Edwards and His Audience

NASHUA—John Edwards and entourage of Bonny Raitt and Jackson Browne arrived in New Hampshire yesterday and immediately set out on a barnstorming tour of the state. At Webster College here last night a packed auditorium of 350-plus waited an hour for crews to hook up the audio equipment, and then applauded politely when Edwards took the stage after a couple of songs.

Edwards launched into his boyish Huey Long routine—critical of insurance and drug companies, opposing nuclear power, down on coal liquefaction, although pointedly not opposed to developing technology to make coal clean. The audience broke into a cheer when Edwards said torture was un-American and he was against it. He embraced the campaign to stop global warming and spoke knowledgeably of his plans for universal health care, including what amounts to a partial single-payer scheme. He wants combat troops out of Iraq, no permanent bases, but also desires a stable government.

All of this was a little too good to be true, especially if one had witnessed the same man four years ago, timidly promising reform legislation to nudge corporate America into putting more information on product labels. That was not exactly what you'd call populism. It was all Democratic Leadership Counsel stuff—middle class tax relief, soccer moms, and technology innovation. Government regulation is a dirty word to the neoliberals at the DLC associated with the long dead vestiges of the New Deal—something the small clique of decrepit liberals drag out of the closet every four years. Get over it. The DLC doesn't discuss the poor, which it eagerly and successfully had sought to kick off welfare—part of the Clinton legacy. John Edwards' turning against the DLC line (he was never an official member, but was widely viewed as a de facto member) represents a radical change—so abrupt it makes some voters a bit nervous, and others outright suspicious. Last night people clearly liked Edwards but wondered if he was not too good to be true. The overall result is an odd disconnect between the man and his audience.

Comments

So James, you could start by learning to spell Bonnie Raitt and the Democratic Leadership Council.

Second, Edwards "widely viewed as a de facto member" of the DLC? Substantiate, please, unless you just want to rumor-monger.

Third, even if he was a "not really a member but a sort of kind of de facto member", I say better late than never for Edwards to repudicate the DLC BS. Clinton and Obama certainly haven't.

For the record, my favorite primary candidates, in order, are (1) Kucinich, (2) Dodd, (3) Edwards, (4) Richardson, although the order of the list varies somewhat.

Posted by: Jim Martin on 12/19/07 at 1:22 PM Respond

repudiate

Murphy's law in action.

Posted by: capt on 12/19/07 at 1:42 PM Respond

Touché.

OTOH I'm a commenter in a thread. I hope you expect a little better from paid MoJo staff whose job it is report and do blog posts.

Posted by: Jim Martin on 12/19/07 at 8:02 PM Respond

BTW, capt, you do know what Murphy's Law actually says, don't you? I take your point, but it's hardly an appropriate law to cite. Finagle's Corollary might be a bit closer.

Posted by: Jim Martin on 12/19/07 at 8:03 PM Respond

Jim,

"things will go wrong in any given situation, if you give them a chance."

Apropos in that it never fails (at least for me) that when I correct anothers spelling a spelling error will find its way into my correction.

No reason to be defensive, it happens to all of us.

An SP is an unintentional error so totally forgivable.

Posted by: capt on 12/20/07 at 6:19 AM Respond

Finagle's Law of Dynamic Negatives (also known as Finagle's corollary to Murphy's Law) is usually rendered:

Anything that can go wrong, will—at the worst possible moment

****

Hardly applies, there is no "worst possible moment" for a persons spelling - especially is commenting on a blog.

NBD but "Murphy's Law" applies from my POV.

Posted by: capt on 12/20/07 at 6:22 AM Respond

To quote former SDS leader Carl Oglesby, we need a progressive movement that would rather ride a gift horse than look it in the mouth.

In this primary, John Edwards has proven to be that gift-horse, but James Ridgeway is conducting a detailed dental exam and dismissing Edwards' message as unconvincing given his political history.

First, Edwards' performance as Kerry's running-mate was distinctly different from the populist "two Americas" theme he used so effectively in the primaries.

But just as the Robert Rubin-Roger Altman Wall Street Brain Trust made Kerry drop his most effective line about "Benedict Arnold CEOs,"
Edwards' speeches were stripped of their most compelling populist messages.

Edwards has adopted the most progressive appeal by a Democratic candidates since Jesse Jackson in 1988 (with the exception of the marginalized Dennis Kucinich).

Edwards has blazed away at the outsourcing of jobs, called not only for ending the Iraq War but for terminating US bases, and his healthcare plan--while short of a full single-payer system--was the first and best of the three major Democratic candidates.

Moreover, Edwards is calling upon the American people to get ready for a war with the clearly-defined "special interests" like the insurers and drug companies.

From a progressive standpoint, Edwards is hugely raising the ante in the Democratic primary.

Yet Ridgeway asserts that Edwards' audience felt a "disconnect" and was "suspicious" of his message. However, he cited no actual citizens. Not exactly a persuasive case.
Roger Bybee, Milwaukee

Posted by: Roger Bybee on 01/08/08 at 3:33 PM Respond