MyDD :: Edwards joins the fray?

Edwards joins the fray?

by areyouready, Fri Jul 27, 2007 at 01:06:27 PM EST

It looks like Edwards has decided to jump in, 'First Read' is reporting Edwards made the following comment this morning:

"If you're looking, if you're looking for what's wrong in Washington, why the system is broken, why the system doesn't work, one perfect example is what's been happening over the last four days. We've had two good people, Democratic candidates for president, who've spent their time attacking each other, instead of attacking the problems that this country's faced."

My brief analysis:
This is exactly why it's extremely silly for Obama to launch that 'Bush-Cheney lite' attack and continue this path. He simply has no control on the message and its aftermath anymore. Every player and every pundit will jump in. It will only drag him down the mud and will be devasting to his 'change' and 'hope' theme in the long run.

It really does not matter to Clinton's campaign even some pundits or ultra-liberals believe she is also wrong in this skirmish because she is not running based on a platform of empty 'hope' and 'change', she's running a platform of a 'real change' to 'competence'.

Tags: Hillary Edwards (all tags)

Permalink :: 19 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: Edwards joins the fray? (none / 0)

This does give John Edwards the opportunity to come across as the adult.

by DoIT on Fri Jul 27, 2007 at 01:11:04 PM EST

Re: Edwards joins the fray? (none / 0)

Actually not just Edwards. Dodd also rebuked both Clinton and Obama. My point is Obama will have no control on his message anymore. Everybody will try to drag him down in the mud since it's human nature to be cynical. LOL.

Without 'hope', what else does Obama have?

Hillary: We will finally have a president who doesn't mind pulling over and asking for directions. Am I right, ladies?

by areyouready on Fri Jul 27, 2007 at 01:14:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards joins the fray? (none / 0)

I think he has squandered that opportunity already. Coulter etc.

Funny how a debate is seen as childish. Should everyone just shut up or praise each other? This is politics, our candidates better get ready for a much worse treatment by the Repubs.

Your sig line is awful btw. You haven't understood anything about Obama, or perhaps you just wanna make shit up. Don't know why I'm debating you really.

The history of the left is a history of purists betraying the progressive movement so that they can feel good about their righteous selves.

by Populism2008 on Fri Jul 27, 2007 at 01:25:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards joins the fray? (none / 0)

But I thought you supported debate without preconditions. ?

My sig line is my business. If your candidate wants to blaspheme Hillary he deserves a little back. Besides, mine is truer.

by DoIT on Fri Jul 27, 2007 at 01:34:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards joins the fray? (none / 0)

The blasphemy charge generally is reserved for statements against the deity. Are you comparing Clinton to God?!!

by horizonr on Fri Jul 27, 2007 at 03:28:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards joins the fray? (none / 0)

Talk about worship!!!

by horizonr on Fri Jul 27, 2007 at 03:28:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

But the problem is whether Hillary (none / 0)

represents real change or not. That is what Obama is pointing out, rightly so IMO.

The history of the left is a history of purists betraying the progressive movement so that they can feel good about their righteous selves.

by Populism2008 on Fri Jul 27, 2007 at 01:16:18 PM EST

Re: But the problem is whether Hillary (none / 0)

What 'real change' does he have? I mean seriously. To launch this kind of rhetoric certainly does not bode well for his 'real change' theme.

Hillary: We will finally have a president who doesn't mind pulling over and asking for directions. Am I right, ladies?

by areyouready on Fri Jul 27, 2007 at 01:20:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: But the problem is whether Hillary (none / 0)

Well, in this case it's a change in diplomacy compared to Bush and Hillary.

On most issues any Democrat in the WH, including Hillary, would represent a great change compared to the criminals we have now.

The history of the left is a history of purists betraying the progressive movement so that they can feel good about their righteous selves.

by Populism2008 on Fri Jul 27, 2007 at 01:30:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: But the problem is whether Hillary (none / 0)

If his real change in foreign policy is to sit down with a bunch of dictators with no 'preconditions' for coffee and tea, I'll skip his 'real change'.

Hillary: We will finally have a president who doesn't mind pulling over and asking for directions. Am I right, ladies?

by areyouready on Fri Jul 27, 2007 at 01:35:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama's Change (none / 0)

Obama argues that electing Hillary would be a continuim of the present and a flashback to the 90s. Obama wants to roll things back to the time of his hero, Reagan. The Eighties Baby.

You know, ole Ronnie who gives a shit about the Constitution Reagan. Obama's Hero, besides Joe that is.

by DoIT on Fri Jul 27, 2007 at 01:38:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: But the problem is whether Hillary (none / 0)

Clinton is getting into the mud too and this is a gross error for a front runner to get involved with on an issue like that.

Forty-two percent (42%) of Americans say that the next President should meet with the heads of nations such as Iran, Syria, and North Korea without setting any preconditions. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 34% disagree while 24% are not sure.

That question came up during last Monday's Presidential Debate with Illinois Senator Barack Obama saying he would commit to such meetings and New York Senator Hillary Clinton offering a more cautious response. Democrats, by a 55% to 22% margin, agree with Obama.

by BDM on Fri Jul 27, 2007 at 03:14:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: But the problem is whether Hillary (none / 0)

Ha Ha Ha !

Hillary messed up. John Edwards wahhed his tail for the wrong "cause".

"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama

by BlueDiamond on Fri Jul 27, 2007 at 05:47:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards joins the fray? (none / 0)

This coming from the guy who attacked both Clinton and Obama in the 2nd debate.

by reasonwarrior on Fri Jul 27, 2007 at 01:33:48 PM EST

Re: Edwards joins the fray? (none / 0)

He did not attack them. He simply pointed out that he advocated while they did not. Much removed from "naive" or "Bush-Cheney lite".

by jsamuel on Fri Jul 27, 2007 at 02:25:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards joins the fray? (none / 0)

Granted, it was not the same as "Bush/Cheney Lite" but it was about the same as calling them irresponsible. That's the gist of what he was saying. Edwards would never sink so low as to call them Bush or Cheney. That's why he has now taken my 2nd place candidate spot from Obama. If Hillary doesn't get the nom, I want Edwards to have it.

by reasonwarrior on Fri Jul 27, 2007 at 10:05:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]