Edwards shines in debate/unveils new strategy

[cleveramerican]

and its a brilliant one.

He's gonna wear the hair shirt for the dems. He's gonna heep blame on himself( and every other dem who went along with it) for the mess of Iraq, and repent for it.

It triangulates Hillary and Obama nicely.
It suits his personal campaigning style.
If he can convince voters He has truly had an epiphany since his vote in the Senate.
And Hillary doesn't admit it was a HUGE mistake.Plays the nuances of the situation.
and Obama himself keeps reminding people he wasn't a senator then,thus reminding everyone how short a time he's been on the national stage.


Rank and File Dems know that their elected officials in congress share way more blame for the Iraq mess than they have so far 'fessed up to. They demand some atonement,they demand enough humility to accept their individual roles in the lead-up to the war.

From my front porch it looks like a brilliant strategy.It could work. It suits him.
Nice work John!Now your really showing me something!

[MH1]

1. Has he repented for his role in cosponsoring IWR?

Or just his "vote"?

[cleveramerican]

2. That is his task at hand

I am not sure he can close this deal, but it positions him nicely.

re-read line 6 in the OP

[cyclezealot]

3. Kucinich is my first choice.

And I say Edward's Health Care plan is a total sell out and joke. But, with David Bonior as a campaign advisor, that says good things about Edwards. With Bonior as an aide, I am surprised Edwards let us down with his health care plan. Edwards probably number two.
The ruling class in this country is so set by the gosphel of "Free Trade, " which has destroyed this countries industrial base. That is the test of a politician's courage. How is Edwards' courage on this issue.

[cleveramerican]

4. " I was wrong and I'm sorry....

and if you give me the chance I'll fix it" is a nice succinct sincere campaign strategy.
It gives him a place to stand and it represents the feelings of lots of dems.

[cyclezealot]

6. he's made progress, but

he has a few more apologies to make for his current health care plan. And trade?

[LBJDemocrat]

8. In 2004

Particularly when debating John Kerry one-on-one, Edwards was highly critical of free trade. He positioned himself as the fair trade candidate pretty much as soon as Gephardt left that gap by dropping out.

[Czolgosz]

7. Kucinich is also my first choice, but I have a much more positive view of Edwards'd health care plan

Here's some analysis:

This is key and quite ingenious I think. It allows for some market competition to try to lower prices as insurance companies compete against each other and the federal government. If the government program proves to be the best option (which if we have a Democratic government, it surely will be) then it will be a no-brainer to choose the federal plan and over time we should have a gradual transition to a single-payer system. The framing on this is excellent. We can talk about competition and it will be hard for the republicans to beat this back. If the private market wins, so be it. If it doesn't, then don't Americans deserve the best plan available, even if it happens to be the federal plan?

http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/2/5/15200/45347

Let me talk just briefly about my plan for universal health care, and then I'm sure we'll get into more detail as we go through this conversation. Basically what we do is cover all Americans. In my plan there's shared responsibilities. The employers are required to either cover their employees or to pay into a fund that will help pay for coverage for their employees. The government plays an important role. The government will set up health care markets all across America, and in each of those markets if you're the consumer, you can go in and choose what your health care plan would be. Some of the choices are private insurers, and then one choice is a government plan, basically a Medicare Plus plan. And the idea is to determine whether Americans actually want a private insurer or whether they'd rather have government run Medicare Plus kind of single-payer plan. And we'll find out over time which way people go.

...

It is true that single-payer health care systems in the world dramatically reduce costs and significantly reduce administrative costs, particularly compared to private insurers. It's also true that a lot of people who are listening to this forum like the health insurance they have now and would like to keep it.

And my judgment is, number one, to get it done so that we don't spend another decade arguing about whether we keep the system we have now or actually have universal health care. I think this system, my proposal, a truly universal plan, a bold plan, but doesn't go directly to single-payer, can be accomplished. I think it can be accomplished politically. I think we can get support from across the political spectrum and will accomplish a lot of what we want to do.

Second, it does give people choice. And I think Americans have become accustomed to having choice, and I think they want to be able to choose what their health care plan is. Now, it may be that that gravitates towards a single-payer plan because they will have the Medicare plus the choices. And if that's the case, then the whole system can go in that direction. But you'll decide that. Consumers will decide that. So I think actually this plan makes sense in terms of moving us forward, getting a universal health care plan in place, giving people the choice of the equivalent of a single-payer plan with Medicare Plus, and then we'll see where it goes from there.

http://www.americanprogressaction.org/events/healthforum/edwards_transcript.html

[ChiciB1]

5. I've Been One Of His Supporters For Quite Some Time Now...

Have seen NOTHING to change my mind so far. That's ALL I'm going to say because there are some "nasties" around here who keep making derogatory comments when I say anything else!

[Catchawave]

10. Gennifer *with a G* Flowers never changed my mind

about Bill, especially with Hillary's support and standing beside him in '92. Oh yeah, and he won anyhow :)

John Edwards is so much better than Bill.

[ChiciB1]

11. Hi There! I Sooooooooo Agree!

Ain't it weird that we feel uncomfortable should we decide to post anything "good" about John Edwards??

Almost to the point of sheer anxiety or something? Here at Democratic Underground, about a Democratic candidate!

Oh well, I'll live to see another day I guess... and I agree with YOU!

[rinsd]

9. Shines? He got his ass handed to him via one deft line by Obama.

Candidate Windsock can apologize all he wants. The GOP would eat him alive in the general for it.

[LaPera]

12. No, 41% say Edwards, the republicans are drooling at having Obama

Not a chance in hell will there be President Obama!

http://johnedwards.com/

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/05/opinion/polls/main647648.shtml

[cleveramerican]

13. the only thing better....

than hammering Hillary for her nuanced position regarding the war... is getting her to do it herself.

The only thing better than pointing out how short a time Obama has been on the national stage is getting Obama himself to do it.

As far as free trade or health care goes... don't kid yourselves... whoever gets it right on the war is going to win. Those other issues are frosting on the cake.


By accepting blame he covertly points the finger of blame at the others,except Obama, who will be forced to keep pointing out he wasn't around in '03 and just arrived at this party.It also gives him a chance to apologize for it and covertly points out that a few haven't.


It a very good strategy because its genuinely simple. Those are the kind that win.

[mzmolly]

14. That's a poll from 2004.

:shrug:

[Cameron27]

16. It is from 2004 lol

but luckily 41% thought Edwards won the debate and only 28% thought Cheney did. ROFL

Good catch.

[MonkeyFunk]

15. It's a risky strategy

it may put Clinton on the defensive (though I think her answer is as acceptable as his answer, given that he sponsored the damned thing), but it also reminds people again and again and again that other than an apology, there is little difference between them on the IWR, and Clinton can use his sponsorship against him.

No, I don't think it's a brilliant strategy.