Booman Tribune

On Edwards, Hillary, and Obama

by BooMan
Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 01:23:28 PM EST

I'm always ripping on Washington Post reporters but I really like Dan Balz. He did a very good job of covering John Edwards' announcement speech from this morning in the 9th Ward of New Orleans. Edwards is emerging, by his own design, as the netroots candidate of 2008. This can be seen in a variety of ways. First, his announcement today was accompanied by a big netroots ad buy (including at this site), a major multimedia rollout, and even a brief diary at Daily Kos. Second, he is directly emphasizing the biggest issue of concern to the netroots: the war. This morning he said (again) that his vote for the war was a mistake, that there was no military solution, and that far from escalating we should immediately pull out 40-50 thousand troops. Third, he is emphasizing progressive issues, including rolling back Bush's tax cuts, dramatically increasing taxes on oil companies, expanding health care, and tackling poverty.

In doing these things, he is hoping to gain the early support of the netroots and prevent Obama from catching fire.

Obama's positioning has been somewhat different. He has not ignored the netroots, but he has neither pandered to us, nor has he crafted a message that fits nicely with our ethos. The netroots is stridently partisan and uncompormising. We were born in an era where we had no power and no voice, and where the Democratic leadership was lacking spine and the media was overtly hostile to war doubters and traditional liberals. In that environment, we instinctly rejected any signs of bipartisanship, seeing it (usually correctly) as nothing short of appeasement. Obama's strategy involves an appeal for the nation to break this paradigm, to move beyond the era of anger and recriminations. At it's base, Obama's movement looks to make partisan blogging irrelevant, or something of the past. So, even while he reaches out to us with one hand, he pushes us away with the other.

Edwards and Obama are both looking to change the face of the Democratic Party, and they both offer a sunny and optimistic vision of what is possible in America. The difference is, so far, that Obama seeks to move beyond ideology, while Edwards seeks to move beyond a race for centrist voters. Edwards is going for the progressive activists and the disenfranchised (those who traditionally don't vote), and his appeal is to the heartstrings of the center. 'Look at the ninth ward. Is this the best we can do?'

Obama offers a kind of transcendental politics. It's a politics that fits in with the multicultural, culturally tolerant, tech-savvy, young professional ethos of twenty and early thirty-somethings. He offers a break with the past, but it's an appeal to feelings, to style, to new possibilities. I think he has a powerful message. But the message is more the man, than any specific policies.

In some ways, Obama is this year's Edwards from 2004. He is heavy on the good looks, charm, and freshness, and light on the resume and foreign policy experience. Edwards still suffers from those same deficiencies, but he has one Presidential campaign under his belt, he has sat on the Council of Foreign Relations, and, as a result, his experience is a little more fleshed out.

And then there is Hillary. Hillary and her supporters are actually happy to be at odds with the netroots. As long as she is being attacked by the left she can blunt any suggestion that she is too liberal, or that she is a radical that is out of step with mainstream America. The right-wing worked tirelessly to paint Hillary as a big government femi-nazi and it has taken a lot of work, and a lot of centrist voting and posturing, to blunt that image. Being a Senator from liberal New York makes it even more imperative for her to run away from the left. But, in pursuing this entirely rational strategy, the political ground has shifted under her feet. The netroots has emerged as a force within national politics. It is not a force that can be intentionally alienated without consequences.

She has succeeded in becoming the consensus front-runner of the mainstream media, which means that she is now considered a wholly acceptable President by the Establishment. But the Establishment has never been in more ill repute with both the nation and the activists within the Democratic Party.

The mere fact that she is a woman will make her candidacy exciting. Never before have we had a woman running for President that began in such a strong position. The prospect of a First Hubby, Bill Clinton, also makes her candidacy exciting. But, the pitch for her candidacy is going to be a return to competency and centrist government. When matched up against the bloodless partisanship of a Dennis Kucinich, this will have real appeal. But I don't think it can compete effectively with the charismatic campaigns of Obama and Edwards.

It's possible that someone else will emerge to compete with these three candidates, but I can't see it happening right now. Old fuddy-duddies like Biden and Dodd just seem out of step with the times and the party. Vilsack doesn't have the funding or the star-power or the base of support.

It looks like a real three-way race, and much too hard to predict at this early stage.



Display:
by BooMan on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 01:31:50 PM EST
I'll admit I'm a big Edwards fan Boo and do think you summed up the outlines of these 3 nicely.  One thing I would add about Edwards that seems to get overlooked I believe is that he is just as massively smart as Clinton and has a razor sharp mind.  And that is what it would really take to flesh out a foreign policy-he has done a fair amount of traveling overseas also these last several years to gather more knowledge and understanding.

Add that to the fact that his wife, Elizabeth, is every bit as smart as Hillary and you have a very winning and smart combination.  I remember seeing her doing a town hall meeting during the last election and she took questions for at least and hour and half on every subject imaginable and she answered in depth without once referring to any notes.

Obama seems to be going backwards to me-not forward...he gets more cautious all the time and pretty speeches and phrases don't cut it. Being a vessel for peoples hopes/dreams is fine unless the vessel is empty.

As long as Hilary is a war hawk and continues to believe that Israel is our 51st state and bombing Iran is an option she can take a freaken hike. She lost my vote a long time ago.

'Poverty is the worst form of violence'--Gandhi

by chocolate ink on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 01:57:24 PM EST
All our candidates seem extremely smart to me.  Even Dodd, Biden, and Richardson are very smart individuals.

Edwards is smart.  But I don't know that he stands out from the pack in that regard.

by BooMan on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 02:32:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Oh I agree they are all very smart but Edwards seems to be using his smarts in the right way...to my way of thinking anyway.

'Poverty is the worst form of violence'--Gandhi
by chocolate ink on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 03:02:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]
He has social and emotional intelligence. He's genuinly empathetic to everyday concerns and fears. In this regard he's like Bill Clinton without the nagging slickness.

Green Grass and High Tides Forever
by supersoling (colorsplash62@optonline.net) on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 06:30:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Biden (D-MBNA)?  NO way.

Richardson reminds me of 'Scoop' Jackson.  Western and a moderate who almost sounds like a Repub.

Dodd?  Not even breaking water.

Obama as Veep would get him some foreign policy experience and a possible shoe-in for any future presidential run.  Alright, it is more positioning, but it would give him more experience.

But prez now?  It is not his year.  And if it was, we would be in for it.  Not anything definitive.  Just something I am feeling.

An untypical Negro

http://thisblksistaspage.wordpress.com

by blksista (gab1954@gmail.com) on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 02:59:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
may be in the future if the dominoes fall properly...if Wes Clark wants another shot a Clark/Obama ticket would work as well.

With all the bridges Bush has blown up (not merely burned) with his "my way or the highway" foreign policies, we're going to need someone with some sort of experience in that realm to work with what allies we have left and to rebuild connections with those Bush has alienated. And as you mentioned, a VP position would give  Obama the necessary experience, plus his Senate experience could be helpful in the VP's traditional position in that chamber.

There are a lot of Obama supporters that are framing the issue in terms of race: "If you don't support Obama, you must be a closet racist." But I just don't think he's got the mileage behind him to handle the job quite yet...give him a few more years of seasoning...


-- Walking In Darkness --

by Cali Scribe on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 03:42:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]
There are a lot of Obama supporters that are framing the issue in terms of race: "If you don't support Obama, you must be a closet racist."

Oh, man.  You've got to be kidding me.

I don't support Obama.  

A lot of blacks don't support Obama, either.  

He doesn't come through the usual political channels, doesn't embrace African Americanness (he's more an immigrant than black), and some blacks secretly don't trust him.  Does that make me and us prejudiced?

We just wanna see something more of him.


An untypical Negro

http://thisblksistaspage.wordpress.com

by blksista (gab1954@gmail.com) on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 05:35:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]
What do you make of the Obama endorsement from Chicago mayor Daley?

It looks like Jesse Jackson Jr. isn't going to run, but I think that there's still a lot of animosity between blacks and the Daley administration.  It looks a lot like  an albatross to me.

by ManfromMiddletown on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 06:57:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't know anything about that or Jesse Jr. wanting to run for Daley's seat.

That being said, I don't like the idea that Obama is friends or deeply allied with Daley or members of his machine.

An untypical Negro

http://thisblksistaspage.wordpress.com

by blksista (gab1954@gmail.com) on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 09:57:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]
What do you think of Oprah saying she will do everything she can for Obama if he runs?

Explore More John McCain
by Books Alive on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 11:35:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The queenmaker for the Dems?

Look, Oprah would be the last person in the world to tell me who and how to vote.

And if any other person would take her THAT seriously would need their heads examined.

People need to stop soaking their heads at the cult of celebrity.  

Personalities and images have gotten this country in big trouble.  An image fades and personalities can be scripted.

It's what a person does.


An untypical Negro

http://thisblksistaspage.wordpress.com

by blksista (gab1954@gmail.com) on Fri Dec 29th, 2006 at 12:52:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I think Oprah started believing her own press about her being a so called 'national treasure'..plus she had Arnie and Marie on her show during his run for governor in our special election and I've never forgiven her for that piece of pandering to her celebrity friends. As for her endorsing Obama, well that just proves she ain't as smart as she thinks she is.

'Poverty is the worst form of violence'--Gandhi
by chocolate ink on Fri Dec 29th, 2006 at 01:50:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm not and have never been a fan of her or her program, but she gets headlines. Her fans read the books she selects, but would they really vote for someone on her say-so? If they did, that qualifies them as lemmings, as far as I'm concerned.

Explore More John McCain
by Books Alive on Fri Dec 29th, 2006 at 05:36:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I would agree on your characterization of Edwards slowly becoming more of a consensus netroots candidate. Barring Al Gore jumping in the race, I think many in the netroots will slowly gravitate towards Edwards. Clark also seems to elicit a lot of strong support on the 'Net, but to be honest, I think it might be harder for him to give it a go-around a second time. Obama...well, there are people who like him, and people who don't. It'll be interesting to see the depth of his support; we already know that it's broad. I don't worry about Hillary because despite all the establishment power and money she'll bring if she enters the race, I'm not convinced she stands a prayer of winning the primary.
by PsiFighter37 on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 02:32:51 PM EST
for SecDef in a Democratic administration? I remember there was some talk that he would have been ineligible in 2004/2005 because he hadn't been retired long enough. If he's not running himself, it could be because he's eyeing that potential job...


-- Walking In Darkness --
by Cali Scribe on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 03:44:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Obama falls totally flat with me for some reason.  I just can't get interested in him, and have never understood where all the hype came from.

I'm tired of family presidential dynasties, so no Hillary.

Out of the 3, Edwards is the most appealing to me, and as chocolate ink pointed out, his wife is a major bonus to his candidacy- not only is she smart, she comes across as someone you'd like to have as your neighbor.

I still wish Feingold were running.

"Little people are very stuff-intensive."

by CabinGirl on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 02:42:03 PM EST
I still wish Feingold were running.

I know.  But they would have roasted him over the coals for his dead-in-the-lake-water marriages.  It says, hound.

I still say Edwards-Obama.  Both would appeal to:

City vote
Country vote
Anti-Iraq war vote
Working people vote
Blacks
Boomer vote
Gen X, Y, Z vote
Women

I could go on, but it just looks magical.  But I want to watch and see beyond the backdrop of New Orleans.

Edwards-Clark looks good, too.

No way in the world would I support Hillary.  NO.


An untypical Negro

http://thisblksistaspage.wordpress.com

by blksista (gab1954@gmail.com) on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 02:52:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I wouldn't mind one bit seeing an Edwards/Fiengold team. They are probably the two most honest politicians in this day and age.

Frodo failed...Bush has got the ring.
by alohaleezy on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 02:56:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I could go with that.

"Little people are very stuff-intensive."
by CabinGirl on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 03:24:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]
and yet the Washington talking heads speak breathlessly about a Newt Gingrich candidacy?

When it comes to political "standards", I see double...


-- Walking In Darkness --

by Cali Scribe on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 03:48:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It's amusing how you write 'And then there is Hillary.' The sigh is almost audible or am I hearing myself. She's always there, tying herself up in knots about flag-burning and video games and keeping her husband in the conspicuous foreground-background. Even after she loses the nominatin to John Edwards she will be triangulating herself in to a cat's cradle which she can't get out of. Sorry, but I have the impression she's being transported on a cloud of sugar plums right out of this solar system. She is not of this world, at least not of my world.
by Quentin on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 02:45:52 PM EST
...But, in pursuing this entirely rational strategy, the political ground has shifted under her feet. ...

I supppose that Hillary's is a rational strategy if getting into office is the paramount concern, the best interests of the people be damned.

I don't care much for Obama or Hillary, make mine Edwards.

Oh, there you are, Perry. -Phineas -SLB-

by boran2 (blogistan@yahoo.com) on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 03:17:08 PM EST
I like Edwards.  If Gore doesn't end up getting into the race, Edwards is my current favorite.

I'd love it if he teamed up with Feingold.  But I think Russ is probably going to stay in the Senate.

If Obama ended up as the VP nominee, that ticket would be a 100 billion million gigawatt hope generator, which would be a great contrast to the entrenched Republican fear machine.

But hey, it's still waaay early.

Tengo un sueño.
by ejmw (ewitham (at) umich (dot) edu) on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 03:51:43 PM EST
I agree, Edwards would make a fine President. And Obama would work well as a VP.

Hillary and her DLC-consultry had their chance to support our issues, and passed. The old guard Dems failed in 2000, 2002, and 2004. Time to put'm out to pasture.

As I witnessed at the VP campaign stop in Fargo the summer of '04, Edwards is one hell of a campaigner. He's a great speaker and he loves to press the flesh with the people. He reached so far over the fence at one point I thought he'd fall into the crowd. He's not short of enthusiasm or energy, that's for sure.  

Nonviolent Action information available here

by NorthDakotaDemocrat (NorthDakotaDemocrat at g mail dot com) on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 05:36:49 PM EST
Good analysis.  I've been an Edwards man since 2004, probably because I identify with him.  Hilary would make an extremely good candidate.  Obama is unseasoned.  I think that's what the people who are pushing like about him.  They think they can push him in their direction.  I don't think that's going to happen, but he needs seasoning.

The one person you didn't mention is Al Gore.  He's probably the strongest candidate we have, because he combinese the strengths of Edwards and Hilary.

Isn't it great we have such a strong team?  Too bad we don't have a Parliamentary system, where they could share executive authority.

Knut

by Knut Wicksell (b_didnn@hotmail.ca) on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 10:27:26 PM EST
Of the three, Edwards has my full support and my vote.  I agree with others that obama is not seasoned enough to be a good president.  Hillary lost her back bone when she became a senator.  She had bigger balls as the first lady and actually was willing to stand for something.


John Edwards 08


Doing My Part For The Left

by refinish69 (refinish69 at gmail dot com) on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 10:48:37 PM EST
Of the current crop of potential candidates, you're right, I think I like Edwards the best.

Of course barring someone else jumping into the race * koffkoffalgorekoffkoff *

I for one welcome our new Twitter overlords. @Omir55

by Omir the Storyteller (omir.the.storyteller -CAT- gmail -DOG- com) on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 10:54:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I prefer Edwards over Gore.  I just don't think Al wants to run or has what it takes to win.

Doing My Part For The Left
by refinish69 (refinish69 at gmail dot com) on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 10:59:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I think he'd do it for the good of the country, but he doesn't seem to be actively pursuing the job. That's good, in my opinion.

Frankly I wanted to see Feingold run, and when he dropped out I didn't have a clear favorite to support. If it's a three way race, no question. Obama seems to be a pleasant enough person, but I think at this point in time Edwards would do a better job. (No question about Hilary. I would be happy to see a woman as President, but that doesn't mean just any woman, and it doesn't mean Hilary.)

I for one welcome our new Twitter overlords. @Omir55

by Omir the Storyteller (omir.the.storyteller -CAT- gmail -DOG- com) on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 11:11:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Hillary's little coup attempt with Carvelle was her death knell on the left.
We hated her anyway but, now there is no chance.
Edwards strikes me as fake.  Someone looking for something to get him to president.  Maybe because several people from his state say the same things.  He was never in the senate, he was running for prez the day he was elected senator and never did much for them. I don't trust him
Obama is my senator. Yes, his background makes him naturally prone to try to understand all people.  but, check on his work and you will see someone who is very busy (Edwards doesn't have a job which makes him have time to woo the netroots.  Obama does and is quite busy in the senate doing his job).  He also is pretty liberal on things.  More liberal than Edwards sparse record indicates.  He was more center in his voting.  Obama is left of there.  
I do wish you guys would not just run after anyone who sucks up but, do some digging and googling first.
by vwcat on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 11:17:56 PM EST
Edwards is Vice-Presidential at best

Hillary is like electing Bill for another eight years which certainly looks appealing after the last six

Obama is like having the winning lottery ticket

Gore seems to be the most likely Democrat that could win

by donmyers on Fri Dec 29th, 2006 at 05:01:32 AM EST
Unless and until Gore decides to get in the race, I'm with Edwards. I decided years ago that my best money and efforts are spent during the primaries when there is some hope of having an impact. So I like to get in early with a candidate that I feel strongly about.

But I must say, I'm keeping my eyes and ears open to the other two - just in case they wind up winning the nomination. I don't want to write off anyone until I feel its necessary because I know we're going to need to get behind them to take on McCain/Guiliani (or whoever the repugs annoint).

The one that would be hardest for me to support is Clinton, and for many reasons. But I agree that her connection to Carville and what he tried to do to Dean is the worst of it all.

Doesn't information itself have a liberal bias? Steven Colbert

by NLinStPaul on Fri Dec 29th, 2006 at 09:59:07 AM EST
I think Edwards is great but I just don't know what has changed since 2004 except that he is two years older.  The more I think about the Dems in 2008, the more I think the nomination is Al Gore's to lose: he was robbed in 2000, has been consistently right on Iraq (unlike Hillary), and will not have a problem with either cash or name recognition... I wrote a story on this at www.minor-ripper.blogspot.com
by MinorRipper (minorripper@gmail.com) on Fri Dec 29th, 2006 at 10:08:22 AM EST


Display:
Go to: [ Booman Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]
Menu
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password





Find textbooks at Alibris!

NOTE: Overstock bests Amazon's prices and is "blue."

THE BOOKS WITH "BUZZ":
______________

Senator Edward M. Kennedy tells his extraordinary personal story:

True Compass: A Memoir
by Edward M. Kennedy.

Read Barack Obama's vision for America:

The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream
by Barack Obama

Boran2 and maryb2004 recommend:

The Big Over Easy: A Nursery Crime
by Jasper Fforde

Must-have information for all presidents-and citizens-of the twenty-first century?

Physics for Future Presidents: The Science behind the Headlines
Richard A. Muller

rae recommends:

Dark Ages America: The Final Phase of Empire
by Morris Berman.

On BooMan’s shelf:

Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln
by Doris Kearns Goodwin

This looks interesting:

Adventure Divas
by Holly Morris

Here’s a good one from
Elizabeth Gilbert:

Eat Pray Love
by Elizabeth Gilbert

"Crash" * Best Motion Picture, Academy Awards * Only $11.79 at Overstock * 2006 SAG Winner, Best Ensemble

Check out
Powell's new section:
NEW FAVORITES

Selected new arrivals at 30% off

Recommended by Indianadem and ejmw:
The Conscience of a Liberal
by Paul Wellstone

From northcountry’s bookshelf:

The New Golden Age:
The Coming Revolution Against
Political Corruption and Economic Chaos
by Ravi Batra

A novel about contractors in Iraq from the woman that runs The Spy That Billed Me:

Outsourced: A Novel
from RJ Hillhouse.


Great Deals
----- * ^ * -----

Find mystery novels by Nancy Pickard ("Kansas")



Challenging Empire: How People, Governments, and the UN Defy US Power by Phyllis Bennis (interviewed on DN!)


Featured by Keith Olbermann, New (Powell's Sale): Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower by William Blum (whose other books merit serious consideration)


"Explosive" State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration
by James Risen


The book the CIA doesn't want you to read: Jawbreaker: The Attack on Bin Laden and Al Qaeda: A Personal Account by the CIA's Key Field Commander
Larry Johnson's review


BT's all-time best seller:

PERMACULTURE:
A Designers' Manual

$79.95 * Sale: $59.95


Unequal Sisters: A Multicultural Reader in U.S. Women's History (Third Edition)


The Undercover Economist: Exposing Why the Rich Are Rich, the Poor Are Poor And Why You Can Never Buy a Decent Used Car!


The Worst Hard Time: The Untold Story of Those Who Survived the Great American Dust Bowl
by Timothy Egan


Green Press Initiative
----- * ^ * -----


Journalistas: 100 Years of the Best Writing and Reporting by Women Journalists by Eleanor Mills * NYT review


Bury Me Standing: the Gypsies & Their Journey


1491: New Revelations of the Americas before Columbus



Brokeback Mountain
by Annie Proulx
----- * ^ * -----
Check out Powell's
"At The Movies"


Imperial Ambitions: Conversations on the Post-9/11 World by Noam Chomsky (Power & Terror: Post 9-11 Talks)


The Price of Privilege:

How Parental Pressure and
Material Advantage Are Creating a Generation of
Disconnected and Unhappy Kids

by Madeline Levine


Save 35-70% on
name brand clothing,
footwear, and outdoor gear
at SierraTradingPost.com

:





We listened to PEN American Center's "State of Emergency" and found 1940s books by Curzio Malaparte only at Alibris. (Selection (MP3) excerpted from "The Skin.")

Alibris - Books You Thought You'd Never Find
Banned Books * Are you a fan of Film Noir, Art House, Documentaries or Hong Kong Action? * Searching for a long-lost children's book or a first printing of Miles Davis' Kind of Blue on vinyl? Find it at Alibris!

:
:
www.Patagonia.com


Listed on BlogShares

© 2009 Booman Tribune