Look to the Outside

by Molly Ivors

Sorry for the double-decker post, but I just wanted to point your attention to this interesting piece by CBS News' Chip Reid, which might explain why my man Edwards is receiving such little press (though it does seem to be improving slightly).

Reid notes that, from the perspective of political journalists, Edwards is No Fun:

I’m a bit unhappy with John Edwards. I’ve been covering his campaign for 10 days and he hasn't made a lot of news. Let’s face it – a lot of what political reporters report on is mistakes. The campaign trail is one long minefield, covered with Iowa cow pies, and when they step in one – we leap.

I’ve done very little leaping – and I blame Edwards. While other candidates misspeak, over-speak, and double-speak, Edwards (at least in these 10 days) has made so few mistakes that I end up being transported -- newsless -- from town to town like a sack of Iowa corn .

He has a remarkable ability to stay on message. Not just in “the speech,” but even in Q and A. Nothing throws him off. He turns nearly every question into another opportunity to repeat his central theme. Global warming? We need to fight big oil. Health care? Fight the big drug and insurance companies. Iowa farmers’ problems? Blame those monster farm conglomerates. And the Iowa populists eat it up. We'll see how well it works in other states.
He’s even disciplined in his daily routine. While most reporters use the campaign trail as an excuse to over-eat and abandon their exercise routines, Edwards squeezes in a run EVERY DAY, rain, sleet, or shine.

Come on John – relax.  Step in an Iowa cow pie and let me do my job.

Maybe that's why they're so anxious to gin up confrontations between the candidates: they're more fun. I honestly believe that any of the Dem candidates *could* be president, and well, but as with everyone else, I have my fave. Still, this is pretty starkly confessional on Reid's part, and surprisingly honest.

Reid's other observations, that Edwards is a regular guy who really believes what he says and understands the crises that matter to most Americans, that he respects his wife and hands over the mic to her readily, that he's an idealist, don't surprise me.

But it was a commenter at Bleeding Heartland that really put it in a nutshell for me:

You know why Iowans "eat it up" Chip?  I was at three of these events and I know why I and they eat it up. It's because his "theme" is about rewarding work over wealth. All the other candidates' themes are about themselves i.e. how much experience they have.  How their judgment is perfect. How many times they voted the right way.

But Edwards central theme is about us , not about him. He has a crystal clear vision of the kind of America he would like to see in 30 years and how we can get there; all of us together.  It's because of the passion in his voice that you feel in your gut as he speaks.  It's like going to church and hearing a sermon that has you raring to go out and do something useful. He's the candidate with a clear and powerful agenda that can be achieved.  It's not about him.  It's about us. He's a champion, not a rock star.

Beautiful. The commenter, Montana Maven, loves Edwards maybe even more than I do. All hail the rural liberal shitkickers! My peeps!

(Image courtesy of The Tattler.)

Comments

[bill]

This makes sense. I just hope people get the chance to see for themselves.

[DrDick]

"All hail the rural liberal shitkickers! My peeps!"
YO! Seconded from western Montana.

[SteveB]

He turns nearly every question into another opportunity to repeat his central theme. Global warming? We need to fight big oil. Health care? Fight the big drug and insurance companies. Iowa farmers’ problems? Blame those monster farm conglomerates.

Funny how this can't be a syptom of a real problem, how corporations, vastly more powerful and wealthy than the've ever been, use their power to fuck things up across the spectrum - from how we treat the sick to how we grow our food.

No, it must all be some labored rhetorical device on the part of Edwards. No other possible explanation for it.

[ThresherK]

Will this be the same Inbred Surprise as in '92 or '00, where the press corps are so tuned out that the candidate goes straight over their heads to actual (gasp) voters?

PS Any truth to the rumor that the press hates Edwards for being the first to pull out of the Fauxhole debate?

[actor212]

Sorry.

I voted for Edwards in 2004.

After the shit he put Amanda and Melissa thru, he proved to me he doesn't have the character to be President.

[SteveB]

actor212 is right.

Edwards' shameful mistreatment of Amanda and Melissa is exactly why I'm voting for Cynthia McKinney next November.

[coozledad]

Once us North Carolina boys get the word, we're not that bad. But I have to admit John's a rarity in these parts.
Cross your fingers, kids.

[spencer]

After the shit he put Amanda and Melissa thru, he proved to me he doesn't have the character to be President.

Damn right. Another corporate toady in the White House is far more desirable than someone who fucked up on the question of whether or not to retain a very opinionated and somewhat controversial (in some quarters, anyway) blogger on his staff. (And I say that as someone who enjoys Amanda's writing more often than not.)

And I'm also sure that Hillary and / or Obama have never ever ever acted in such a way that reveals such a profound lack of character as BloggerGate did to Edwards.

Nope. It's character through and through for those two.

[Geraldo]

Hurray for petty vindictiveness. Let's us just invade Iran to show Edwards he can't just treat Melissa and Amanda badly in our opinion.

what

[Frederick]

As if Melissa hasn't put others through worse with her lockstep liberalism. Ever think she just got a dose of her own medicine?

[Democrats Against Hillary]

Whiskey -

Yeah...it's tough. I think Edwards is a good candidate, but folks aren't as focused on economic issues as they used to be. And if they are, there's barely a difference between the candidates (let's face it...). Hillary might be slightly less likely to oppose trade agreements...and their healthcare plans are nearly the same...

[Mal in Cal]

Yup, Edwards is my guy from now through the primaries and hopefully to the general. Thanks for pointing to Reid's piece and Bleeding Heartland.
Edwards is the TRUE populist of the bunch. It's about US not HIM. Ah so true! Bravo!

Merry Christmas to the band on Liberal Mountain from the hermit in El Sobrante!

[low-tech cyclist]

Even in about as confessional a moment as a MSM reporter is likely to experience, I see no hint that Reid even considers filling his news hole with Edwards' actual positions on issues and how they compare with those of other Presidential aspirants.

Yeah, I was less than happy with the way the Edwards campaign handled the situation with Amanda and Melissa. Next to that, Hillary's hiring union-busters is clearly a triviality. But I'll let actor212, SteveB, etc. explain that to the workers whose efforts to unionize were wrecked by Mark Penn.

[grendelkhan]

Frederick: As if Melissa hasn't put others through worse with her lockstep liberalism.

Say what? Can you provide a little background here?

[eRobin]

Dodd is my guy. I still can't bring myself to trust Edwards to be the real deal. Still, if Dodd doesn't make it, I'll go with Edwards. Even if he's shining us on now, it will be good to have him talking the talk in the general.

[Batocchio]

Right on, Molly and Montana Maven.

Perhaps I missed something, but I thought both Amada and Melissa stepped down because the ridiculous Donohue attacks were being covered relentlessly, and becoming a distraction. Whether that's code for firing or their call is a question. But I believe Melissa still supports Edwards, unless I've missed something.

[actor212]

LTC, et al,

If you think for one minute that Edwards isn't going to cave into special interests, particularly given his hedge fund interests, then you've got another think coming.

With Hillary, at least we know the devil we're dealing with. With Obama, you takes your chances with the roll of the dice.

Either of those is preferable to a man who can't even stand up the the fucking Catholic League.

[actor212]

Batto,

I suspect both still support Edwards, but my point was that Edwards dropped, then supported, then "fired" both (and yes, they resigned, the same way a CEO under fire "resigns"...no pressure there, huh?).

That right there, in a nutshell, is how an Edwards' administration will govern. Like his stance on Iraq, so went his stance on Amanda and Melissa, and it stinks.

[actor212]

Grendel,

Melissa has issues with some commenters at her site using the "c" word, no matter the context.