Edwards Challenges Clinton To Take Public Financing

In her several talk show appearances on Sunday, Hillary Clinton was asked over and over about fugitive bundler Norman Hsu and each time she diffused the issue by saying that they've put measures in place to make sure something like that doesn't happen again AND she stressed her belief that the solution is public financing of elections. Well, today John Edwards announced he would seek public financing for his primary and, if he wins, general election campaigns, and challenged Clinton to do the same.

"Senator Clinton said she believes public financing is the answer to ending the influence of lobbyists and special interests in Washington," said Congressman Bonior. "If she really believes that, she should join Senator Edwards and seek public financing, or she should explain to the American people why she does not mean what she says."

Edwards said:

Sen. Clinton said she is for public financing so she can step forward and show she actually means it."

The Edwards campaign is couching this move as "focusing on the issues that matter to the American people;" it's a matter of principle that further serves to distinguish Edwards from Clinton.

"This is not about a money calculation," Mr. Edwards told CNN's Candy Crowley. "This is about taking a stand, a principled stand, and I believe in public financing."

Message: I'm a person of principle, Clinton says one thing and does another. Of course, it doesn't hurt that taking the public financing makes him competitive with Clinton and Obama throughout the primary. From Ambinder:

"Before we did this," one adviser said, "there were only two campaigns [Obama's and Clinton's] who thought they'd be around before the primaries with about $20M or $30M on hand. Now, we're going to be right there with them. We're going to have between $18M and $21M on hand now. That'll give us a huge boost."

"The bigger implication here is that there are now three campaigns with major wherewithall going into the primaries," the aide said.

But could it backfire? Kos notes that the spending cap of around $50 million would have to tide him over through the convention, which isn't until August 25. But after checking in with the Edwards campaign, Kos reports back:

1.) the cap doesn't apply to field, and only 50 percent of advertising counts against the spending cap ($54 million). So they think they'll have plenty of money to get through a primary season that will be over February 5, and have enough to last through the summer;

2.) ...they're taking the Obama approach for the general election. That is, they'll opt into public financing only if the Republican nominee does as well; and

3.) even if they're short on money, the 527s can pick up the slack over the summer.

Kos is still a bit skeptical but this certainly puts to rest any fears that Edwards wouldn't be able to compete with Obama and Clinton in the early states. And it just may explain why he's been keeping his powder dry in Iowa.



Display:


Terrible spin (none / 0)

I can't believe the frontpager is buying his spin at the expense of dragging the entire democratic party down the toilet.

There's no question that both Obama and Clinton supporters, and many other second-tier candidates' supporters are united on this front.

Edwards is a complete joke and fraud. In Feb, 2007, he said this:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/ 2007-02-05-edwards-money_x.htm

WASHINGTON -- Democrat John Edwards on Monday joined New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in saying he will not use public money for the presidential primary campaign or, if he wins his party's nomination, for the general election.
The move by the former North Carolina senator is the latest sign of trouble for the public campaign funding system, created after the Watergate scandal to set limits and disclosure rules on contributions to presidential campaigns.

Edwards said in an interview that he expects major candidates in both parties to raise unlimited private dollars rather than participate in the public system. He said he needs to do the same "to have the funds to be competitive."

Edwards plans to start soliciting contributions for the general election soon, spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri said. Clinton has been raising money for both the primary and general elections since she got into the race last month

This sort of blatant cheating, flip-flopping disqualifies him from running for any office.


Hillary: We will finally have a president who doesn't mind pulling over and asking for directions. Am I right, ladies?
by areyouready on Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 09:37:26 PM EST

Re: Terrible spin (none / 0)

Well, I wouldn't call it cheating or say it qualifies him for office, but I would call it "terrible spin" and kind of laugh at those who actually buy the notion that he's doing this for moral reasons, and not for reasons stemming from troubles fundraising or miscalculations in how much funds he'd need.

He's trying to spin what is an obvious admission of campaign trouble as a moral stand, which is pretty much what he has to do to keep from completely hemoragging supporters.  I can't say I blame him, but I certainly don't believe him, when it's so obviously false.


by mopper8 on Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 09:49:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Terrible spin (none / 0)

Actually I should thank you for the link. I got the link from one of your posts.


Hillary: We will finally have a president who doesn't mind pulling over and asking for directions. Am I right, ladies?
by areyouready on Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 09:57:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Terrible spin (none / 0)

what an interesting standard you hold candidates to. never changing their minds on anything. ever.


by Todd Beeton on Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 10:01:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I can't take credit (none / 0)

And  wish I could remember the bloggers name.

He wrote changing your mind and then changing it back again is flip flopping.  Just changing your mind once is called thinking.


by dpANDREWS on Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 10:13:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Amen brutha! (none / 0)

The one year where we have shown we have people who can drastically outraise the Republicans and put the money advantage in our column for a change and we end up with a bunch of freaks and geeks who want to squander that advantage and cede it right back to the Republicans.

Oh but won't we all feel good when we eat our granola and drink our soy milk and pee and moan about how horrible President Giuliani is!!!

Sheesh.  I am getting ill reading some of this nonsense from people who are hellbent on trying to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.  


by dpANDREWS on Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 10:12:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Edwards won't put his skin in the game (none / 0)

He talks and talks and says how important this is to him and yet unlike Kerry or even Romney, Edwards won't spend dime one of his own money on this race.  Shows how important it is to him and what he thinks his chances are.

Shame.  I was wrong.

I thought Edwards was honing his campaign and looking better.   I said he was the best debater last night and had stood by my prediction he'd pass Obama for number 2.

Now?  Doubtful.


by dpANDREWS on Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 10:19:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards Challenges Clinton To Take Public Fina (1.50 / 4)

Does he want our money for another $400 haircut? or to "learn" the ways of hedge funds to close more homes in Iowa, more than the already 100?

Edwards is an excuse for being pathetic. I used to have respect for him, but now, this is just getting retarded.

Why no challenge to Obama? Maybe because you are a whip who can't challenge ALL the democrats.


by American1989 on Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 09:44:03 PM EST

Re: (none / 0)

Todd, all you have to do is look at the timing of this sudden "change of heart" to see what is really going on.   I would bet good money that Edwards' Q3 fundraising numbers are quite disappointing, even for the low-budget campaign he has been running.  


by georgep on Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 09:47:54 PM EST

Re: (none / 0)

I didn't say I bought into the spin, just communicating how he's "couching" it. I think it's an interesting twist and accomplishes a lot of things in one fell swoop, most importantly, providing another distinction from Hillary. look, I see these maneuvers as interesting tactics no matter whom they benefit, you guys see them as pro or anti-your candidate. no one actually thinks Clinton is actually going to take public matching funds, but I like that Edwards went there.


by Todd Beeton on Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 09:56:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: (2.00 / 1)

I see your point.  I was just surprised you did not make mention in your diary that while Edwards is trying to make lemonade out of lemons (his right and smart politics) the looming fundraising deadline and the numbers behind them are more than likely behind the whole thing, not a true "moral" thing.  

I think it is important to see this issue from both sides.  Sure, it is good politics to use this issue as a "distinctor."  But the pitfall here is that an awful lot of people will be looking at "matching funds" as the campaign being in money trouble, just like we all commented when McCain was talking about doing just that (I believe you or Jonathan had a frontpager on McCain suddenly talking about going for these matching funds and it was seen as a desperate campaign move and a sign that McCain is "probably finished.")


by georgep on Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 10:05:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: (none / 0)

Yeah .. and Rudy is doing so well he had to fire his finance chief the other day .. lol  .. and you are sure getting worked up over a guy you think has no chance anyway .. so what's the big deal? .. why do you even care? ... Isn't Hillary inevitable?


John McCain: Bush right to veto kids health insurance expansion
by Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle on Fri Sep 28, 2007 at 12:48:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: (none / 0)

So, when Rudy fires his finance chief, we say "He is in big trouble," even though he insists that it was planned all along.  But, whatever move Edwards makes is always principled, because he wants to change how DC works, etc.?   Well, whatever works for you, I guess.

BTW, I am having a good time here.  Seems to be you who is getting all worked up.   Why care?  Edwards makes it appear like a "principled stand" and calls for Clinton to "join" him.  I appreciate his money problems, but to turn it into something this is not is disingenious.    


by georgep on Fri Sep 28, 2007 at 01:59:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards Challenges Clinton To Take Public Fina (2.00 / 1)

Terrible decision.


by Jerome Armstrong on Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 09:52:28 PM EST

Re: Edwards Challenges Clinton To Take Public Fina (none / 0)

That was my initial reaction, too.

I can see how the "spin" makes sense, though.  This will give him the resources to compete through Feb. 5, assuming he wins Iowa.


The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK
by Vox Populi on Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 10:09:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

WAKE UP PEOPLE! (none / 0)

Sorry to shout but we don't have to implode along with Edwards.  We don't even have to implode along with Bush.

A Democrat can run a smart and tough campaign and win this time.  


by dpANDREWS on Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 10:08:46 PM EST

Re: Edwards Challenges Clinton (none / 0)

A couple of things wrong with your argument: 1) Edwards is behind Clinton and Obama in the polls, 2) he can't raise enough money to stay competitive without federal funds. See polls below where Edwards is and has been ahead of all others in the most important match-ups with each Republican. See Edwards fundraising so far and his spending, about $25 million, see opensecrets.org

Also, we don't know how much money he has raised for Q3.

Democratic Candidate vs. Republican Candidate

Survey USA - September 27, 2007
Minnesota  
Averages
Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 15.66%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 10.66%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 17.00%

Survey USA - September 26, 2007
Wisconsin
Averages
Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 5.00%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 7.66%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 8.66%

Ohio  (20 electoral votes)
Averages
Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 3.33%
Obama trails the Republicans by an average of 7.00%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 9.33%

Iowa (7 electoral votes)
Averages
Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 7.00%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 9.33%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 15.66%

Missouri (11 electoral votes)
Averages
Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 3.66%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 5.33%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 13.00%

New Mexico (5 electoral votes)
Average
Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 11.33%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 10.00%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 13.00%

Kentucky (8 electoral votes)
Average
Clinton trails the Republicans by an average of 5.00%
Obama trails the Republicans by an average of 12.33%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 1.33%

Virginia (13 electoral votes)
Averages
Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 9.33%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 3.66%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 11.33%

Alabama (9 electoral votes)
Average
Clinton trails the Republicans by an average of 8.33%
Obama trails the Republicans by an average of 23.33%
Edwards trails the Republicans by an average of 5.33%

Kansas (6 electoral votes)
Average
Clinton trails the Republicans by an average of 8.00%
Obama trails the Republicans by an average of 5.00%
Edwards trails the Republicans by an average of 1.00%


by mrobinsong on Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 10:18:28 PM EST

Re: Edwards Challenges Clinton To Take Public Fina (none / 0)

I think that Edwards actually challenging Clinton to put up or shut up about public financing is a great tactic. It makes it clear that Clinton isn't interested in following through on the things she claims she wants to do or thinks are the right thing. She is nothing more than a panderer and Edwards is calling her out. Good for him.


by Freaky Thirsty on Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 10:21:57 PM EST

Re: Edwards Challenges Clinton To Take Public Fina (none / 0)

Challenging Clinton and Obama when he is clearly trailing both of them badly in the money chase, in the middle of the campaign? Who here believes him?

The spin is getting ridiculous.


by richochet on Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 10:39:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards Challenges Clinton To Take Public Fina (none / 0)

Just because someone isn't as popular as someone else does not diminish the truth of their position. Your spin is ridiculous. Paris Hilton politics will not win the Democratic nomination despite your best efforts.


by Freaky Thirsty on Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 10:44:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards Challenges Clinton To Take Public Fina (none / 0)

ok...


by richochet on Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 10:51:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards Challenges Clinton (none / 0)

Oh, yeah, sure, Hillary will give up all her potential money so she can legitimize John Edward's blatant lies about doing it on "principle."  Hey- why not? Would you like her to dress up as Hitler as well on Halloween?  Sure- no problem!  Just provide the moustache.


by reasonwarrior on Fri Sep 28, 2007 at 12:11:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Hail Mary (none / 0)

Well, it is certainly a Hail Mary, maybe he could pull a Kerry and mortgage his new house. I knew the Edwards campaign was in financial trouble when they pulled out of NV, I had no idea that it was so bad that they would throw in the towel. Maybe this buys him some time to make his electability argument in IA, but immediately after he has probably already exceeded state caps and will have a hard time competing for delegates.

Ultimately I doubt it will make much difference, electability is not as salient this cycle and campaign finance reform never is, and besides neither is really Clinton's weakness. I can't imagine that Clinton and Obama won't use this to draw attention to Edwards's inability to compete.

The pre-convention point is probably obscure to most voters. Gore got creamed by the RNC in 2000 when, between the nomination and the convention, he ran out of money under public financing and the DNC could not afford to fund his campaign or run ads for him. McAuliffe turned that around in 2004 (the DNC had enough for ads and about $17MM in coordinated expenditure for Kerry once his nomination was assured) but the current DNC is pretty close to broke, I would hate to see the nominee collapsing under Romney or Giuliani ads.


by souvarine on Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 11:13:14 PM EST

Re: Hail Mary (none / 0)

Yeah .. Rudy is a barn burner on fund raising ..  he's so damn broke ... he just fired his finance chief ... all you Edwards haters need to take a deep breath and relax .. you sure are getting all worked up over nothing .. considering you all don't think Edwards has a chance in hell anyway


John McCain: Bush right to veto kids health insurance expansion
by Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle on Fri Sep 28, 2007 at 12:46:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards (none / 0)

Yet more proof that John Edwards will do and say anything to stay in the race- even if he has to bring the entire Democratic party down with him.


by reasonwarrior on Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 11:43:48 PM EST

Re: Edwards (none / 0)

Like you are an Edwards supporter?  Anyone ever call you chicken little?


John McCain: Bush right to veto kids health insurance expansion
by Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle on Fri Sep 28, 2007 at 12:44:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards (none / 0)

What the heck are you ranting about?  Take your own advice and relax.  Let others have their opinions.  


by georgep on Fri Sep 28, 2007 at 01:51:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.