The Real Liberal: John Edwards is Third in the Polls, But Don't Count Him Out

[Joanne98]

Tim DickinsonPosted Aug 10, 2007 1:03 PM

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/15825410/the_real_liberal

If he weren't rich, handsome and so well married, you might feel a little sorry for John Edwards. Never before in the 231-year history of our republic have the inalienable traits that Edwards possesses -- his fair skin and a Y chromosome -- been anything but a prerequisite for presidential politics. Today, his race and gender stand a chance of derailing his campaign altogether. "There's a lot of democrats who would like to make history," says Markos Moulitsas, founder of the influential online forum Daily Kos. "The party is anxious to nominate a black or a woman," agrees Dick Morris, the former adviser to Bill Clinton. "You have to sign off on either of those two options before you even get to voting for Edwards." Indeed, Edwards has been all but eclipsed by the celebrity candidacies of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama: He ranks a distant third in national polls, and his $12 million cash on hand is barely a third of Hillary's and Obama's hauls.

But counting Edwards out would be a big mistake. Flying below the radar, the former vice-presidential candidate is pulling off a feat that Democratic consultants have long considered impossible: staking out the most progressive platform among the viable candidates while preserving an aura of electability. In head-to-head polling against the likes of Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, Clinton and Obama have managed to post only modest leads. Edwards, by contrast, not only bests every Republican candidate in the race, he trounces them -- by an average of twelve points.

"Edwards' message is more left than it was in '04, and it's attracting the right kind of people for the primaries," says Bill Carrick, a veteran party strategist. "But the general electorate still sees him as mainstream. He's doing a good job of threading that needle."

While Clinton and Obama are running media-age campaigns that focus on big ad buys in delegate-rich states, Edwards is taking a decidedly old-school approach. In a strategy reminiscent of the way Jimmy Carter captured New Hampshire in 1976, Edwards has focused on building grass-roots support in Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina -- the first four Democratic contests, all of which will be held in January. Working out of the national spotlight, he has established a sizable lead in the state where a victory in 2004 effectively clinched John Kerry's nomination. "Edwards could well win Iowa," says James Carville, the former adviser to Bill Clinton. Thanks to his Southern roots and a deep relationship with organized labor, Edwards would then become the candidate to beat in both South Carolina and Nevada -- victories that would establish him as the front-runner a week before the huge "national primary" scheduled for twenty states on February 5th. "If he wins Iowa and New Hampshire," says Chris Lehane, a top strategist for both Kerry and Al Gore, "He'll have such a head of steam he'll be unstoppable." Continued>
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/15825410/the_real_liberal

[saltpoint]

1. 'Am in touch with the sons of a very long-standing Democratic

official in an otherwise red state.

One is for Kucinich. The other is for Edwards.

Both are more discerning about platform and ideology than their more-famous mother.

All 3 were formidable and had the effect of reducing all comers to respectful awe.

I've learned a lot from them over the years and through their good offices had the chance to meet a lot of state-level officials and many Democratic county organization people.

The one who is for Kucinich says he is too stubborn to vote for anybody else but that if Martians swept down and stole Dennis away tomorrow morning, Edwards would be a strong second choice.

These are people who will support our ticket no matter what. No matter the candidates who comprise it, no matter who the Pukes send up against us.