Mark Winston Griffith
In the face of an Obama victory in Iowa, the audacity of John Edwards
All Obama, all the time. Now that the audaciously hopeful candidate has rocked Iowa, that's what you're going to see and hear over the next few weeks. And rightfully so.
But there is another story buried deeper in the Iowa results that is just as worthy of attention. It's John Edwards's second place, 30% showing and his populist "let's put corporate power in check " message that is building momentum.
Forget his haircut. If you listen enough to the men and average white bands on the Sunday morning talk shows, you would think there is nothing more to Edwards than his pompadour. Furthermore, the mainstream press has dismissed him as apoplectic. David Brooks wrote in today's New York Times that Obama has "made John Edwards, with his angry cries that 'corporate greed is killing your children’s future,' seem old-fashioned. Edwards's political career is probably over. "
Well, with Brooks and his colleagues reducing the Democratic presidential race to a dual axis, Obama-Clinton, affair there may in fact be no political oxygen left for Edwards as the primary season advances. Dodd and Biden have already dropped out.
But with foreclosures, fueled by Wall Street greed and recklessness, wiping out homeownership America with Katrina-like force, and with regulators and politicians offering up consumers to corporations like lambs to slaughter, Edwards's indignation is the appropriate political tone to strike. Even the Wall Street Journal recently acknowledged that the pissed-off populism that Edwards and Mike Huckabee represent is apparently resonating with voters
Hope is indeed audacious. But no more so than a presidential candidate giving voice to economic justice.
Posted at 4:40 AM, Jan 04, 2008 in Politics | Permalink | Comments (10)
Comments
Since when is a candidate who has about fourteen nonwhite supporters nationwide the voice of the excluded?
Demographically, the excluded - women, minorities, the poor - tend to be for Clinton. I read an analysis on myDD last year that explains that in general, those demographics tend to go for the safest Democrat, because they have the most to lose out of a Republican win; in 2004, they backed Kerry over Edwards and Dean. Yelling about economic justice doesn't equal promoting economic justice. After all, Lyndon Johnson promised an end to poverty, and instead delivered stagflation. At least Johnson had the courage to sacrifice Southern support on the altar of civil rights; I don't see any of today's Democrats do the same with immigrant rights or gay rights.
Posted by: Alon Levy | January 4, 2008 09:11 AM
Well, actually, I never used the term "voice of the excluded," you did. But to the extend that you're talking about people of color, Obama and Clinton didn't get those voters necessarily because of anything they said. Clinton, married to the man dubbed the country's "first black president", walked in the race with people of color already loyal to her. And Obama, by virtue of the fact that he is a more than reasonable black Democrat, received people of color voters on the strength of that alone. There is nothing about the Obama and Clinton messages that, compared with any other of the candidates, are particularly aimed at the disenfranchised. They're both trying too hard to be as broadly appealing as possible.
You're right. Talking about economic justice is not the same as doing something about economic justice. But if we are not going to judge candidates by what their platforms are, what's the point of the campaign trail?
Posted by: Mark Winston Griffith | January 4, 2008 10:38 AM
Actually, on balance, I'd be a whole lot more concerned for Hillary than for Edwards. I think he's got a great shot at second in N.H. behind Barack, or possibly a win, though I doubt it. If Hill-diggity comes in third in two primaries, she's caput, for all intents and purposes.
David Brooks is a putz that I don't think anyone, right or left, pays all that much attention to. And there's so much Hillary resentment in the media that this third place in Iowa is going to be what you hear about much, much more than Obama's win.
Posted by: DragonFlyEye | January 4, 2008 11:17 AM
As an Obama supporter, I am, of course, thrilled to bits with the Iowa outcome. An unprecedented turnout, delivered a serious plurality to an anti-Iraq-war candidate of color. Even better, the candidate with whom I agree most on the issues, Jonathan Edwards, did very well -- showing that his progressives positions have a central role to play in the 2008 elections. Do we have to reply still to Mr. Brooks?
Posted by: Daniel Millstone | January 4, 2008 12:25 PM
My concern is less for John Edwards personally than for the critique of corporate power that he has been willing to bring to the debate. It's not perfect by any stretch, but its strikes a tone that few other candidate are willing to take on.
Posted by: Mark Winston Griffith | January 4, 2008 03:07 PM
The campaign trail's for letting candidates choose which issues to emphasize and which coalition to form. For their actual positions, I ignore what they say and look at what they've done. Edwards cosponsored the Iraq War resolution, and didn't have a terribly progressive record on domestic issues. Edwards the populist is an invention of Presidential ambitions, just like Kucinich the pro-choicer.
Meanwhile, on the stump he's displaying ignorance of any issue that doesn't involve spending money on anti-poverty programs. His foreign policy is laughable, and in 2004 he went as far as telling Joe Klein the voters don't care about it; that's why his position on Iran changes based on whether he's talking to AIPAC or Ezra Klein. More than the other Democrats, he can't talk about immigration in any language but "There should be more labor rights," which is probably why Latinos are by the millions not supporting him. On gay rights, he's pandering to the Netroots by framing his opposition to SSM in "I've not evolved enough yet" terms.
Posted by: Alon Levy | January 4, 2008 05:49 PM
John Edwards. Presidential Candidate - Where is the Media coverage?
Let hear about Johh Edwards! Lets hear his message!
Media Coverage for John Edwards! Yes! Please!
Posted by: leslie | January 15, 2008 12:56 AM
John Edwards. Presidential Candidate - Where is the Media coverage?
Let hear about Johh Edwards! Lets hear his message!
Media Coverage for John Edwards! Yes! Please!
Posted by: leslie | January 15, 2008 12:57 AM
John Edwards. Presidential Candidate - Where is the Media coverage?
Let hear about Johh Edwards! Lets hear his message!
Media Coverage for John Edwards! Yes! Please!
Posted by: leslie | January 15, 2008 12:58 AM
John Edwards. Presidential Candidate - Where is the Media coverage?
Let hear about Johh Edwards! Lets hear his message!
Media Coverage for John Edwards! Yes! Please!
Posted by: leslie | January 15, 2008 12:59 AM