Edwards is doing something Bush did, and it's going to...

...win Edwards the election.

Edwards is setting up a mood in which it is unseemly to attack him.

Bush did the same thing. During 2000, his team was able to create this sense that if you criticized Bush it said more about what a bitch you were than it said anything about Bush. The content of the criticism got totally lost, and the focus turned towards the personality problems of the attaker.

I was watching Edwards today on CSPAN, and I was thinking, there's no way that Bush is going to be able to attack him. It's going to make Bush seem like an ass if he tries it.

Where does that leave Bush? To debate the issues? Hah!

(Compare this to the other candidates. They're creating a mood in which attacking is part of the strategy.)

Apparently Edwards considers Foreign Policy as just a "background thing".

I'm pretty sure he can be critiqued effectively....

that piled on discrediting Paul O'Neill.

That's a fact.

The other statement is an exact quote from Edwards on what he thinks about Foreign Policy.

That is also a fact.

Bashing?

You lower the discourse.

He will rip AWOL's skin off. And make you love him while he's doing it.

You're attacking him for talking to a guy he's known for over 25 years?

Shelton isn't endorsing Edwards. He ansered some questions about foreign policy that Edwards asked to prep himself. It makes sense.

This attack hardly has any weight at all except with people who support Clark, but it's not like they would have gone for Edwards over Clark but for this info, and it's not like they're NOT going to vote for Edwards if he gets nominated because of this.

in choosing his Advisors.

Shelton is a Neo-Con.

Edwards has shown no capacity whatsoever to deal with the PNAC crowd.

He probably doesn't even know what the letters represent.

known Shelton for 30 years, and that they work in similar fields?

I'd be more worried about Edwards if I knew that he had a personal relationship with Shelton outside of politics and then refused to talk to him.

As a lawyer, Edwards probably knows something about judging the credibility of witnesses. Shelton isn't telling Edwards how to think. Edwards is picking his brains, and having the pre-existing relationship probably gives him a great foundation for judging his credibility.

Do you think Kerry should avoid talking to his former prep-school ice hockey teammate Robert Muehler (sp), because Meuhler's a whore for fascists? Kerry should and probably does take advantage of pre-existing relationships in order to get useful info about how the world works.

Shelton is a DEMOCRAT and has always been identified as a military dove. Your position is just WRONG. In fact, the Newsweek article about Clark today even mentions how Shelton wanted a less aggressive approach to Yugoslavia regarding Kosovo. Calling Shelton a "neo con" is absurd.

...why are his Democratic opponents so afraid to do it?

Dean had to hire CMB to throw his punches. (Which didn't land, notably.)

Not being angry, sullen or boring.

who is good and optimistic and hopeful.

(This is why anger doesn't work.)

If you have a problem with **** YOU are the problem. Worked very well for *B*. Until Howard Dean had the guts to go issue to issue with him. Good luck to Edwards with this RW tactic.

issue is NOT a right wing tactic.

Dean's YEARGH has taken away his ability to criticize Bush and be taken seriously. Like Bush did to Gore, it will be so easy to treat any rant at Bush by Dean as the product of an unstable, irrational, agitated personality. That's how you play into right wing tactics.

now he can be attacked, you see it happening around here (everyone is fair game) but nothing sticks so teflon too. Ponder that.

They will bash Edwards with glee. They'll dig up every absurd jury award in history and associate them with Edwards.

It will be easy.

and it didn't work either.

He talked about lawyers being responsible for their lawsuits.

Afterwards some heckler shouted in his face (actually, from a cowardly 10 feet away) as Edwards signed things, "is that what you did when you were suing doctors in NC?" He said, 'in fact, yes. Everything he just said he actually did when he pacticed law.

The guy meant to heckle him, and Edwards made it sound like a compliment.

So, uhm, bring it on.

Look, AP, I like Edwards well enough; though I don't see him as presidential timber yet. What Edwards supporters need to realize is that the shitstorm is still to come. Everyone gets their turn, as will Edwards. See you then.

...I remember them telling me that on the FBI tour...

Drudge and others tried smearing Edwards this week, and none of it really stuck. I mean, nobody had more baggage than Clinton and he managed to break through it all. How the heck did Bush get elected in 2000? Some politicians just have it.

Edwards is used to the shitstorm. Think that's not what he had to deal with when the Helm's machinery tried to defeat him when he ran against the Repub incumbent Lauch Faircloth?

Do you think he hasn't faced down the repub shitstorms when he went toe-to-toe with Big Insurance law firms, HMO law firms, etc.

He's been through the shitstorms and emerged victorious.

Has any other candidate running beat an incumbent republican already, besides Edwards? No.

its not nearly enough.

As much as I dislike Edwards, if his career as a trial lawyer is all they can pull up, then we shouldn't have much to worry about concerning an Edwards nomination.

On the other hand, could you imagine a Rove commercial with a clip of Clark praising Chimp? That would instantly turn the US into a one-party state.

into Edwards overall theme of two Americas...

Edwards is setting this thing up perfectly.

He knows the GE is the "closing argument" - and everything he's doing now he's doing with an eye towards the GE.

In 1998,when Edwards ran against Jesses Helms' crony, incumbent Lauch Faircloth, Lauch was going to post ads depicting Edwards as the poster boy for tort reform. UNTIL, he (or his assistants) looked at the cases. Then he/they realized JRE would shine and Lauch would look like the dirty dog that he was. Hence no such ads.

I'm a Clark supporter, but JRE is a great stump speech guy and mighty charismatic in person. His trial lawyer experience has made him a fast on his feet thinker and he can articulately charm the opposition.

At a rally here last spring following our SC Jefferson-Jackson dinner, I witnessed a Kerry supporter convert to Edwards right before my eyes after meeting them both!

Clark-Edwards perhaps.

what are you gonna say to JRE, he's too good looking?

The laywer thing is BS, the vast majority of politicans/presidents have passed the bar.

still putting up HUGE yard signs in front of the smaller Clark signs so Clark's signs aren't seen? Yeah, he's running a real clean campaign. He voted for the IWR and the Patriot Act. :eyes:

I wouldn't want MY candidate aligned with Bush in any way whatsoever!

Yessiree after giving a speech...answering some questions...

I bet he, Elizabeth, and the toddlers go putting up yard signs.

:eyes:

...Yes, John Edwards is running all over the country putting up yard signs. That is the secret weapon in his campaign. Big yard signs.

Isn't it?

...I would say that's pretty good evidence that Johnny's running a positive campaign.

...but, I'm going to bet that he's not so new to politics that this surprises him, nor, I bet, would Clark think that Edwards has has total control over EVERY SINGLE supporter's mind and body. (Furthermore, first I've ever heard this complaint, and quite likely the last.)

Also, highly amusing to hear "I wouldn't want MY candidate aligned with Bush in any way whatsoever!"

Would attending a fundraiser for and complementing Bush fall in that category?

"Would attending a fundraiser for and complementing Bush fall in that category?"

From deep behind the line..............Threee Points!!

Good observation. I agree that Edwards has positioned himself beautifully. I have been on board with Clark but am getting ever so close to switching to Edwards.

just ask their supporters. The bash is in the eye of the beholder.

That said, I completely regret the attack atmosphere. I hope that we can establish a bash-free zone for all of our Democratic candidates. Best of luck to your candidate!

...hope...optimism.

So, even if I were to conced that he went negative once or twice (which I don't concede without argument) I'd still be left arguing that the fact that he's done this YET IS TOTALLY PERCEIVED AS A DECENT, POSITIVE campaigner is an even better argument to support him.

He can rip you to pieces and look like a good guy doing it to everyone (except the most partisan, defensive hair-trigger supporters)? Damn, he's gong to destroy Bush then.

a candidate the next thing you should do is DUCK. Avoid the incoming slime!!

http://www.hillnews.com/news/050703/edwards.aspx That's a story from last May about a wealth of first-time contributors from trial law firms, some of them low-level employees, ponying up $2,000 contributions on the same day for Edwards' campaign. The DOJ is investigating. Any concerns here, Edwards supporters?

A BIG PIECE of North Carolina Sen. John Edwards's campaign message is about how he would work to "clean up" Washington if elected president. He accuses President Bush of putting "the interests of lobbyists and campaign contributors above the interests of regular people." But Mr. Edwards -- alone among the serious candidates for president -- declines to provide a list of his major campaign financiers: the men and women who have not only the capability to write $2,000 checks themselves but the networks that allow them to harvest bigger bundles for their favored candidates. President Bush posts on his Web site the names of his $100,000 Pioneers and $200,000 Rangers. Mr. Edwards's Democratic rivals -- Sens. John F. Kerry (Mass.) and Joseph I. Lieberman (Conn.), former Vermont governor Howard Dean and retired Gen. Wesley K. Clark -- have, at our request, provided similar lists of major underwriters.
more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40385-2004Jan22.html

I have seen Edwards in action on CSPAN in the last couple weeks, and he is ramping it up.

He is starting to speak truth like Dean and Clark and to frame it in a way that is the most effective I've seen a Democrat do for a long time.

Keep it up.

I'm loving this, we're finally hearing about the real issues that concern us in this primary. To take partial credit I think Dean really got them out of their usual rut. Ok, Kucinich, Sharpton and Braun too, but they didn't ever have the media buzz or support to scare the dickens out of the DLC. Nor did they scare the other candidates. Dean did, and look what we got out of it:

Kerry - throw the special interests out of Washington, Bush as C in C is a big fake, veterans are getting screwed

Dean - the war was a lie, Republicans can't handle money, and fire Greenspan while you're at it

Edwards - 35 million poor is immoral (man this is amazing - the poor dropped off the map in 1980)

Clark - The war was wrong, I can't prove that Bush wasn't AWOL, No fed tax for the middle class!

Lieberman - tax the rich!

This stuff is all true, and the message seems to be resonating. Awesome!

Excellent at framing the debate, and in this case at least, putting the debate where it should be?