]

53. He was born and raised in relatively rural areas of NC

I'd say that qualifies him pretty well.

[NYCGirl]

55. Do you really think the people of Iowa are rubes? NT

[LBJDemocrat]

71. People outside of cosmopolitan areas aren't fond of urban elites

It's a prejudice, but it exists. New York (Manhattan), LA, and Chicago, especially are disliked.

[NYCGirl]

72. So you're saying they're unsophisticated rubes. NT

[JI7]

100. that's what Candy Crowley said

remember the green tea stuff from her

[venable]

131. who said this, NYC Girl. who said this?

what's your problem?

[IA_Seth]

106. Well Golllllly!

Thanks fer doin my speakin fer me. Sumtimes I gets so darn frustrated wundrin what in tarnation dem city folks be talkin bout.

What the hell man. As an Iowan I will tell you flatly that there is little 'prejudice' where I am at for anyone from a 'cosmopolitan' area. Hell, Iowa is one of the most educated states in the nation. Sure, there may be rural/city prejudices, but those happen everywhere...in every state. Edwards isn't some down-home good ol boy by any stretch. I don't know any farmers that would identify a whole lot with his lifestyle anymore so than Obama, Clinton, or any of the others.

This was a veiled statement about race/gender biases in our general electorate, and I think it's pretty sick.

[venable]

132. BS - it had nothing to do with race and gender unless you think it so.

Edwards did not say this, it was not veiled, it has to do with the kind of appeal each has.

you know what's sick?....

[SoxFan]

115. Garbage.

Edwards lived in wealthy Carey, NC for most of his adult life, and now lives in a McMansion in a liberal college town. His poor boy act is transparent.

[venable]

133. you are wrong, wrong.

do some research.

do you know anything about the south?

sincere question.

here's some stuff:



The town is spelled C A R Y.
Cary is not wealthy.
Edwards never lived in Cary

you want to look at his life, who he is, visit Robbins, NC

[venable]

130. you really need to look into this before you make such a claim.

ever been to Robbins, NC?

Seneca, SC.

take a visit and come back and tell me he's not rural.

sigh.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

58. Yeah, it is a northern city

That hurts him in the South. That is just a fact. Yankee Dems have not won a southern state since JFK.

It also hurts him, to an extent, in other parts of the nation, as post #47 notes.

[zulchzulu]

80. Ever been to Chicago?

It's pretty big and has a LOT going on. I've lived in NYC, SF, BST, NO and other places and Chicago is a world class city. I know cool cities.

[NYCGirl]

88. Yes I have. I live in NYC now, but I'm a native San Franciscan.

Chicago seemed pretty Midwest. Big, world class, but Midwestern.

[zulchzulu]

104. I could show you any culture in Chicago

The place is huge...granted it's not surrounded by Jersey chemical plants...

[BeyondGeography]

56. You left out the fatherless and often motherless childhood

but who's keeping score.

Nice that you would use Obama's ability to use the lone advantage he had, education, against him.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

62. Do you think Rove and co. will mention that?

==Nice that you would use Obama's ability to use the lone advantage he had, education, against him.==

I didn't. I simply stated the obvious. The repukes will use it against him and it will hurt him. You don't get anymore educationally elite than Harvard for both undergrad and law school.

We can be rational or we can sink our heads in the sand. Did we learn anything from 2000 and 2004?

The other candidates have weaknesses as well. Obama supporters are certainly quick to point out HRC's...

[BeyondGeography]

65. Obama's biography is a strong suit; most people understand that

If RoveCo paint him as elitist, he has plenty of life history to refute it, including years of grass roots community organizing that none of our other candidates can claim. Next.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

89. Kerry's biography was also his strong suit!

Remember? The whole purple heart winner, war hero thing? What happened? They Swift boated him and turned his advantage--the reason he was nominated--into a disadvantage.

==If RoveCo paint him as elitist, he has plenty of life history to refute it, including years of grass roots community organizing that none of our other candidates can claim==

Yeah, and Kerry's purple heart and heroic record really inoculated him from Rove and co....

[NYCGirl]

91. Kerry RAN on his war record — if Edwards runs on his "mill worker father",

Rove will have a lot of fun with that — in fact he already has, if you can judge by his haircut and his house.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

96. Kerry didn't run on his war record in the GE. He ran on competence

Sound familiar? ;)

[NYCGirl]

98. John Kerry, "Reporting for Duty"! NT

[LBJDemocrat]

74. He went to Columbia for undergrad

My mistake.

Though it has to be noted that these days Columbia may fit the stereotype of northern elites even closer than Harvard. It's like Harvard but with more hard-partying and arrogance. Probably wealthier on average, too.

The student body must be seen to be believed.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

90. Thanks for pointing that out. Good point. Columbia is also in *gasp* NYC

So we have an Chicago Ivy Leaguer who went to an Ivy League school in NYC, then an Ivy League law school in Massachusetts, and then was a grad school professor in Chicago. Damn. The locations alone will provide some useful fodder. Look at what they did to Vermonter Dean!

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

63. Exactly. The results speak for themselves

Southerners since 1968: won in 76', lost in 80', won in 92', won in 96', won in 2000 (4 for 5)
Non-Southern Dems since 1968: lost in 68', lost in 72', lost in 84', lost in 88', lost in 04' (0 for 5)

[Jillian]

22. Ouch. nt

[SaveElmer]

23. I'm going to assume Edwards did not have race or gender in mind...

When he said this...though he sure left it open to be interpreted that way...

But making an southern electability argument when you aren't even polling ahead in your own state isn't really all that believable...

[Cameron27]

25. What do you think he means then?

"It's not just a question of who you like"

"It's not just a question of whose vision you are impressed with"

"It's also a question of who is most likely to win the general election"

"It's a pretty simple thing. Who will be a stronger candidate in the general election here in the State of Iowa?" ...

If it's not on the issues, and not on likability...just what is he basing his supposed electability on? His Southerness?

[SaveElmer]

45. Well I assume...

He believes a populist message that he is trying (with limited success) , to disseminate, will resonate better with southerners...

I don't believe Edwards is racist or sexist, so I am going to assume he did not mean that...

But again, he sure left it open to that interpretation...

[draft_mario_cuomo]

48. He probably meant what he and Clark meant in 04'

Let's look at the scoreboard since 1968 for Dems:

Southern nominees: 4 for 5 (Carter 76', Clinton twice, Gore 2000)
Non-Southern nominees: 0 for 5 (Humphrey 68', McGovern 72', Mondale 84', Dukakis 88', Kerry 04')

[SaveElmer]

57. This is true...

But the west is turning into fertile ground for Democrats...and will surpass the southin importance (if it hasn't already)

[draft_mario_cuomo]

83. Good point but we can't write-off the South for 08'

We ran into the problem of hoping for a near sweep of purple states in 04'. We needed near perfection to win in 04' while ceding the South's 153 electoral votes to Bush from day 1.

Let's also remember that what sells in the South helps in border states and, to a lesser extent, other places.

[Adelante]

54. I don't say he is racist or sexist, either

I just think he sees his opportunity and he's taking it, as politicians do.

[Cameron27]

64. Oh I agree that he's not a racist or sexist,

but I think he's pushing his southern, white, y chromosome appeal to the max.

[Adelante]

69. Exactly

The tactic is racist and sexist, but it doesn't take a racist or sexist to employ it. Just a politician.

[smalll]

24. Because he's NOT running as a "moderate" this is pretty egregious -

He's running to Hillary's and Obama's left, or at least is positioning himself there: anti-war to the max, "the two Americas," the concern about poverty. So why is Edwards going to be a "stronger candidate" who can "go to other parts of the county where we have swing candidates" and campaign with them? Hmmmm??? Simply and solely because Edwards is a white man, not a woman, not a black man. So he's trying to appeal here to Iowa's caucus-goers who like to try to pick "winners" for their parties, and he is asking them to basically assume racism and sexism in the American electorate enough to make himself the default candidate.

It's as though Johnson in 1960 campaigned against Kennedy for the nomination by telling his audiences that they shouldn't risk a Catholic, and should stick with Protestant Lyndon.

And they say Hillary's un-electable. That's a laugh. This man, and at times, his wife, put their foot in it almost weekly it seems.

[LBJDemocrat]

49. Because the other two represent the urban north

The same reason supporters of Fred Thompson, who's running well to the right of Giuliani, claim that he's more electable.

Clinton and Obama have little appeal in middle America relative to Edwards, and, yes, part of it may be that they do little to counter their image as the candidates for the well-to-do city people. Edwards' liberalism actually MAKES him electable.

[NYCGirl]

52. "Well-to-do city people"!! I have this image Edwards in overalls with a piece of

straw sticking out of his mouth.


:rofl:

[draft_mario_cuomo]

27. WesDem, wasn't this one of the key rationales behind the Clark candidacy?

That, by virtue of his southern roots, he could compete across the nation?

Edwards is right. Only he can make inroads in the South, aside from HRC in Arkansas by virtue of her home court advantage.

[Adelante]

36. I don't agree he has that advantage

He's arguing down ticket loss would be suffered, because, of the “three of us," only he would be able to campaign for candidates in swing districts. If he were still in his centrist mode, rather than running left, perhaps there might be something to it. However, both Clinton and Obama are closer to center than the new Edwards, so he is no more attractive to swing district candidates than they would be. In fact, I would say they have it over him on that score and the polls are generally showing it. The only thing he has to offer a conservature culture that Obama and Clinton don't have is he is white and male, so that's what he's selling.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

66. Perception is reality. Edwards is perceived as the most centrist of the three

Also, he is from the South and can connect with rural voters with his rural background. Neither Obama and HRC--regardless of their skin color or biological plumbing--can do that.

You make a strong case, though. I think the issue in this thread is whether Edwards was playing the race card (you know, like supporters of a certain candidate do when they say only their candidate can win in certain states because his skin color will allegedly increase turnout...) or whether he meant something else. The DLC'ers are quickly jumping to attack Edwards by claiming that is what he meant. It is clear, though, that he probably meant what I and others have been saying. He is not dumb. He wouldn't do something that would alienate women and African-Americans, who combine for about 70% of the Dem primary electorate!

[draft_mario_cuomo]

28. Where did he mention race or gender?

HRC's general election problems have been discussed numerous times. Obama? He is a Harvard undergrad, Harvard law educated former University of Chicago professor from liberal, cosmopolitan Chicago, Illinois in the North. Look at how badly Kerry was painted as an "elitist." That will happen on a much larger scale with Obama.

[BeyondGeography]

35. You're right, he should have completed the thought

"I think it's just a reality that I can campaign anyplace in America (and you can't say the same thing about a black man or a woman)."

[Colobo]

37. LOL! Good one. I hope John gets grilled by the media for this.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

42. How well do Ivy League professors from cosmopolitan, liberal Chicago sell in some parts of the US?

Even if Obama were 100% white he would face these hurdles.

[LBJDemocrat]

51. If John Kerry had it bad...

Let's remember that John Kerry is a highly decorated Vietnam veteran who didn't patronize his audience and had a history of integrity in the public sphere.

Barack Obama is a rich kid who never picked up anything heavier than a pencil. Columbia undergrad AND Harvard Law (Kerry went to Boston College). Law professor at University of Chicago (there's not much love for universities these days, what with +10% annual tuition inflation).

Some of this might be forgiven if he sincerely sympathized with the laborers of the Rust Belt or those in rural areas, but apparently, he wants the worker to understand that CEOs are human just like us.

Fucking nothing but rhetoric.

[BeyondGeography]

59. Rich kid? Ignorance alert

He grew up in exceedingly modest circumstances. Whatever money his mother had went to education. "Dad" was completely out of the picture for all but one confusing month of his life.

The fact that he was able to succeed academically makes him a rich kid in your eyes. Lame.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

97. People thought BC was a rich kid until Morris came up with "the man from Hope"

Let's not kid ourselves. The right-wing will paint Obama as born rich as well. Why? The reason, as Morris has explained, people assumed BC was rich was his elite education. Well, Obama is even more educationally elite than BC was!

Of course, we know BC was able to fight back and correct the record with his "Man from Hope" story and Obama would do the same with his compelling "mother from Kansas, father from Kenya" story.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

67. Good point about Obama's patronizing rhetoric toward some audiences

Obama is the only Dem who castigates certain parts of the population, especially to some black audiences, which is marketed by Axlerod and co. as "tough love" (it is his version of an extended Sister Souljah moment to sooth concerns of some non-black voters...). He goes to them and spouts repuke talking points!

[geek tragedy]

78. No, he tells them stuff that they agree with.

Good thing white liberals are around to tell them that they believe in Republican talking points though--it's not like those people can think for themselves. :sarcasm:

[draft_mario_cuomo]

84. I wasn't aware that I am white, but thanks for sharing the news

:rofl:

The fact is what Obama says in his Sister Souljah moments could easily come from the lips of Newt Gingrich...

[geek tragedy]

101. "Fact" is a very loose term for

Edwards fanatics.

[w4rma]

117. You said that, not Edwards. You thought it up all on your own. (nt)

[LBJDemocrat]

41. Ask yourself:

Would you be making a big deal about Edwards' claim of electability if his opponents didn't include a woman and a black man?

[draft_mario_cuomo]

46. No. We know this because electability was central to the Clark, Edwards candidacies in 04'

No one accused them of bigotry then (we had two African-American candidates, one who was a woman running at the time). It was understood that they were relying on their southern roots to sell their electability--and the evidence since 1960 suggests being from the South is a big boost for a Democrat. Let's look at the scoreboard since 1964:

Southern nominees: 4 for 5 (Carter 76', Clinton twice, Gore 2000)
Non-Southern nominees: 0 for 5 (Humphrey 68', McGovern 72', Mondale 84', Dukakis 88', Kerry 04')

[geek tragedy]

61. He wouldn't have made that comment if a black man

and a woman weren't kicking his ambulance-chasing ass.

[LBJDemocrat]

70. Edwards is an ambulance chaser now?

That's a repub talking point.

Besides, I'll take an ambulance chaser over a guy who goes to the dispossessed and tells them they're poor because they have a bad attitude.

[geek tragedy]

77. Good thing no such candidate is in the race.

Just Edwards Version 3.0. Or is he Version 3.1, playing off of regional and racial resentment?

[draft_mario_cuomo]

86. There is one. Obama largely blames poverty on the poor, even in his book nt

[geek tragedy]

103. Oh bullshit. Have a nice day. eom

[draft_mario_cuomo]

85. So why did he--and Clark--make that argument in 2004?

As far as I know, they were both well ahead of Sharpton and Mosley-Braun...

[geek tragedy]

102. Were Sharpton and Mosley-Braun ahead of

Edwards in the polls?

[geek tragedy]

60. He will say anything to win. Anything.

Now he's invoking his White Male Privilege. Disgusting.

[unc70]

120. Bingo! Thank you for playing RW TP (NC version)

Any Edwards thread on DU is rapidly becoming equivalent to a public one at wral.com. Most contain nearly all the talking points. Notice how each TP attacks what would normally be considered one of his strengths. Standard playbook (go after Kerry's military service).

Nearly all the attacks on Edwards are nearly identical to the ones used when he first ran for Senate in NC. Breck Girl, big house (Raleigh then), bad neighbor ("my neighbor Johnny" emails), "say anything" trial lawyer, elite - not like you (in NC that is often part of an attack on The University and on Chapel Hill), and on and on and on.

But why stop with JRE ten years ago. It's really a lot the same as it was over fifty years ago. Study the defeat of Senator Frank Porter Graham ("Dr. Frank") by "Red" Smith -- with Terry Sanford and Jesse Helms running their respective campaigns. Then follow Sanford, from his nominating JFK (and delivering NC) through civil rights, education, etc.

If you don't know and understand the liberal/progressive/populist tradition in NC and the South, understand the language and nuances, then give it a rest until you do your homework. I suggest starting with the 1994 documentary "Dr. Frank" narrated by Charles Kuralt followed by the one from PBS on Terry Sanford.

I don't know the in's and out's of Chicago politics, so I listen to those posters who do and do not feel compelled to jump in. I rarely even feel competent to comment on SC or VA.


One last thing. Be very careful when reading stories quoting any of our candidates. They are routinely misquoted or quoted out of context. Stories distributed by AP seem to be particularly prone to that problem along with misleading headlines. A couple of their reporters seem little more than conduits for RW attacks. Or maybe they are just trying to sell more papers.

[zulchzulu]

68. Edwards was making the point that Bill Clinton can't be seen in some parts of the country

I agree.

Senator Clinton will have to tell her husband not to go with her or have people be reminded that he is also part of the package if she is the nominee.

Ferchrissakes, look at what Gore had to do to not have Bill be seen with him in 2000. Of course, Bill Clinton didn't want to help out fellow Democrat John Kerry in 2004 because he wanted his wife to run in 2008.

As for Edwards firing shots across the Clinton bow, he should know by now she's going to be a distant third or possibly fourth in Iowa and thus will deflate into a nobody by February 5th.

If, however, Edwards is saying that Obama can't campaign everywhere in the US, perhaps seeing how Obama was in the heart of Dixie when in Mississippi recently, then he does indeed have his very nicely-curled head up his ass.

[Adelante]

76. No he wasn't

He was talking about both Obama and Clinton. There are “three of us who are most likely to be the Democratic nominee.” And then he goes into his riff about how he is the only one, etc.

[zulchzulu]

79. I mentioned the possibility he mentioned both candidates...

Either way, it was a very stupid thing to say. Nothing new, as usual.

[BlueStater]

73. Uh, he's probably talking about his Southern roots

You people are reading way too much into this. He's saying he has a better chance than Hillary and Obama because he's a southerner. And, looking over election results in the last 30 years, he kind of has a point.

For someone who is supposedly fading, Hillary and Obama supporters sure do like attacking Edwards a lot.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

87. See my factual thread on this. You are right

And Edwards has made the case based on his regional advantage before. The DLC crowd is acting as if he suddenly starting saying this. :rofl:

[smalll]

75. John Edwards: "I can campaign anyplace in America" -

"and cover a lot of ground without even leaving my house!"

Apropos of nothing in particular, remember when Paris Hilton got out of jail for three days, and was slated to spend the rest of her time under house arrest? She got a lot of grief for that, and I saw a number of pictures and descriptions of her "mansion." Which is only 2,700 square feet. Just think about that: John Edwards's house is more than TEN TIMES LARGER than Paris Hilton's mansion. And somehow Obama's the "elitist" because he had the misfortune to aquire his law degree at an Ivy League institution. Silly Barack! He should have taken his JD at a State school like John did, then he could have racked up millions in high-stakes trials, built his own "recreation barn" and develop a $400-haircut habit, and all would be forgiven!

[draft_mario_cuomo]

82. Edwards is right. Being from the South helps in the South (duh!)

If you are interested in the facts:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3325153

[DemDogs]

94. IN, MO, LA, KY, KA, IA, NC, VA, TN

The question isn't what color his skin is but whether he thinks he can win and will use his resources there. Kerry didn't. Edwards will. You can't win where you don't play. Edwards plays everywhere, which, by the way, will help the down-ballot races including some freshman Reps already under attack and some State Houses (including IA) that we just won.

After the recent SCt decisions, it sounds to me like this is the best argument ANY candidate has.

[Zandor]

108. The comment had nothing to do with gender or race

It had to with bing from the South. IMO.

[AtomicKitten]

109. recent polling shows Edwards taking a nosedive in So. Carolina

so, there's that

[Alamom]

112. Thank you. eom

[obnoxiousdrunk]

111. Edwards need not worry

about the GE as he's not going to be a part of it.

[ripple]

113. Campaigning and winning are two entirely different things. n/t

[FrenchieCat]

119. John Edwards forgets that he is lacking gravitas on national Defense issues

and in the General Election that will make a difference as to who the winner is....no matter how "southern" Edwards claims to be.

John Edwards is not as electable as he portrays based on what the election issues will be....and him being a White Male from the South will simply not be enough! He may the Dem nomination by default....because it is obvious that many will buy into the fact that he can somehow win over a woman, a Black man and an Hispanic man, but unfortunately, that will not be enough to win the GE, which will be what counts.

I'm not sure why folks are forgetting the state of our current affairs, but John Edwards will easily be painted as weak on defense, and the fact that he has had to apologize for his judgement on the war over and over again will be used against him when all is said and done.

Those following the obvious Conventional Wisdom as to what a Presidential candidate should look like will be proven wrong.

[AtomicKitten]

121. what I'd like to know

... is how Edwards has the audacity to claim he could not recall/partially read the NIE report before voting "yes" on the IWR .......
HE WAS ON THE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE!!!!

Oy vey.

[FrenchieCat]

124. That's ok, cause no one will never know this fact until the GE......

Because the Media that is supposed to "hate" Edwards seem to laud and highlight Edwards' numerous apologies as his bonafide experience in National Security, and not question him any further.

That "hate Edwards" media must not have yet heard that the man co-sponsored the IWR back in 2002......cause if they had, as much as the "hate" Edwards, they would have used it against him....instead of only seemingly highlighting Sen. Clinton's vote on the IWR when they do their "punditry" "thing". :eyes:

My bet is that the media is setting up John Edwards for the nomination on the Dem side......only to bring him crashing down during the GE. The media knows how to defeat a White Guy (that's easy) cause they have done it time and time again...which really is the only thing that Edwards seem to be able to come up with to support his claim that he is soooo "electable".

IMO, that's one of the reasons that he is not electable; he owes too much to the media who are keeping mum for now and only exposing the dumb shit (like haircuts and other things that don't matter in the end).

Yes, the media "hates" John Edwards! :sarcasm:

[Adelante]

125. Well, one thing I didn't realize until today

Edwards was the ONLY one on the Intelligence Committee who did not read the NIE.

All but one Democrat on the 17-person Intelligence Committee in 2002 recalled reading the NIE: Former Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) told a campaign-trail audience earlier this month that he had, but later recanted. Edwards voted to authorize war.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/few-senators-read-iraq-nie-report-2007-06-19.html

[AtomicKitten]

126. *

:scared:

[FrenchieCat]

128. Well let's see if the "I hate Edwards" media highlight this point .....

anytime during the primaries.


Doubt it!

He said sorry, and that seems good enough for the "I hate Edwards" corporate media.

[IA_Seth]

135. "but later recanted"

The new campaign slogan I hear?

[Cameron27]

142. Oh for chrissakes, it just gets worse.

John Edwards: the only one on the Intel Committee who didn't read the NIE, yet "stepped up" to co-sponsor the IWR. I will never trust this man's judgment.

[venable]

129. pardon me, but is this the dump-on-edwards dump?

reading this thread was not pretty, nor was any single thing addressed maturely, at least in my humble opinion.

it's like a feeding frenzy. what a ball!!


So what if he said this. Tell me a candidate that doesn't think the same. Tell me another candidate besides Edwards that speaks what he thinks. End of story.

I hope you all enjoyed the pile-on.

[FrenchieCat]

134. Maybe the point is that John Edwards really doesn't explain WHY he believes that

he can campaign in all 50 states, and the other candidates can't.

Would you illuminate for us as to why Edwrds believes that this is the case? Because there are those of us who believe that Edwards is simply speaking in codes.......and saying that being a Southern White male makes him more palatable to the general population and therefore a stronger GE candidate.

Myself, I do not believe that John Edwards is as electable as he purports.....one reason being that "I'm sorry" does not give one proven national security bonafides.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

143. He's done it several times. One instance was in the OP in a thread you posted in numerous times

Do you not read posts you respond to or are you deliberately pretending you don't so you can spew inaccurate talking points?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3325193&mesg_id=3325193

[coco77]

136. I have never seen what it is that people ...

see in Edwards, I could not take it in the last campaign when he kept repeating the same old speech over and over and again. I also don't understand why they say Obama has no experience as though Edwards has a lot. I just don't see it, even though I agree with a lot that he has to say.

[GeorgeGist]

138. Sad but true ...

because he's the ONLY white guy ... among the three. Narcissism anyone?

[illinoisprogressive]

140. Kinda of republican of him and rather arrogant.