A few questions regarding this "Edwards Going Negative" Story

First, who leaked these pages to the press?

Second, has anyone seen the rest of the caucus training manual?

Third, who put the manual together?

Fourth, is there ANY anecdotal evidence that Edwards caucus leaders were trash talking the other candidates?

This is the funniest thing yet. The most interesting aspect is that he praised Dennis Kucinich in the "leaked" memo.

He went negative against other candidates. But by your own words he played favortism.

he was prepared to. Everyone else already went negative - hell, Braun went negative on Edwards in the last debate. Braun's not as nice as we think either!

It's just such an utter non issue. So Edwards reads DU, big deal? Nothing in that memo that I haven't posted at one time or another. It's hardly a secret that Howard Dean is a Park Avenue Liberal, or that Gephardt is a Washington insider, or that every time Kerry goes to bed, it's a fundraiser.

If this is the worst they have on Edwards, I guess he really is a boy scout.

Busted! Edwards' Memo Details Plans To Go Negative

Edited on Wed Jan-21-04 09:36 PM by cryingshame

Edwards' memo details plans to criticize rivals
By John Mercurio
CNN Political Unit
Wednesday, January 21, 2004 Posted: 8:23 PM EST (0123 GMT)

Note: So much for the sanctimonious Edwards. But then having Shelton on his team was a warning signal
for those who would listen.

Also Note, the information was signed by Edwards himself so don't buy the denial at the end. They
wouldn't put his signature there without the candidate's permission. That is why it was labeled
confidental and etc.




MANCHESTER, New Hampshire (CNN) -- Despite being credited with breathing life into his presidential bid by
pushing positive themes, Sen. John Edwards' campaign circulated a confidential memo earlier this month
that instructed supporters on how to attack his Democratic rivals during the Iowa caucuses.

The four-page document, obtained by CNN, instructs his campaign captains in Iowa precincts to describe
former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean as an "elitist from Park Avenue in New York City." And it says Sen. John
Kerry "can't claim to change America because he has been part of the failed Washington politics for too
long."

It also offers a particularly detailed critique of Rep. Dick Gephardt, the former House minority leader who
withdrew from the presidential race after his following a fourth-place finish in Iowa. Under his leadership, it
says, House Democrats "lost control of Congress in 1994, and lost four more times since then. ... We can't
afford another losing national campaign against George W. Bush and the Republicans." It adds, "Even if
Gephardt somehow wins in Iowa, his campaign is eventually dead, just as it was in 1988."

Edwards campaign spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri said the memo was written by his campaign in Iowa, and
that Edwards himself did not know about the document until CNN contacted his campaign about it. - snip-
Asked why Edwards' signature appears prominently at the top of the memo next to his type-written name,
Edwards campaign communications director David Ginsberg said the documents are part of a 50-page
training booklet, and that parts should not be taken out of context.


http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/21/elec04.prez.edwards/

Second link so we know CNN didn't make it up:

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/US/edwards_positive_040121.html

1. We'll never know

2. Obviously somebody has

3. Staffers. What level of staffers? Who knows. All of the camps have these things and they include things like how the viability works, how the regroup sessions work, how to do caucus math, how delegates get assigned, what do county delegates do, policy stances, and how to attract voters from the other camp.

Obviously more than one person was involved in putting the manual together, and I bet that the "signature" was a signature on the manual cover. Who specifically put together the so-called "negative" stuff? Obviously some staffer.

4. None that I saw or heard, but others may have - there were 2,000 different precincts.

Big frickin' deal on this. Next thing you'll be saying he wore the same underwear two days in a row.

SHOCK! His staff circulated really, really minor negative comments about his competition! OHMYGOSH!

Move along, nothing to see here...

First, who leaked these pages to the press?

Well somebody dug it up somewhere, perhaps somebody who was worried about Edwards catching up or perhaps somebody who was beat badly by Edwards in Iowa...

Second, has anyone seen the rest of the caucus training manual?

??? Not even Edwards

Third, who put the manual together?

Staffers, trying to defend there candidate

Fourth, is there ANY anecdotal evidence that Edwards caucus leaders were trash talking the other candidates?

none reported

He saw it.

He used his talking point about Clark.

what was the clark talking point that he used ?

He said something about Clark's not being in Iowa.

To Edwards credit, he would/will be very smooth hitting his talking points... he must have been a great lawyer!

He certainly has his own style. And that's a good thing if he gets the nod.

or a contingency plan if others went negative? I'm sure all the candidates have plans to go negative if they're forced to.

I need to know more about this before making any judgements.

And they all have lines to use to compare and contrast candidates for people who are undecided.

The media (and certain posters) are making this an issue because it's mean to undermine the notion that Edwards is a nice guy, which will help Bush if they go head to head.

My question, after watching the caucuses on CSPAN, is: what the hell was in Dean's manual.

The only line I heard that worked was, "if you caucus with us we'll elect you as a delegate to the county-level caucus and you can vote for Kucinich."

That's the ONLY line that worked.

The document -- marked "CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEDGED" (sic) and "NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION" and signed by the senator -- encourages Edwards supporters to tell undecided caucus-attendees that former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean is a "Park Avenue elitist from New York City" and say Sen. John Kerry of

Who do you think they're giving this information to? They're giving it to volunteers and voters SO THEY CAN USE THIS INFO.

Have you ever worked in an office? They stamp ConfIdential on everything. However, as soon as you give it so someone who isn't an employee of the campaign, it's no longer confidential.

If this booklet in fact WAS confidential, then it's even LESS relevant, because if that were the case, then NONE OF THIS INFORMATION REACHED THE VOTERS!!!!

So ... let's see if I have all this straight ...

***The "campaign book" story is being circulated about Edwards.

***Susan Estridge supposedly said on Alan Colmes' radio show the other night that the Boston Herald has been investigating alleged extramarital activities in John Kerry's life.

***Dean's yeeeeeeaaaaah will never die

***Clinton henchmen are supposedly digging up dirt on other candidates on behalf of Clark.

***Bill O'Reilly is supposedly holding some big bombshell about Clark.

Pretty soon, Lyndon Larouche is gonna be the only candidate not buried in mud by the evil forces of the universe. It's open season on Democrats ... and SIGH it's only JANUARY!

I imagine we have books like this, too, also marked that way. It's just part of strategizing, really. It's normal. If negative points are used you fight back, but every campaign has to know what they are or they are being irresponsible. Honest.

"confidential, not for distribution" per the CNN story.

Of course, it hardly matters really. All of these guys play this game for keeps. I am sure other camps have their briefing books as well. It is only a story when placed in seemingly stark contrast to the "positive campaign" meme.

If it was confidential, then they never could have used it. These were arguments to tell people to make. If you're not telling them to make them, then what's the big deal?

So was it confidential or not?

Dennis cedes his votes to Edwards.

So I guess we did "hear" about it ... or witnessed it's results.

eom

This is about weakening the dem who ultimately faces Bush (whomever it is).

Pick your candidate's best quality and be prepared to hear the media lie about it.

Now they're lies?

of push polling by Edwards to teachers in the state, telling them that Dean doesn't really support education.

Is that what you mean?

or Rove, who knows. But the slimeball machine is in overdrive.

Inform me.

Or is this just hyperbole as an example?

thing expect someone to scratch the surface and find out you are just an imitation. No lawyer jokes from me though.

Teachers need to hear the truth about that.

:D

Seems that lately a bunch of people are sour grapes because their candidate had a less than stellar performance last Monday. This is really reaching.

However, once again, Edwards took the high road, took responsibility, and quickly diffused the issue.

This is great news though! This means that others are finally paying attention to Edwards and see him as a major threat.

"What prominant DEMOCRAT known for being a nice guy is suddenly hitting below the belt....latest from the political grapevine"

Edwards has not spoken publicly in a negative way about his rivals--and has focused his campaign on what he's gonna do for the American people. That is great, good, and fine--it is a way to campaign that appeals to voters who are tired of all the mud flinging. It may not be how every candidate has chosen to run--but it is his campaign and God Bless him for it.

There is a phrase I have heard used in campaigns to indicate issues or things that make the opposition seem less attractive. It is "The Magic Bullet." It is not at all uncommon that the campaign puts those out for staff or even volunteers to use.

The fact that his campaign has a manual with "magic bullet" phrases included on one page is not a big shock. These guys are the big leagues, and having talking points or even specific emotional trigger phrases handed to staffers is not new, nor it is uncommon strategy. (Shoot, as low on the food chain as I am it is something I've used in campaigns at county level!)

The fact that they even HAVE a manual is no biggie--it is how you do it if you have multiple campaign locations and you want to stay on message and consistent. The "confidential" mark is also no biggie--would YOU hand a step by step plan out to your opponents during the race?

I just don't see why this is even a subject for discussion or concern. If Edwards is smart his campaign will just keep on going and this will blow over.

Laura