- ‹ previous
- 3987 of 8827
- next ›
Edwards in New Hampshire
As John Edwards ends his Iowa campaign in a virtual tie with Obama and Clinton he is also showing some gains in New Hampshire. In an American Research Group poll conducted between December 27-29, Edwards inched up from 15 to 21 percent in mid December. Meanwhile, Clinton fell from 38 to 31 percent, and Obama rose from 24 to 27 percent.
The question remains whether Edwards, who has long concentrated on Iowa, can break through the entrenched Obama and Clinton operations here on election day.
That may depend on the reception here to his intensifying anti-corporate populist style campaign. In New Hampshire the overriding general issues always have been focused around taxes and fiscal responsibility. Government, especially Washington beltway politics, is viewed here with suspicion and in recent years has lost credibility. As in other parts of the nation, there is an anti-immigrant tide. These concerns could work against Edwards's message, with its emphasis on income redistribution and government involvement in daily life which may mean new spending. And his health care plans call for more spending, not less. His promise to end disparity between poor and rich with implicit redistribution of income goes against New Hampshire's love of the free market. He has shied clear of immigration.
In addition, people remain unclear about whether to believe Edwards. Last week he dropped into Nashua, the populous area in the southern part of the state, for a door to door campaign, knocking on doors, dispensing coffee and doughnuts. He got a warm reception. Reporters asked him about lobbyists, and Edwards promised they would never get into his White House. "When I am President of the United States, no corporate lobbyist will work in my White House," he said in a recent speech. He says he won't take money from them. But recently a private donation of $495,000 was made to the Alliance for a New America, a 527 a political advocacy group that raises money and campaigns independently of the candidate that supports Edwards. Edwards says he has "absolutely no control" over this contribution.
As for the influence of lobbyists, Edwards's supporters include Scott Tyre, who serves on candidate's national finance committee. Tyre is the president of the Association of Wisconsin Lobbyists and owner of Capital Navigators, a lobby firm. He has personally donated $6,600 to the campaign. Whether these sorts of contradictions will harm his campaign remains to be seen.





























I'm an Edwards fan, but I do have to wonder: if he can't control his campaign, can he control the White House?
Gimmie a break whiners ... maybe you'd be happy if Edwards diverted all his campaign contributions to his opponents and ran his entire campaign on $1.98. Ya want to fix this problem for REAL, or do ya just want to whine about it? Elect someone like Edwards and then urge him and your Congressional types to REFORM campaign and election processes to be "PUBLICLY FUNDED." I only care whether those donating to Edwards also back Edward's CORE policy positions or not. It takes money to run a campaign, so either donate, reform the process, do both, or cram it. As for Tim J. saying he is an Edwards fan, I say B.S.!
{"...to REFORM campaign and election processes to be "PUBLICLY FUNDED."}
So, my tax dollars should go to support the election of the next George (Adolph) Bush to come along?
Or maybe some Joe Stalin look-alike?
"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical."
--Thomas Jefferson-- 1779
The real question is if Edwards can hold back Obama and secure the nomination for Clinton. Nader anyone?
A guy who donates $6600 freaking bucks to a campaign that is taking matching funds?? Come on, that's not even worth mentioning, except the powers-that-be are afraid of Edwards and his message that is catching on across not only Iowa but the country as a whole. $6600 is going to buy what kind of influence??? The press had better go hit up Obamas, Hillary's, and every F'ing Republican's contributors for the REAL Influence peddling. Sheesh...
I do not think Edwards will win N.H. I may be wrong, I just have a hard time seeing it. I think Hillary will win both N.H. and Iowa.
This article is not well-researched. According to the law governing the 527's, Edwards cannot get involved in the activities of the 527's, either pro or con. He is to have no contact with them whatsoever. Most Americans are ill-informed, and so will believe whatever they read; it is particularly distressing for Edwards' supporters. We need every single vote we can get. Research on your own before you pass judgement.
Well said! Thank you for your rational approach to this discussion. People are so easily influenced by what they read; we need to research the issues indepent of the news media - even the progressive elements in the media.