The Decline and Fall of John Edwards

5% today in Nevada? That's just embarrassing.

Thus far he was only competitive in Iowa, where he lived for the past five years.

Which state is Edwards going to win in this primary process? You have to win some states if you want to secure the nomination.

I think the Edwards campaign is running on borrowed time.

It may be time to withdraw soon.

from Edwards' platform and message. He, more than anyone, has changed the debate. Even onto the puke side.

His message may be the big winner.

GOOD POINT!

I don't buy the "John Edwards isn't doing better because the media are ignoring him." He has gotten plenty of coverage, not to mention that he came in the race as the presumptive frontrunner, the previous VP nominee, with huge name recognition, and a decent war chest. I doubt there's a single voter in any of these primaries or caucuses who has not gotten sufficient exposure to John Edwards.

A month or so back, we were hearing from the Edwards campaign that although Obama and Clinton were ahead in the polls, Edwards had the best organization on the ground and would, like the tortoise in the fable, best the two hares in the race. It didn't happen. Apparently, his ground game just wasn't as good as they thought they were - and that's not the fault of the media or anyone else but the Edwards campaign.

The media may be partly to blame, but certainly don't bear all the blame. Although Clinton and Obama have gotten more coverage, they've also gotten much more scrutiny and taken more hits while Edwards has been able to operate just below the radar screen for much of this race. He hasn't gotten as much coverage, but he also hasn't had to put endure the same amount of crap.

I can't say for sure all of the reasons he's not doing better so far. But a large part of that has to do with the messenger and his team, who have not quite hit the mark.

I don't like you much right now.

The average voter just wants to show up and vote. Edwards comes across as demanding that voters suddenly invest a lot of emotion in his platform or at least politics in general.

This could be particularly important given the sharp contrast to his demeanor and approach in 2004, when he was much more optimistic, hopeful and positive and far less confrontational and caustic with his fellow Democrats. It's clear that, since leaving the Senate, he's become more more fervent - which some see as evidence that he was unwilling to take chances while accountable to a constituency and only evolved when it was convenient to do so. On the other hand, there could be logical reasons for the change - maybe Edwards himself has changed in the past four years - gotten mad as hell and won't take it anymore.

Nevertheless, it's a shame to see him doing so poorly. I believe he's a good man with an important message, but, so far, he hasn't convinced a significant number of Democratic voters that he should be the next president.

Those controlling the narrative of the party, and the party leadership do not want to "invest a lot of emotion in a platform or at least politics in general" and do not want the people to either. They do not want to rock the boat, because things are pretty good for them.

The general public is plenty ready to invest emotion in "politics in general" but not in the way that the insiders define politics - in such a way that the have-nots have no voice and are left by the side of the road.

Edwards does not in any way come across as angry or demanding, but for some reason that characterization of him is being continually repeated.

Of course, the Republicans do not want the public to think about politics, or have any investment in the system. "Just show up and vote" is all they ask, and the more simplistic and shallow the reasons the better.

If it were not true that millions were suffering and that things were getting worse for the average person, then I could see some merit in this don't rock the boat and go along to get along attitude.

I think Edwards does come across as demanding. He seems to demand that I join him in anger towards corporate greed.
I have my share, but it manifests differently, and I have a whole different perspective. Suppose you have to deal to work? People with disabilities rely on drug companies. As much as we hate them we recognize that they perform a service. Especially when they are useful to us. Additionally, In order to work, people with disabilities make deals for accommodations based on ADA with businesses. It was written for bussiness. We also sue unsuccssefully from time to time and it is being eroded, but until congress has the guts to pass a law to restore it, it is what it is.
But, our position is one where we are having to educate everyone in government, business schools, etc. We are more inclined to use diplomacy and civility. It actually works if done properly. Maybe not as quickly as one wants, but it does.

Regulation of corporations does not hurt businesses - if anything, it will strengthen them. Edwards is not talking about destroying corporations, let alone the businesses that the corporations - and through them big finance - are controlling. He is talking about a balance. He is talking nothing more radical than what we had in our times of greatest prosperity and productivity.

Are you sure you are actually hearing Edwards, or are you hearing the interpretations of what he is saying from other people? The right wingers want us to hear Edwards as "angry" and "demanding" and "radical" and "anti-business."

Of course diplomacy and civility are important, and yes change does not need to be quick. But we are changing in the wrong direction - rapidly.

I do hear Edwards, and I my interpretation is not what you have written, yet it is valid.
He comes across as angry "fight" is an angry word in my estimation.

I live among have nots who spend a lot of time at the doctor. Too much time with social workers. They spend a significant part of their days dealing with very critical personal problems. The last thing they want is to take politics as seriously as Edwards paints it. They are not prepared to get into some ring to "fight with every fiber of their being."

Because what they know is true- All politics is local. They want to believe that their investment can produce positive results no matter what party is in the majority.
We have a Republican packed general assembly that we have finally convinced to start listening to our constituency.
Our people want to be rid of negativity and demonization. They are sick of good guy bad guy politics.

I didn't mean to insult you. I may not have been clear and the fault could well be mine. I don't see how your post was responsive to my post.

You think Edwards is angry, and you think people are not. Understood.

You expressed your opinion. Here is mine: your depiction of people being too overwhelmed by their daily struggles to take politics seriously is self-contradictory and a recipe for disaster. This disconnection is a significant part of the problem.

Of course all politics are local, but we are discussing a national candidate here. Of course you try to work with the legislative bodies regardless of which party is in power, but we are advocating for one of those two parties here.

"Wanting to be rid of negativity and demonization" and "good bad guy politics" is the approach the party has been taking for quite a while now. Unfortunately in the real world there are “bad guys” and “demons” and they don't magically go away merely because we are tired of fighting.

which equates to EMOTION, which being negative - against, can qualify as anger. JE isn't using just logic, he is trying to rally people AGAINST corporatocracy....and the rest which to many .. looks and sounds like anger....

It has been in certain speeches. But to characterize him as "angry" is idiotic. Oh but that's the M$M's spin, all right. I'll grant you that.

it out to be (not to say it isn't important) wouldn't Guiliani be doing better in these races? However, he's been doing no better than Ron Paul. I say that to say, there is more to it than the media coverage--the message is important and your ability to deliver that message.

How... interesting.

FFS.

now you bitch at me cause my posts what... don't meet your high expectations?

Jesus christ.

and TV media has painted it as a two-person race.

and when they *do* deign to mention Edwards, it's crap like the OP?

Yeah... you support all the candidates, all right. :eyes:

no secret ballots there...you MUST SUPPORT THE WINNER or you WILL be deemed a LOSER!

Go to a caucus, and learn something. Seriously.

does MN have a caucus? or a primary...I PREFER THE PRIVACY OF A VOTING BOOTH RATHER THAN HAVING TO STAND IN A SQUARE TILL NOT ENOUGH PEOPLE JOIN ME AND I HAVE TO MOVE TO ANOTHER SQUARE...SOUNDS MORE LIKE MUSICAL CHAIRS TO ME!

You've obviously never been to one, because you post the same bullshit reply all the other people who have never been to a caucus post.

A caucus is just like a political convention, only on the precinct level. If we decide our candidates via convention, then what difference does it make?

Seriously. Do yourself a favor, and go edumacate yourself.

does supporting John Edwards make me an elementary schooler??? JUST ASKIN?

The bullying at caucuses is a myth. Really. I've caucused. I've never seen a bully. Just neighbors doing the business of the Democratic Party.

understand the caucus process based only on what is reported here!

There is absolutely bullying and exclusion in party locals and in caucuses. It is not correct to take either extreme position - "caucuses never involve bullying" nor "caucuses always involve bullying."

But there is a strong element of bullying all through the party - and through our society these days.

To think anything else is naive. It is the exception anymore in modern American society to be in a situation where there is no bullying. We have become a nation of bullies, and bullies rule and win at every level. People who are not bullies are ridiculed as "losers" or "idealists" and such.

Bullying has reached epidemic proportions.

Adults do not tolerate bullying, and "grow a tough skin" or "get over it" or "move on." Adults confront bullies. That is the only way to stop it, and if we do not stop it, it will destroy us.

Bullying has become rampant and pervasive and now impacts every aspect of our lives, including Democratic party politics at all levels.

Of course, bullies want us to merely endure bullying.

Of course, bullies want to deny that bullying is a problem.

And, of course, bullies want to dominate the discussion and influence our ability to perceive and stand up to bullies.

I am embarassed that any Dem wouldn't question such weird results.

there just seems to be something fucked up with these numbers..n/t

"The cries of a stolen election" started in 2000.

So much for democracy in America.

in Super Tues states. No reason for him to withdraw based on a caucus state, or anything else. Last time I looked, it was a candidate's right to run as long as he/she wished, through to the nomination.

he should drop out as well.

And I'm sure somewhere, someone has the goods on Hillary, too. So she should probably drop out.

WTF, why don't we just GIVE the White House to the GOP for the next 8 years, huh?

:wtf:

You know why things are the way they are as well as I do. Deny it if you will, but the best candidate is being taken out of the race by the media and its money.

/

I do not think Nevada will define his campaign. I think that the next 17 days will be far more important. If he does not do well in this time period, then he will need to re-evaluate what is best for him and for the party. But I think that he has a chance of surprising those who are thinking that he is out of the contest.

Why don't people listen?

and he still has my support.

from the begining. The media has almost totally blacked him out. I hate to say it, but I just hope his message will somehow get through and be part of the Dem platform, it seems like that is our only hope.

It is amazing to me that in 2008 any Democrat would ridicule those expressing the idea that the media has a strong determining influence on our elections, or that there are questions about the integrity of the elections and the procedures and tactics of the party leadership.

I would invite anyone to pick up any phone book from any part of the country and randomly dial numbers and ask people what they know about Edwards and Kucinich as compared to Obama and Clinton.

You should not feel hopeless, dajoki, nor should any Edwards supporters. This isn't really about Edwards. Those so eager to dance on the grave of the Edwards campaign, and so quick to mock and ridicule Edwards supporters (and Kucinich supporters and all critics of the party on the left) and in general be such poor sports and bad winners are not celebrating what they claim to be celebrating.

We may lose the nomination, but we do not need to lose the truth. The truth is that the entire process is tightly controlled by a relative handful of people, egged on by their sycophants who themselves represent a small percentage of the activists and an even smaller percentage of the general public. The Edwards campaign, and Dean's leadership of the DNC represent the movement to wrest away the control of the few over the party and the narrative of the party within the national political discussion. People are celebrating the crushing and suppression of the forgotten and left behind people, and the negation of the traditional principles and ideals of the party. In so doing, they are celebrating the weakening and possible destruction of the party - for the sake of keeping tight reins on where it goes and keeping participation and input as low as possible from the rabble.

The battle is not merely for the nomination, the battle is for power - who will control the Democratic party and what direction it will be going. Edwards is one small part of that battle, as is Kucinich. The opponents of Edwards want to disguise the truth about the battle, and make it all about a horse race. They want to talk about who is winning the game, and do not want to talk about how the game is rigged. They want to talk about electing candidates with a "D" after their name, but not about what that "D" is supposed to mean.

They want to crush idealism, they want to move the party to the right. They are happy with the current situation, with who is a "winner" in society and who is not, and merely want a Democratic administration because it will more effectively and intelligently and successfully protect and defend the status quo than the Bush administration and Republicans are doing. They think that the system is working pretty good, and that we just need a new captain at the helm who is "one of us." They are OK with millions - the bottom half - being left behind.

This battle for the soul of the party will go on, no matter what the outcome of the current primary race. Many are supporting the two leading candidates in good faith, and will eventually be on our side, so no need to antagonize them. But they are being led by that small faction of people I described above. The more clear that becomes, the less infighting and bitterness we will have in the party, the more solidarity, and that will lead to certain success for the party. Not these bittersweet wins, as with the midterms, where we elect people with a “D” after their name, but it does no good because there was no mandate, no program, no commitment to fight.

Many supporters of the two major candidates are hoping that we can turn the country around without a fight, without identifying the enemy, without knowing where the battle lines are. I wish they were right. I hoped that back when Clinton was first elected. But from the day Clinton was first elected, things have steadily gotten worse. Whatever step the Clinton administration took forward, we were shoved back two steps and the right wingers used the Clinton administration to build and consolidate power. Soon everyone will see that this moderate and accommodating “practical” strategy is not working and never will work, because we are up against an opponent who will not compromise, who will not accommodate, and who has no caution.

Fear not, we will prevail. It is just a matter of time, and unfortunately also a matter of how much suffering people will need to endure between now and then, before those who will not fight because they are not truly in opposition to the big money interests are bumped out of power, and before those who are hoping — hoping that we will not have to fight for our lives sooner or later — realize that this is a false hope and a dangerous illusion.

You really have a way of hitting the heart of the matter, you express my feelings better than I could even possibly hope to. Every time I read one of your posts it gives me hope. You are so right about the fight for the soul of our party. That is why I believe Edwards should continue his struggle to be heard, to keep the fight going and maybe, just maybe win one of the small battles to wrest control from that handful of people who care only about power and maintaining the status quo. So whatever you are doing and however you do it, please keep it up. Thank you very much Two Americas.:patriot:

You have a tremendous gift. You put what many of us feel into the perfect string of words every time, and I thank you.

You speak the truth - you speak ABOUT the truth - and do so in a way that makes perfect sense, without emotionality.

You continue to inspire me and give me genuine hope...about what, I'm no longer sure...lol...but hope alone can be the seed to awaken the truth and allow it to grow.

I wish you would post your own threads - or give me permission to do so for you ;) . More people need to read what you're sharing. I think it impacts people more than they would admit.

Again, thank you for interacting here.

:patriot:

remember he ran for POTUS and the VP????? Last I checked JE was on the last debate, Kucinich was shut out. Why didn't JE speak out then about corporations??? Wasn't basically a corporation not allowing Kucinich to be on the debate????? NBC last I looked was a pretty huge corporation. JE had prime opportunity to make a statement about Corporations running the elections to the point that they don't allow a candidate to even appear on a debate. Isn't that what JE is supposed to be railing against? Or was self serving opportunity more important?????? There is too much hypocrisy around JE. He has changed his positions and made too many mistake in a short amount of time as well as not living up to all of his passion against corporations and their negative effect on American lives - JE supports the little guy???????? Who is more little in this election than DK?

I would be much happier if the roles were reversed, believe me.

in this state.

You can deny it's true 'til you're blue in the face, but I'm sure many other sober people here from any camp would agree with me.

Oh, and welcome to D.U.

one could say , whoever it is , The Hill , who is disliked even by the party faithful or a virtually unknown African American Man who has admitted in print to drug use may prove a long shot when it comes to elect ability nationwide.
So REALITY CHECK RIGHT BACK AT YOU!

concerning how well JE is doing how he's gaining ground etc. then blaming the media when it doesn't pan out or as one poster suggested corruption. That would be his supporters on DU that can't seem to see the forest for the trees. That's called reality, the numbers don't lie. And it doesn't matter who I support (not Hillary and not JE though I would support him before Hillary) point is I can't access the home page without 70% being taken up by something relating to JE who really isn't a viable candidate and a lot of the information is just not true. So, one can only come to the conclusion his supporters need a reality check.

And once again, how VIABLE IS YOUR CANDIDATE IN THE GENERAL ELECTION? HMMM?

and no one else. You attempt at deflecting is an obvious sign of weakness.

consider yourself ignored now.
buh bye.

compared to Edwards, No media coverage compared to Edwards. Huckabee won a primary, Edwards gets 5%.

Face it, people don't want to vote for him.

Mike huckabee=62,978
John edwards=57,543

AND I WOULD BET A LAS VEGAS TOKEN MOST OF HUCKABEES ARE CURRENT WHILE MANY OF JOHN EDWARDS REFERS TO HIS VP CAMPAIGN AND SENATE

This is Edwards second national campaign. His name recognition in both of the Presidential runs was in the 80's. He was the Democratic VP candidate in 2004, he spent almost 4 years in Iowa with no competition. Edwards will have to face reality, the Democrats that vote in the primaries and caucuses do not want him.

The fact that Huckabee is meeting with less hostility and suppression in the Republican party than Edwards is in the Democratic party is a sad and telling commentary as to just how far the party has strayed from its foundational and traditional principles and ideals and constituency.

Thanks for the reminder.

It is actually possible that the Republicans could field a candidate to the left of the Democratic party candidate this year - to the left on the issues of power and economics, which are what politics were about before we fell for the right wing "cultural war" bait and started playing their game instead of our own.

We may well be seeing the early signs that the coalitions that the two parties have been relying on for the last 30 years or so are now breaking up, and that we are about to see a dramatic re-alignment of the two parties. We certainly can see deep and profound - and perhaps unbridgeable and irreconcilable - divisions in the Democratic party right here every day.

don't count Edwards out.

There's plenty of primaries coming up.

Whadda ya' think?

!

Rotten O.P.

How pathetic is that.

comments.

I'll try harder next time.

I actually have spent the last 4.5 or so years here doing nothing but trolling.

the only question is before or after SC

I agree, that's a tough one. I'd imagine they'd really want to stay involved there, since it's his birthplace -- symbolic and important personally, perhaps. But for the same reasons, they might not want to lose big there (and I don't know what the polls are saying). I'm not a fan, but I hope he sticks it out through SC and makes a good showing there.

Us Edwards supporters will probably have to be content with the knowledge that (as even the pundits have noticed) the Edwards platform has had enormous influence on the debate.

We can live with that, I think. And it still ain't over ...

Edwards supporters wanted to make that decision... so they went with #2... I think he has more support than what is showing...

I was a big supporter of Edwards in 04, and all these years of Bush have made Edwards sound angry... my hope is that he and his wife go back to the messages they spoke on in 2004, about democratic values and the need to be compassionate...

but I am now, because he continues to speak out on democratic values and the need to be compassionate. It is that need for compassion that compels us to restore propriety to the realtionship between business and government, to structure the economy to support a growing middle class and not a sustain the appetites of a gluttonous few.

People talk about anger as if it were somehow inappropriate to the situation we now face ... and I don't get that. But thanks for writing back, friend.

Elizabeth and John have had to fight for every minute of airtime.... in 04 Elizabeth had a voice that could have calmed and given hope to anyone in pain or need... I hope she will continue to share that voice... I fear her time is limited and her gifts will be lost... John gave a feeling of inspiration as well...

What you said - and add Bites

Don't let people convince you that the message lives or dies by this one campaign.

This is barely the beginning. They ain't seen nothing yet.

The crisis is not going away. The nessage will be no less true tomorrow than it is today. The enemy will be the same, and fighting just as hard.

The Edwards critics are not attacking Edwards. They are attacking all of us. Their goal is to get us to be discouraged about his message.

Edwards critics are opposed to his message. But they will not be able to stop it.

That still adheres to a BS political system based on media popularity, soundbites, brainwashing, and corporate asskissing.

It's like watching a slow suicide

And look how vicious people are about it.

Sad and disheartening don't even come close to describing it... *sigh*

EDWARDS CAMPAIGN STATEMENT ON NEVADA CAUCUS RESULTS

Chapel Hill, North Carolina – John Edwards for President campaign manager, former Congressman David Bonior, released the following statement about today’s Nevada caucus results.

“Congratulations to Senator Clinton for her win in Nevada. Our campaign is very grateful to all those who demonstrated the loyalty and dedication to stand up for John Edwards in the face of very difficult circumstances and long odds, including our brothers and sisters in Nevada from the Carpenters, Steelworkers, Transport Workers, and Communications Workers of America.

“John Edwards is the underdog in this campaign, facing two $100 million candidates. But that is nothing compared to the real underdogs in our country – working men and women, middle class families, and all those who have no voice in Washington.

“John Edwards is in this race to fight for the real underdogs and to make sure the voices of the American people are heard in Washington, not the special interests. That’s why he’s the only candidate in this race who has never taken a dime from PACs or Washington lobbyists; the only candidate who will ban corporate lobbyists from his White House; and the only candidate who is honest enough to say we are in a fight for our country and we need to take on the special interests if we are going to have a country that works for hard-working families and the middle class.

“The race to the nomination is a marathon and not a sprint, and we’re committed to making sure the voices of all the voters in the remaining 47 states are heard. The nomination won’t be decided by win-loss records, but by delegates, and we’re ready to fight for every delegate. Saving the middle class is going to be an epic battle, and that’s a fight John Edwards is ready for.”

Even though Michigan doesn't count.

:eyes:

That state is *ucked up.

Seriously.

Why is our senate majority leader from a state that
can't get people out to caucus?

O'Donnell is now posting on DU. I thought you were at Huffington Post?

Whatever, you obviously have no comprehension of politics or public service.
No, you're just a hyperbolic keyboard warrior.

Carry on soldier, troll, or mere misguided fool.

In the meantime, those of us who are supporters of Edwards, will carry on nicely.
Ba-bye, now, ba-bye.

see less juvenile responses filled with so much sarcasm and more logical respectful replies.

His own campaign acknowledges it.

Only the most gullible will believe you.