Am I the only one who gets the sense that this speechfrom John Edwards isn’t going to really get the senator anywhere? He’s sort of in that limbo-zone between frontrunner and fringe that nobody wants to be in, and he seems to think being kind of bold will get him out of that rut. But the thing is, like his post-2004 rediscovery of movement liberalism and regret for the Iraq War - wouldn’t this speech have had more potency if he had given it before he was running third to Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama? That is, it’s not hard to give a tough speech when you’ve got (relatively) nothing to lose as opposed to one when you’re leading the pack.
I like Sen. Edwards a lot but I just feel like his campaign has been stuck in the muck for a long-ass time and they are nowhere near digging out.
They got into a huge fight about politics (Brad supports Barack Obama, while Angie’s a John Edwards fan.) Brad ended up calling her immature. He says the next thing he knew, Angie was cursing at him and throwing a glass of wine in his face.”
We use Fox News standards to determine these endorsements so third-hand gossip in celebrity magazines are as good as a direct statement.
As far as substance goes, I totally agree with and support Sen. Edwards speeches and policies with regard to poverty. The problem is, from a political standpoint I think it’s a loser. Edwards has clearly made discussing poverty a centerpiece of his campaign, and it was what he was working on inbetween the last election and when he declared his candidacy. But as a motivator to capture someone’s vote, it’s a clunker.
Why? Because most people who are in poverty either don’t think of themselves as impoverished or prefer more aspirational approaches to getting out of poverty. Most people who are poor statistically when asked will likely not say that they’re poor. In fact, they’re probably likely to say that they’re “middle class”. It’s the same way as if you ask people that are by many standards wealthy, they’re also likely to describe themselves as “middle class”. I think it’s kind of an American thing to want to be part of the middle class, because we have one in this country while other nations you’re either really rich or really poor. Since about the post-WWII boom we’ve had this inbetween state that the bulk of us belong too, and no matter the reality of your fiscal situation, you still probably identify with this group (This is also why I cringe when I hear Democrats and progressives drone on about “working people”. It just sounds like elitists talking down to people when you say that.)
The other reason why I think it doesn’t work is because Sen. Edwards’ rhetoric too readily accepts the idea of poverty. He discusses how to raise people out of poverty with concrete policy, but I don’t think people want to hear that. Many liberals pooh-pooh this, but the vast majority of Americans still believe in the Horatio Alger story, and while it is clearly much harder to make that happen nowadays thanks to the concentration of wealth and the conservative racket designed to protect that concentration, you will still sell people better on your policies when you make it clear that they’ll be “moving on up”.
The discussion of poverty, class, and the great American dream of upward mobility is one where a realistic discussion is a clunker. Americans don’t want to be told that to be poor is to be noble, poor folks do not see it that way. It may seem crass, but more abstract dialogue about increasing wealth and ownership would be much more successful.
Ok, assume that Danny Glover hasn’t been running around kissy-face with people like Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro, pretend that didn’t happen. What, if any, ground is to be gained for John Edwards hanging around with the star of Operation Dumbo Drop?
“If Mayor Giuliani believes that what President Bush has done is good, and wants to embrace it and run a campaign for the Presidency saying, ‘I will give you four more years of what this president has given you,’ then he’s allowed to do that. He’ll never be elected President of the United States, but he’s allowed to do that.”
The Edwards campaign, again, shows a stunning lack of coordination and discipline. Just real sloppy, guys. Keep it up and Senator Clinton’s team will have you for lunch.
Sen. Edwards is talking about this idea of mandatory service. It is stupid. It is nonsense. The idea of American freedom is about the freedom to perform national service or not. I like that there are programs like Americorps or the military around, but the idea is to make it so people voluntarily sign up. Conscription’s got no place in a democracy like ours.
Why did John Edwards not disclose his Fortress salary until today? That’s three weeks of bad Iowa stories, a George S. grilling, and lots of other unnecessary guff? Just for $479K?
The Edwards campaign seems to me to make some silly amateur hour mistakes that you wouldn’t think would even be on the horizon of someone that ran for president a scant 3 years ago. And the problem is, so much of it is self-inflicted.
The argument you’re trying to make is that you’re more organized than Sen. Clinton, the most hard-charging campaign since the Bush ‘04 machine. Cowboy up, folks.
Maureen Dowd may be a horrible columnist (and she is, I can never understand WTF she’s saying behind all that cutesy talk) but the Edwards campaign basically handed her and the right a gimme.
For as many as 50 million Americans, the IRS gets all the information it needs to calculate taxes from employers and financial institutions. As part of Edwards’ plan, the IRS would calculate the tax bill and mail it to them on a Form 1, where they could verify and recalculate it or simply sign and return it. Form 1 is a step toward Edwards’ vision of a tax code that is simpler and fairer and that rewards work.
People hate doing their taxes. For a lot of people this would eliminate the whole April 15th hustle of getting your taxes in order and mailing them off. Please do this.
Best wishes go out for Mrs. Edwards and Sen. Edwards. I’ve personally met the both of them and can testify that they are genuinely warm and great folks. The news they announced today was sad, but they both faced it with characteristic strength.
Although her words did not hurt us, they may have hurt some in the gay community. We are all sick and tired of anyone supporting or applauding or introducing hate words into the national dialogue, tired of people thinking that words that cause others pain are fair game. And we are sick and tired of people like Miss Coulter thinking that her use of loaded words about the homosexual community in this country is remotely humorous or appropriate.
Former vice presidential candidate John Edwards, who is considering another run for the Democratic nomination for president, said Saturday the United States should start pulling troops out of Iraq immediately.
The former U.S. Sen. from North Carolina told reporters America should "make it clear (to Iraqis) we are leaving, and the best way is to start leaving. We should take 40,000 combat troops out now."
Edwards, who has said he regretted his vote as a U.S. senator authorizing President Bush to declare war in Iraq, said he would ask the country’s military leaders for a strategy "to have the (rest of the) troops out in roughly 12 to 18 months."
"There is no chance other countries in the world will help Iraq as long as we are an occupying force," he said.
Former Sen. John Edwards began a national anti-poverty campaign Monday by exhorting students at the University of North Carolina to launch a grass-roots effort similar to the civil rights movement of the 1960s.
This time, he told them, the divide isn’t black and white but rich and poor.
The recent devastation of Hurricane Katrina exposed that rift clearly, Edwards told the roughly 700 people who attended the inaugural event of a planned 10-campus “Opportunity Rocks” tour.
from John Edwards isn’t going to really get the senator anywhere? He’s sort of in that limbo-zone between frontrunner and fringe that nobody wants to be in, and he seems to think being kind of bold will get him out of that rut. But the thing is, like his post-2004 rediscovery of movement liberalism and regret for the Iraq War - wouldn’t this speech have had more potency if he had given it before he was running third to Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama? That is, it’s not hard to give a tough speech when you’ve got (relatively) nothing to lose as opposed to one when you’re leading the pack.
