For once I agree with Matt Stoller.

[Mass]

Here is what he said about Edwards's announcement, and it was what I felt all along.

I apologize to those who like Edwards. It is not an attempt to bash him. I am just trying to express my feelings about him.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/12/27/184649/71

...
Bad Edwards

by Matt Stoller, Wed Dec 27, 2006 at 06:46:49 PM EST

In this New York Times article on Edwards, there's this quote.

Mr. Edwards, who is arguably the most Web-savvy candidate in the '08 race to date, is using Thursday's event to try to gin up his supporters via the Internet. He sent out an e-mail message earlier this week, saying he was on the verge of making a decision that his aides say has, in fact, already been made.

... Instead he pretended to care about input and asked 'Should I run' when (1) he had already decided that he was going to run, (2) had announced he was going to announce in New Orleans, and (3) had aides tell the New York Times that he had already made his decision and that his supporters' feedback was irrelevant. The message to supporters is that they are gullible morons that are less important than sucking up to big media. A truly transformative President has to trust the American people, not play stupid and transparent games like this.

I don't know if Edwards is going to be progressive or not, but I do know that I don't trust him or his campaign because he obviously doesn't trust us enough to be honest about his intentions. I hope he gets it soon, but he's now in the risk-averse Obama box.
...

(Well, not totally. I am waiting to hear more about Obama to make this judgment. For now, I like him, but who knows what may happen).

Just to make it clearer, like Matt Stoller, this is just the last of a series of frustration. I started by really liking Edwards and he started as my close second to John Kerry in 03. At some point, I even thought I would support him in the 04 primaries if Kerry did not run or collapsed. However, tons of little things that do not ring true, like that, have made me doubt there is more than ambition in the man.

His campaign for poverty is important, but the truth is that, as I posted yesterday, he may be the only one to talk about poverty, but he is not the only one whose proposals would really impact poor people in a positive sense, if anything because a lot of things beyond aide to poverty will.

I posted that yesterday and I tend to think this is right:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3030728&mesg_id=3030778

You may want to see what they are concretely proposing and who is the best for solving this country's problems?

I have listened hard to Edwards and I just do not think his solutions are sufficient. His emphasis on poverty is good, but he is far from being alone caring about that and proposing solutions.

When I look at the sum of all the problems that need to be solved, and many of which, even if they are not labeled "poverty issues", will affect more directly the poorest ones, I want to hear what everybody is proposing. Developing new jobs, offering a good healthcare program that everybody can access, good school starting very early (it is generally too late for the lowest-income kids, to intervene at college age), caring about the environment and global warming, are all solutions to problems that will impact more fundamentally poor people than others. Poor kids are the ones who will be impacted the most in case of war (hence the importance of foreign policy issues), or by strict judicial programs.

So, I am all for talking about poverty, but this can be tricky. Economic solutions are important, but other issues are just as important. Listen to everybody. Judge their solutions to the whole set of issues, and then decide.

I somehow think that proposals made by Kerry ( Gore, or probably Obama when he will explain his proposals more, or even Clinton) will have more effect on poor people because they will act on a broader spectrum.


To make it relevant to this forum, I continue that Kerry has a better program to help poor people, because it is broader (with various economical programs that will help poor people where it matters, like by offering solutions for small businesses, an extensive plan for healthcare, solutions for global warming, and a plan for peace) while also helping the middle class to stay middle class.

So, please, run John Kerry.

[wisteria]

1. I have never felt Edwards concerns about "us" were genuine, even back in 03/04

I just don't trust him to stand by what he promises. IMO, it is all about him. he has put together a cleverly packaged sentiment, sure to appeal to the middle class and poor, but when it comes down to actually helping us, I have a feeling what we will find are a bunch of empty promises.This run- IMO,is all about John Edwards and the power and name John Edwards wants. Apparently, he has wanted the position of President since he ran for the Senate, if you can believe some of what is in an article on MSNBC on line,


Edwards began building support for his first presidential bid shortly after arriving in the Senate. He quickly made a name for himself in Congress, using his legal background to help Democratic colleagues navigate the impeachment hearings.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16377918/

This comment from your link says a lot about the man and for me brings to mind the word phony,

Edwards' part of reaching out to the grassroots in a half-hearted manner because doing so fully would jeopardize other relationships he values a great deal more (such as those his aides have with the New York Times).

I saw him at a union rally up in Johnstown, PA in 04, (the third time I had seen him) and by then his whole persona seemed to be nothing more than a put on. At that point, I felt he added nothing to the ticket.
IMO, he isn't Presidential material.

[karynnj]

2. I agree with you and Stoller

My distrust comes from seeing little descrepancies between rhetoric and truth that would prevent me from supporting him if Kerry doesn't run.

Kerry's life is consistant with the beliefs and things he says - he really did choose a life of public service and paid a stiff economic price for it. In 2004, I had read the NYT articles on the backgrounds of the primary candidates before I read Tour of Duty.

In the brief description of Kerry's time as a private lawyer, I was impressed that he quickly was dissatisfied with using his talents as a trial lawyer - even though he was a very successful one and could have amassed an Edwards-like fortune. Because I had just read the NYT profiles - the contrast between Kerry and Edwards was clear to me as I read that paragraph.

Kerry had the skills and connections to become rich. The choices he made showed that what mattered most to him was his job as a Senator and his daughters. Kerry was involved on political and environmental issues from his 20s on. Edwards was absent until he was a wealthy almost 50 year old.

For Edwards, in his 50s to suddenly portray himself as the advocate of the disadvantaged seems politically expedient - when he sometimes didn't even vote in his adult years. For Elizabeth to mischaracterize their real economic situation, asks for trouble. To describe 2 recent talented law school graduates as struggling shows that she is out of tuch with people who really are struggling.

Obama who actually chose to be a Civil Rights lawyer and who did work for the poor in Chicago seems to have a history consistant with the issue - where Edwards really doesn't.

Gore who advocated on global warming and was a public servant from his 20s on also lived the life he advocates for.

Even Hillary has a more consistent life story.

[beachmom]

7. You're right -- Obama is more the "real deal" on poverty than Edwards

If we want a lightweight with little to no foreign policy experience, Obama is WAY better than Edwards. He's lived a more interesting life, and didn't make much when he was a community organizer in Chicago; and it was a FRUSTRATING job to say the least, but he kept at it. I suppose I should finish the Obama book -- I got stuck in the Chicago part which was a little tedious. I do want to read about his trip to Africa. I started reading it in 2005, and then I put it down, since the books on Kerry were FAR more interesting.

For me, Edwards is not even ON my list for president -- and I'm a fairly good predicter of who's hot but won't be when the primaries actually are voted on. I couldn't see Howard Dean as president and he crashed and burned. Edwards will, too. He doesn't wear very well.

[Inuca]

13. One more "I agree" comment

There is something genuine about Obama, at least that's how I perceive it, which is completely lacking in Edwards, IMHO of course. Also a seriousness and a sense of real deep intelligence as opposed to charming smarts. I am sure I am not alone in having more than ENOUGH of the superficial "I want to have a beer with" candidate. I am obviously not equating Edwards and *, but I simply think that there is a certain similarity (symmetry?) between what made one popular and endearing in some circles and what makes others like Edwards.

[ProSense]

3. There is a lot

of political maneuvering going on. After all the build up, Edwards' team accidentally scooped him with an Internet announcement. Oops!

A lot of ideas (what Gary Hart refers to as theses) being floated, but ideas always have been. It'll be interesting to see what else comes out of these campaigns to put these ideas into effect. For me, vision and experience are important.

[whometense]

4. Have you seen his myspace page?

http://www.myspace.com/johnedwards.

We were discussing this last night with my kids and nieces - all in the target demographic. He's reaching out for the youth vote, but it comes across to some like the uncle who tries too hard to be cool.

John Kerry has a myspace page too. http://www.myspace.com/johnkerry

But it's a satiric/clumsy hit job site. I don't know what the impact of all this is. Just throwing the info out there.

Edited to add: there's another JK myspace page here: http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=36284810

I think it's a tribute site, but it's hard to tell.

[wisteria]

5. The second site is definitely better than the first.

The first one seems to be filled with middle school type comments. Oh, wait, I mean, Republican comments.

[beachmom]

6. I like the freeper Kerry myspace better than the "I'm cool because

I'm on myspace" Edwards site. Okay -- some of these freepers actually ARE funny. For some reason, I think that site would make Kerry himself laugh -- I mean, you gotta laugh at the caricature of yourself!

I opened my paper today, and there was an article about Edwards' "oops" announcement one day early. And a picture of Edwards in New Orleans. Sorry, but this whole NOLA backdrop announcement P.R. makes me want to barf. Since Kerry's big issues has been Iraq and the Middle East, does that mean he should announce from Baghdad, acting all concerned about the troops? Well, of course not, because it would be in extremely bad taste. Somebody needs to talk to Edwards about class and grace, because launching your ambitions for becoming president on the sacred soil of a place where over 1,000 Americans died is just ill advised, to say the least. Perhapd Guiliani will announce his bid at ground zero?

I think that Kerry should have a decent network of netroots support; however, he should NOT be #1 on the internet. He just needs to be in the top 4 maybe on the blogs. And straw polls don't count. We're talking getting quoted and having diaries about you, etc. By that measurement, Hillary is dead last. Even Biden gets more written about him of substance than Hillary.

I agree with Mass and Stoller. Expect Edwards to be ahead in Iowa until he suddenly inexplicably collapses. This early out, I'm glad he's the guy who will be taking the punches.

[ProSense]

8. Speaking of

Rudy Giuliani, he is doing just that. The myth of "America's mayor" is embedded in his mind.

[Island Blue]

9. That is sick and disgusting.

:puke:

[wisteria]

12. Oh, how unappealing and shallow he is.

I really cannot believe he will have a hell of a chance once people really get to know him. His speaking style is boring, his approach stiff, he has no new ideas or plans to run on and then there is the issue of one or two unhappy ex-wives. He also has this annoying eye tic, that actually is very scary to watch. He also just spews the RW talk and I know there was a time not long ago where he actually blamed the troops for something in order to defend Bush.

Giuliano Blames Missing Weapons Cache on the Troops

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2004/10/28/001/57036

[beachmom]

15. Well, that's bad, but would he announce ON Ground Zero?

Because that's kinda what Edwards is doing announcing from a devastated city.

I hope that if or when Kerry announces, he does so from Faneiul Hall or something like that. No "themes", just "here I am. This is me." Genuine is what people are looking for.

[wisteria]

23. I thought your earlier comment on Edwards choice of NO to make his announcement.

I thought it was inappropriate too. If Giuliano tried to do something similar at the site of 9/11 I would be appalled at this display of exploitation also. Thats what I consider all of this, exploiting others tragedies for personal gain. Crude and classless.

[karynnj]

25. Faneuil Hall is ITSELF part of a theme

but not one that exploits the misfortune of others. I definately hope he does declare there. It is a perfect place for Kerry. It would be Kerry saying we have to fight for our traditional values and to let our democracy be based on discussion of the issues.

I can't remember the words on the plaque that Tay Tay pointed out - on Faneuil Hall, but I think it is part of Kerry's theme. It's broader than the piece parts - it's a call for the United States to live up to the ideas it was created for.

[Democrafty]

32. I agree completely.

It appears to me that JK will run on a policy platform rather than a personality platform, and that's why he has my support. What has been happening at Faneuil is not theatre. It is good reason and common sense from a guy who knows what he is talking about. You can't stage that.

[karynnj]

34. I agree 100%

Hearing the words you knew they came from his heart and soul. There is something special about Faneuil Hall itself. In addition to being about MA's colonial and revolutionary war values, it has to be the perfect setting for a political rally. It is beautiful and elegant without being the least ostentagious. It is majestic with it's high ceiling, but small and intimate. The sound carries through the room giving everything an historic type feel - all the more so when it is Kerry speaking truth. For some reason that I don't understand, it seems to add both warmth and gravitas to what is said. But above all, it's a place where staging something would ring false.

[karynnj]

24. Does anyone else think it funny that the NYT spoke

of Edwards as the most net savvy? Kerry is the one who has developed and used an email list to create a virtual community of activists. Whome's comment that Edwards sounded like the "uncle trying to be cool" is interesting. I also think Edwards' email this week asking if he should run was disengenuous and plays into seeing him as a phony.

Edwards has been one of the worst in understanding how to do a DKos blog - somehow he missed that content was wanted in the last one I saw. I don't think his web site is better than Kerry's (where I love that it is now easy to find lots of speeches - both as video and text.) I suspect one underlying reason that Kerry in reality is more suited to the web than ANY of the others - though some are far more popular - is that the web is more egalitarian. Kerry seems more comfortable than any of the others speaking directly to regular people. (Maybe because he says the same thing to everyone.)

What I really liked about Kerry's fund raising letters is that they were NOT "vote for this guy because I think he's good" He actually made a well thought out case for each person he asked us to support - saying what in the candidate's history, background or vision made him worthy of support. This treats us like peers - he credits us with enough intelligence to evaluate the case, not just follow. (Kerry's comments could in fact be used to persuade others to VOTE for the candidate.)

The one Edwards solicitation I got was a Casey paid letter with Edwards asking for money for Casey - the first 2 pages were on EDWARDS, the third was on why Santorum was bad, only the last page was on Casey. The first reason was that he was the state's top Democratic vote getter. I was already for Casey, but if I weren't this would not motivate me at all.

[Inuca]

10. "tons of little things that do not ring true"

Yes, I 100% agree. There are too many things that sound and feel phony about him, including the New Orleans announcement. I never really liked him, and was disappointed that JK chose him in 04. And I also agree with other comments down-thread about the inconsistency between his newly found populism, helping the poor, etc., and his long and fortune-making career as a trial lawyer.

[partisan]

11. I'll never understand

the animosity towards Edwards. Seems like a good guy. Was he the greatest VP candidate? No. Besides that(and his wife taking shots at Kerry), he's OK with me.

[partisan]

14. As a Kerry supporter,

Obama scares the hell out of me. He has unlimited potential. That said, Kerry '08!

[wisteria]

21. But not in 08, IMO. Way to soon for Obama for President. n/t

[beachmom]

16. Sorry, partisan. I'll be quiet and say no more. I don't hate Edwards,

I just don't want him for president. That is all.

[partisan]

31. No, no, no,

keep voicing your opinion. I read this forum every day and you're one of the best here. I personally don't have a problem with Edwards. I'm sorry if my post read something completely different.

[beachmom]

33. No, your post was a good reminder to tone it down a little.

I just think Kerry is more a person of substance, and when/if he announces it'll become clear.

Thanks for your post.

[rox63]

17. I like Edwards. I just like Kerry a whole lot more. n/t

[Mass]

28. Edwards bothers me because he can and will do whatever he can to be

president, but I do not think he has the experience to do so right now.

Obama has an extraordinary potential, but, in my opinion, he could do a wonderful president, if not in 08, in 12 or 16. So, as a Kerry supporter, he worries me, but I would not be bothered if I had to support him.

[ProSense]

18. Ezra Klein on "The Announcement"

December 28, 2006

The Announcement

By Ezra

Yesterday, John Edwards spent the day shoveling, flattening, and recreating Orelia Tyler's yard. Today, outside that same yard, at 8:03 in the morning, he announced for president. The speech was more casual than most in the announcement genre, at least in my experience. Edwards was dressed in blue jeans, and a plain white undershirt peeked out behind his unbuttoned collar. The address didn't soar or sing; standing atop the wreckage of the second America, he appeared uninterested talking about it. Instead, Instead, he focused on what you -- not he, not the president -- could do about it.

That was the theme of the entire speech, in fact: How much could be done without public office, without winning primaries, without legislation. "This campaign," Edwards promised," will be a grassroots, ground-up campaign where we ask the people to take action." As part of that, there'll be monthly Days of Action, the first on January 27th, which will exhort volunteers and supporters to enter their communities and work on a particular issue. "Americans," Edwards kept saying," have to be patriotic about something besides war," and that means taking individual initiative to ease poverty, conserve energy, and create the Good Society even without holding office.

The announcement was striking for sounding less like a campaign for the presidency and more like a telethon. His campaign would certainly like to lead in the polls, but Edwards seemed more interested in leading a movement. The virtue of the message is obvious, but its magnetism, urgency, and electoral efficacy are less so. It'll be interesting to see if he's any more explicitly political in Iowa later today. A few other disconnected thoughts:

Snip...

• I can't shake the impression that very little was said about poverty or the Two Americas in this announcement, and that was, in some essential way, odd. The theme was civic action, a verb, not a noun. It's an interesting organizing strategy, but it didn't sound, even here, like a message. And that's fine, it may not be. This announcement, so far removed from primary voters, appeared more intent on creating a national base of engaged, involved, supporters than articulating a sharp-edged political theme. It'll be interesting to see if his focus at the Iowa townhall is significantly different. For now, though, Edwards is doing a better job explaining why you should volunteer with him than vote for him.

[Democrafty]

19. I saw that - really fascinating stuff. n/t

[wisteria]

22. The video I watched last night struck me the same way, n/t

[politicasista]

20. He is going after the environmentalist vote

In which my blogger politcal friend (she is a Biden supporter) said was a "smart move" to use NOLA and the Lower Ninth Ward for that purpose. He is also going after the AA vote before the others do. Like 2004, that was the swing vote.

[Mass]

26. Swing vote? Where?

AA voted at 90 + % for Kerry. This is not what you call a swing vote. It is an important part of the Democratic voters and it should not be taken for granted, but not a swing vote by any mean.

As for the environmentalists, Edwards has a lot of work to do to go after the environmentalist vote. What is clear though is that he still thinks you have to win the South to win. It is one strategy among many. NOLA is also a symbol on the issue of poverty, but do we want a symbol, or somebody who can actually do things. What I got from many people is that Edwards is basically saying that people have to change things themselves rather than relaying on the government to do so. I am not that sure that this is a good way to be a leader, but of course, if a government is not useful, it solves Edwards's problem with experience, I imagine. However, if we can change things without a government for domestic policies, I more than ever want somebody who is knowledgeable in foreign policy.

[politicasista]

27. The AA being the "swing vote" came from Tom Joyner

While interviewing Kerry back in October 2004. Tom was talking about how AA will turn out to vote, and Kerry talked about how the AA vote was the swing vote and the fear tactics Rover and others were pulling.

The swing vote comment was also used because AA have a perception that the Democrats take them for granted in every election (even though they still like Clinton), which is why the concession may be hard for Kerry to defend because there are AA who felt let down despite the facts about not having enough votes to contest/continue the election.

[Mass]

29. I understand, but this is not typically what you mean by swing vote.

A 90 % for Kerry (as high as Clinton) shows that AA did not dislike Kerry, contrarely to what some pundits want to say.

Polls in Southern states showed that Kerry did better than Edwards in the AA community and that he won the SC primary thanks to the white vote. Edwards knows that and he knows he will have to work hard on this, particularly if Obama runs.

[politicasista]

30. Exactly

Interesting that the pundits want to spin it as AA didn't like Kerry and say they were just ABB (maybe I need to get off the Internet :crazy:).

And I agree with your previous post that Edwards will have some ground to make up in the environmental department and foreign policy experience.

I also agree with your Edwards, Obama analogy also.

[Mass]

35. I have a lot of respect for Bob Geiger, but here, I have to disagree,

If somebody has an account on Huffington, they may answer, and, to answer to a previous criticism, if Edwards's supporters could cut this type of crap, may be this would help with how I view Edwards.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-geiger/why-john-edwards-changes-_b_37291.html

Finally, many people, including yours truly, believed in hindsight that Edwards would have defeated Bush in 2004 had he been at the top of the Democratic ticket. Edwards was undeniably a more engaging personality than John Kerry and with so much of the vote driven by sheer disgust with Bush, Edwards would have picked up Kerry's 49 percent of the vote and then some based purely on the likeability factor -- that's not the way a president should be chosen but, in our country, it just is.
...