Democrats in 2014: The Party of John Edwards

[oberliner]

In his inaugural address Wednesday, incoming New York Mayor Bill de Blasio tried to establish an intellectual pedigree for his focus on economic inequality. He invoked Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Franklin Roosevelt, Eleanor Roosevelt, Al Smith, Frances Perkins, Fiorello La Guardia, Jacob Riis, David Dinkins, Mario Cuomo, and Harry Belafonte. It reminded me of when Democrats, eager to prove their national-security bona fides, tell audiences they hail from the party of Roosevelt, Truman, and Kennedy. As if there wasn’t some other Democrat after Kennedy who dabbled at war and peace, some guy from Texas.

De Blasio’s speech was a bit like that. He left out the politician who more than any other kindled the Democrats’ renewed interest in economic inequality because that politician has been airbrushed from Democratic Party history. His name is John Edwards.

Edwards, of course, was not the first national politician to decry the gap between rich and poor. As Garance Franke-Ruta noted last September, de Blasio’s "two cities" theme echoes Mario Cuomo’s 1984 Democratic convention keynote and, almost a century before that, William Jennings Bryan's legendary "Cross of Gold" speech. But after Cuomo, the balance of power inside the Democratic Party shifted toward New Democratic politicians like Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Evan Bayh, and Chuck Robb and centrist strategists like Mark Penn and Bruce Reed, who generally avoided the language of class and instead focused on proving that Democrats could foster economic growth.

It was Edwards, during his 2004 presidential run, who returned the focus to inequality by flipping Clintonism on its head. In his 1992 campaign, Clinton had talked a lot about “rewarding work.” Democrats, he insisted, would help people who “played by the rules”—for instance, via an expanded earned income tax credit for the working poor—but they would stop coddling welfare recipients. In 2004, Edwards took that judgmental tone but redirected it. In his narrative, the people disrespecting work were not welfare mothers but trust funders, people who lived off their investments rather than the sweat of their brow.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/01/democrats-in-2014-the-party-of-john-edwards/282767/

[KoKo]

1. As flawed in character as the man was...this is his better legacy:

His "Two Americas" message was resurrected by "Occupy Wall Street" which made the 1% the best talking point we Dems have had in decades because it resonated given the lack of Wall Streeters/Bansters and De-Regulators to be held account for what America has gone through in the further dismantling of the New Deal Protections which protected our society for decades since the Great Depression.


From the Article:

"Now, of course, in the wake of Occupy Wall Street, Elizabeth Warren, and Pope Francis, economic inequality has become motherhood and apple pie for Democrats. Obama will reportedly make it a centerpiece of his final years in office."

[oberliner]

2. Agreed

Important message, flawed messenger.

[phantom power]

3. All messengers are flawed. But only certain kinds of messages get airbrushed out.

It's funny how that works.

[Egalitarian Thug]

5. We could ask Dennis Kucinich about that. n/t

& R

[1StrongBlackMan]

13. DK wasn't airbrushed out of history ...

there was no need to. When he was in Congress, the American electorate most was not ready for his message ... that included the most Democratic Democrats of the Progressive Caucus. DK was out there, largely, by himself.

[Baitball Blogger]

10. So close to greatness.

A very flawed character, indeed.

But we've come a long way, since then. The Two Americas are created from more than just the lack of jobs. It is also influenced by heavily weighing down a group of people with enormous obstacles, such as we do when the criminal justice system over-focuses on one racial make-up over the other. Too often the young of minority groups grow up with distractions and worries that do not affect the children of the dominant groups in this country. How do you sprout wings when society keeps clipping your feathers? It's not easy.

Equal justice. That's what I want to see. When every child and adult has to deal with the same level of accountability, that's when the two Americas will become one America.

And maybe it will make our leaders less narcissistic.

[progressoid]

14. "Obama will reportedly make it a centerpiece of his final years in office."

He tried to adopt Edwards' "Two Americas" during the election but then promptly forgot about it once in office.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

27. Howard Dean, anyone? Edwards sounded inauthentic

By about the 50th time I heard he was the son of a mill worker (part of the white collar management) but hey, it sounds good!

[NobodyHere]

30. To me his biggest "flaw"...

was being idiotic enough to vote for invading Iraq, not to mention the Patriot Act.

F*** him.

[drmeow]

4. The demonization of John Edwards

has always driven me nuts. He was my choice (after Kucinich - who didn't have a hope in hell of getting the nomination) before the infidelity was exposed and that didn't change for me. The reaction to his infidelity was way out of proportion and I think it was largely aimed at silencing his anti-poverty message more than anything else.

[cascadiance]

8. I still wonder how long the party bosses knew about his problems in that campaign...

And waited right until before super Tuesday to have him end his campaign instead of doing it earlier. Perhaps it was part of the plan to get us all drawn to him so that they could keep the support for the message he had from going to someone else then like Kucinich in order to keep the campaign to get down just to two contenders of Clinton and Obama, who they knew were both corporatist in their leanings, even though Obama threw out the more nebulous "working for change" campaign to draw in those Edwards voters who would "hope" that Obama would have his "change" focused on what Edwards was campaigning on. I still voted for Edwards in the California primary even though he was "out" at that point as a point of protest. Here's my old photoshopped image from that point in the campaign where I felt trapped like many others did...

[drmeow]

11. I think the party insiders

wanted both Kucinich and Edwards out much earlier. I think they would have been just as happy if their messages had never even been aired at all. By their very presence they reminded people like us that there ARE politicians who at least talk the talk we want to hear - and the reality is that if they were given an equal voice we wouldn't be the only ones supporting them.

Edwards announced that he was ending his campaign either the morning of or the morning before the AZ primary - I voted for him, anyway.

The media silenced Edwards just like they silenced Dean (Kucinich never had enough of a voice in the media for them to care).

The good news is that the media is not succeeding in silencing the new voices saying the same things. I think we can thank the internet and social media for that.

[karynnj]

17. The media silenced neither Edwards or Dean

Dean remains an important voice - as he was in 2004 as a surrogate and then until 2006 as DNC chair. Even with no position now, he is still an important voice.

As to Edwards, he was the one the media favored the most in 2004. THAT was the entire reason he did as well as he did and a large part of the pressure on Kerry to take him. He was covered before 2008 until it was clear, after Iowa, that he had no chance.

In 2008, the CW was that HRC would win the nomination on super tuesday. That remained true even when Obama won Iowa. Edwards never was likely to do well in nH and after 2 poor results, he had trouble raising money - and he lost support to Obama who gained momentum out of Iowa
In fact, it would have been better for HRC if Edwards had split the anti-HRC vote.

As to silencing the voice, the fact is that after he personally was shown to be not a nice person, his value as a messenger disappeared - and there never a lot of substance behind the facade. The message - of FRR, Cuomo and generations of other Democrats - was good - and it will continue - likely with many different messengers. All hopefully less disappointing as people.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

47. Sorry

I supported the man, he was the first candidate I ever donated money to. I felt like shit when all his dirty laundry came out. You're very naive if you don't think the Republicans would have loved to have that dirt with him as our nominee. If the "party bosses" knew and got him the fuck out of there, thank God, because Sarah Palin would be vice president right now. Chew on that.

[drmeow]

58. I'm sorry you feel so hostile

And I'm kinda sad that you feel the need to direct that hostility at a stranger on a forum who theoretically you actually agree with - but life is too short and there too many other non-hostile people at DU for me to care beyond that. Goodbye.

[cascadiance]

68. I agree he was damaged goods once the details of his dirty laundry came out...

After that came out, I realized he couldn't be the nominee, but the real question in my mind was WHEN the party's PTB first found out about his dirty laundry. If they knew it early on well before they made it public, and allowed (perhaps even ENCOURAGED) him to run in order to draw the more progressive votes in to a "black hole" that couldn't have representation later in the convention, etc. to even help drive the party platform, let alone be a viable candidate, then I have a big problem with the way the party worked. I have no substantive information to back up the notion that this was the case, but it does seem rather convenient that most of the progressive votes were drawn to him early on, and those that supported him earlier didn't have as much of a voice later on when we progressives really NEEDED it to help push the party away from the corporatist control it has been pushed towards. And that the other two candidates had as much support from those who supported "identity" reasons (a minority or a woman) as a reason without as much scrutiny to their stances. Warren this time around offers us the ability to have someone that can be drawn to her both since she's a woman and also her strong progressive stances on issues.

[drmeow]

12. Oh, and I also like Carter

even when it wasn't fashionable to like Carter

[davidpdx]

40. I don't think it was blown out of proportion

He slept with another woman and got her pregnant. I'm glad he got exposed when he did. If he'd been the party's nominee and then it came out we would have ended up with President John McCain.

Early on in the election (in March 2007) I was torn between Edwards and Obama and gave a small donation to each. I decided a month later to support Obama and have never regretted it. When the whole thing came out about Edwards it just reinforced my instinct that I picked the right candidate.

[customerserviceguy]

54. It wasn't just infidelity, let me remind you

That's a dime a dozen among politicians from all parts of the political spectrum.

With that scum John Edwards, we add lying to all of us about it for so very long, while asking for our votes and campaign contributions, knowing it would eventually blow up in his face because he was too damned stupid to wear a rubber. Also, using his wife's cancer as a reason to vote for him when he was cheating on her with a space cadet, whose baby he initially denied was his.

This is so very much more than garden variety sleeping around. But maybe you forgot all that, because you're blinded by his "two Americas" flowery speeches. John Edwards was very much a resident of the better of the two American, and acted like his money gave him permission to act like an alley cat, then lie about it.

[PowerToThePeople]

6. JE's penis is why we can not have an just economic system in the USA.

FUCK!!!!!!

[KoKo]

48. Well...there was a penis before that ....which caused more harm

The Lewinsky Set Up.... Just saying...

Demise of "Glass-Steagall Act" (keeping Investment and Saving Banks Separate since FDR)."Commodities Futures Modernization Act"..."Welfare Reform"..."Telecommunications Deregulation Act"... and more.

[librechik]

7. It was a great agenda, and I'm pleased as punch if Blasio can run with it

and happier if he can implement any of it.

[bigtree]

9. it's not enough for politicians and candidates to talk a good game

. . . it's not such an outlandish expectation from us for them to conduct their lives in a way that allows them to advance those ideals. That's where Edwards completely forfeited that ambition. He'll never get the trust back needed to follow through.

Besides, his message wasn't original to him; even at the time of his candidacy. I'm not seeing where he accomplished anything that can be traced back to his campaign rhetoric.

He was my second choice out of five subsequent picks in that election; almost entirely based on his economic rhetoric and focus.

[karynnj]

15. Edwards simply repeated memes that Democrats long before him used

The difference is that THEIR records - unlike his in the Senate - matched the words.

I understand people who first got involved in politics in 2008 who backed Edwards because of his words think that he was unique, but his 2008 run was far to the left of his 2004 run which was to the left of his Senate career. In 2008, with HRC, the ONLY opening had to be on the left - it was expedient!

If you look at his platform in 2008, it is closer to John Kerry's in 2004 than his own - especially on healthcare, where in 2004 he mocked Kerry's and Dean's as "too expensive" and on the environment where he had a mediocre record in the Senate and Kerry had the best lifetime record. I LIKED his 2008 platform - which is no surprise - but his history did not match it - it actually was a better match for Kerry's record, which he did not have. (ie Kerry voted for NONE of the awful bankruptcy bills - Edwards voted for the only one put in front of him. You can't argue that he was new and didn't understand it - Elizabeth was a bankruptcy lawyer.)

I went to Take Back, America in 2007 with a few friends from the JK group. We were shocked by the pundits and speakers in love with John Edwards. It was weird to see that they had none of our misgivings - that he was a primadonna as the VP nomination and earned no respect from the Kerry people as demonstrated by the fact that NONE of Kerry's people went to Edwards when he opted not to run. More importantly, they did not question that he was a chameleon - always intensely who he is at that moment - only to change when he wanted to. (A nice feature in an actor, not so good in anyone you need to trust.)

Edwards was a very junior politician, who was in the right place at the right time with good looks and slick charm. He had no history and nothing he called for was original.

No, the Democratic party is NOT the party of John Edwards. If you want - say it is the party of FDR. FDR was FOR REAL more than even the role that Edwards played. You want someone more modern -- take Sherrod Brown - who lives and votes what Edwards only learned the lines to say.

[cascadiance]

16. Which is why I wonder if he wasn't just being "used" in the 2008 campaign...

... perhaps told by party bosses that everything would come down easy on him for his affairs, etc. IF he would deliver the message he gave to draw those in the party favoring his campaign messages to him and not to others that the PTB couldn't just "shut down" later to help solidify a Hillary/Obama "choice" at the end instead of perhaps having someone like Kucinich "polluting the waters" and at least forcing more liberal planks in the party platform, etc. too.

I personally hope at some point my senator, Senator Merkley, gets a shot at the presidency down the road. He's been delivering a lot of what the old party of FDR wanted. For now though, someone like Elizabeth Warren has a better shot at being our voice in 2014.

[karynnj]

18. Kucinich was NEVER a threat to them

He never polled high in either 2004 or 2008.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

26. Lot of conspiracy in your post

[davidpdx]

39. I agree about Merkley having a chance to run

He'd be a damn good VP candidate too. It would be nice to have someone in the White House from the west coast.

[Bluenorthwest]

42. I agree, Jeff Merkley is outstanding and has shown himself to be very skilled and courageous in the

Senate. I worked hard on his campaign in 08. He'd have my support for any office he wanted to seek.
Town Halls with Merkley this weekend, Lane and Jackson counties info below, also on the 4th in Deschutes County, Crook County and Jefferson County at link:
January 5, 2014 @ 6:00 PM
Lane County Town Hall
Senator Merkley will update constituents on his work in Washington, DC and answer their questions and invite their suggestions about how to tackle the challenges facing Oregon and America.

101 West 10th Ave
Eugene, OR 97401

January 5, 2014 @ 12:30 PM
Jackson County Town Hall
413 West Main Street
Medford, OR 97501

http://www.merkley.senate.gov/oregon/townhalls/

[Demo_Chris]

43. Excellent post, and (as you undoubtedly know) you are actually going easy on him. nt

[karynnj]

49. Thank you

I think that the message is a very strong one and it resonates well in times when inequality becomes far to obvious.

When the country is doing well, though the inequality is still too large, the issue does not work and is conflated with Communism. Years ago, a British friend who teaches an honors program told us that in one class they used both the iconic Obama hope image and the RW distorted one with the word "socialism". The funny thing is that the kids got the first one and loved it. The second one confused them because they had no negative view of socialism, so all they saw was an ugly distorted image.

That image worked on the right because of the internalized negative of "socialism" - often by many people who have benefited by American programs with roots in socialism - from public schools and libraries to Medicare and Social Security. I think Americans, by our history and our myths, always have the tendency to reject a European like call to class. Most Americans do not know (or believe) that mobility in the US is less than in most European countries. The belief that success comes from hard work and the myth of rugged individualism lead to people voting as if they were already where they expect to be -- ie richer. It also leads to them viewing taxes as "punishing success that someone worked for"

I think with De Blasio and Elizabeth Warren (who voted for Reagan), the point has been reached where the inequality of income is destroying our democracy. This may be the time when that being our message would resonate well - especially as I think more people are seeing how uneven the playing field is.

As to Edwards, I think that his value was entirely in being an attractive, articulate face communicating the message. While still attractive (I haven't seen photos recently) and articulate, his actions have made him toxic. As his value was NOT creating policy or the ideas behind it, but as the front man -- he really is not useful now. What remains in the minds of some of the people who invested their time, money and hopes in him is a lingering desire - very strong in some - for THEIR passion and efforts in support of Edwards to have meant something. Through no fault of theirs, they were stung by seeing that they trusted someone who did not deserve that trust - and who never was who they believed he was. For some, especially pundits who backed Edwards, this surfaces as articles like this one - suggesting that the Edwards campaign was important. but ahead of its time with a "new" message.

[geek tragedy]

64. "He uses my voting record exactly as his platform, even though he had the opposite voting record. "

--Russ Feingold, on John Edwards

[karynnj]

66. nice quote - I forgot that

and forgot the other point - no Senator backed Edwards in 2008. Some of the people who knew him best.

[alato]

19. it was john edwards

that made me realize i was a liberal. still can't shake the betrayal i feel from the guy.

[dembotoz]

20. k and r

[SCVDem]

21. Carlos Danger wasn't doing so bad

At least until he turned into Anthony Wiener.


Or do I have that backwards?

[cali]

22. nonsense. codswallop. or less politely, what bullshit

[Pretzel_Warrior]

24. Hey, Cali! I agree.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

23. Thank Goddess above John Edwards didn't

Make it through to the general over Obama or Clinton. What a nightmare scenario for Dems. Clinton scandal on steroids. I can't even imagine. Poor Elizabeth!!!

You have to get elected before your ideas and speeches mean much. And I disagree with Edwards' pivotal importance in changing the debate.

I believe financial meltdown and lack of prosecution of bankers while they foreclosed on homeowners is what led to Occupy Wall Street and changed the focus from deficits to inequality and a populist message.

[cbayer]

25. I sure hope not.

I certainly don't want my party's platform to be based on lies, scams, insincerity and driven by blind ambition.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

28. Pretty obvious attempt to tar populism with "Edwards" ahead of 11/2014

Can you be any more obvious, Atlantic?

[grahamhgreen]

29. +1

[winter is coming]

32. +1. n/t

[Omaha Steve]

31. I was a huge supporter of Edwards

I'm in his just say no video shot in Iowa on Oct 24, 2017. Talked with him. Got an autograph of him on an AP photo with his family on vacation summer 07 etc.

[oberliner]

33. How do you feel about him now?

How did his infidelity affect your opinion of him, if it did?

[Omaha Steve]

34. I'd like to get the $ and time I donated back

I donated time (took vacation days to do it) to make calls and drive people to the 08 Iowa caucus etc. He had the right message. But for the things he did, he won't ever get my vote again.

I did vote for him in the NE primary in 04. Kerry had it won. The idea was to get him the VP slot. It worked. In all I saw him three times.

OS

[DemocraticWing]

35. I supported John Edwards in 2008.

No matter what we learned about him after the campaign was over, I have no problem with the fact I supported him. He was right about there being Two Americas, and it's only gotten worse since then.

[Greybnk48]

44. I did too. I was excited by his Wall St. vs Main Street message

because everyone else seemed to be ignoring the redistribution of wealth that was underway bottom-up. I'm not embarrassed for supporting him at all. Too much stress pushes some of these people to make stupid decisions, that's all. I still don't think he's a bad man, and he now has to live with what he did to his wife Elizabeth and his kids--all of them.

[DiverDave]

36. His message reverbed with me

I am sick that he had feet of clay, but human will out I guess.
He really did go there
Democrats these days, not so much.
Warren, though, is talking about it.

[reddread]

37. stalking horse who denied his own child to keep up the pretense that was only meant for the suckers

He could lie about his own child, but oh yes, he must have been serious in his rhetoric, poor misunderstood John Edwards.
catch a clue, he is and was always scum of the first order. Ask his dead ex-wife. Every last Edwards supporter was a fool.
But not so much as those who still keep a candle burning.

[Douglas Carpenter]

38. Edwards voted in the Senate as a DLC type New Democrat but used the language of a New Dealer on

the campaign trail - not that it is unusual to discover a gap between a politician's rhetoric and record just a big as the gap between the two Americas - no where did I hear any proposals from Edwards that actually sought to address the issues of the gap between the two Americas

[Bluenorthwest]

41. Sorry, Edwards was a raging hypocritical exploiter of anti gay sentiments who also voted for war

John Edwards, a man I once supported, took it upon his adulterous self to stand up at Democratic events and preach about his own deeply held, very traditional views of marriage, he'd say he was a Deacon's son, with Baptist roots 'it's just a part of me' he'd say 'marriage is for one man and one woman' he'd say, while he himself was betraying his wife. He'd go on and on. He opposed marriage rights for gay people based on his own devout way of living, he claimed to be righteous and to have standing to judge others. The whole time he was lying, cheating and maybe stealing.
I don't much care for hearing that anti gay Edwards or Francis define the future of our Party. Both very wealthy and powerful, both libelous and bigoted, both demonstrating their low views of women in word and especially in action, constantly. So 'rich, famous, anti gay sexists are our future' is not acceptable to me, and if that is what you want, you have a fight coming.

[oberliner]

45. Is there a Democrat you are particularly keen on?

Someone you would like to see seek the nomination next time around?

[LuvLoogie]

53. Equating Edwards with Francis is pretty ridiculous.

I suspect that Francis will do more to change anti-gay Catholic minds than you will or can. I agree that we dodged a bullet with Edwards and his hypocrisy, but you are beginning to sound like a one-trick pony. You would have your pound of flesh.

[geek tragedy]

63. Well, Francis never worked for a hedge fund either nt

[Nye Bevan]

46. Fuck John Edwards. He lied to and cheated on his cancer-stricken wife

and persuaded his friend to lie that he was the father of his mistress's baby. He betrayed all of his supporters and by staying in the race risked throwing away the election to the Republicans if the story came out before election day.

He is a lying, callous, narcissistic piece of shit.

[customerserviceguy]

55. Add to that

Found a space cadet to be his playtoy, and paid her out of campaign funds.

Failed to wear a rubber to prevent the eventual pregnancy.

Denied fatherhood of the child when she was born, a fact she will be able to look up for the rest of her life.

Still thinks we should forgive him. Arrogant bastard.

[deminks]

50. This is what he did in Kansas.

Spur of the moment. Summer. University not in session. He came whistling through Kansas on a train, the crowds on the tracks were so large, he came back the next day. This is what happened. It wasn't just him, or Elizabeth. We didn't really know him. We know, however, what he was saying.

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2004/aug/09/thousands_welcome_edwards/

This is what terrifies both the Reich wing and the 3rd way. Crowds like that in Kansas. They know. We know.

[warrprayer]

52. don't let the 3rd wayers bother you

as this points out, they have both willing and unwilling people on both sides to keep facism alive and well in America


http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024270922

[customerserviceguy]

56. The right wing is not terrified by this message

What successes do it's proponents of the last five decades have to show for it? Kucinich, Edwards, and Occupy Wall Street have all failed to get any meaningful laws passed regarding income inequality. de Blasio might get something in NYC, then he will watch people well-off people move out of the city. It has to be national, or it won't work.

[tritsofme]

51. Edwards is and was an incredible phony.

He deserves credit for nothing but being a scumbag.

[Orsino]

57. Well, he'll never have a chance to deliver on that glimmer of promise...

...but oh, what a promise.

[PeteSelman]

59. If John Kerry had rightly become President in 2005, Edwards might be President now.

But Rove stole it from Kerry and Edwards fell from grace.

Sad really. I liked his message.

[oberliner]

60. Imagine if Gore had rightly become President in 2000

What a different world it would be.

[PeteSelman]

65. No doubt. The whole country lost.

But this thread is about John Edwards.

[Vashta Nerada]

61. I actually liked John Edwards's message.

I supported him in 2004 and 2008 (behind Dennis Kucinich). It pissed me off and saddened that he cheated on his dying wife, though.

[geek tragedy]

62. Let's hope the Democrats mean it as opposed to that ambulance-chasing phony nt

[DevonRex]

67. JE in 6 words: Daddy was a millworker. Two Americas.

Complicated JE: See above + My hair is amazing. Where's my mistress? Where's my wife? That ain't my baby!