home

No Substance To Edwards Critique

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Fri Nov 02, 2007 at 05:19:23 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

The Edwards ad ripping Hillary has wowed some folks in the blogosphere. I thought it was weak, because it seemed to lack any real substance to it. Matt Yglesias agrees with me:

Substantively, though, I'm not in love with this particular critique of Clinton precisely because it's not a substantive critique.

And it seems Team Edwards agrees:

Edwards campaign sources want to emphasize that Edwards did make a policy argument during the debate . . . but that the MSM isn't interested in policy arguments.

Apparently, neither is a good deal of the Netroots.

< Schumer and Feinstein Say Yes To Waterboarding | Obama: Hillary Is Like Rudy >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    No Substance To Edwards Critique | 17 comments (17 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Okay, I know I'm being wordy (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by RedHead on Fri Nov 02, 2007 at 05:45:47 PM EST
    the perfect phrase just hit "Hillary is being Gored"  

    It's been eight loooong years, but hopefully the phrase will resonate.

    It will happen no matter who is the candidate (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by Molly Bloom on Fri Nov 02, 2007 at 05:54:11 PM EST


    Parent
    Criticism of Hillary is Always Unfair... (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by fiver5 on Fri Nov 02, 2007 at 06:17:46 PM EST
    How dare anyone compare what she says with what she said?

    Just remember this critique (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Molly Bloom on Fri Nov 02, 2007 at 06:51:59 PM EST
    can be applied across the board- The only question is, will it?

    Parent
    i was.......................underwhelmed. (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by cpinva on Sat Nov 03, 2007 at 09:22:46 AM EST
    really, kind of amateurish. of course, that's been the format of edwards whole campaign so far. in truth, clinton and edwards are probably the best of the dems. with rudy being the "best" of the repubs, it isn't much of a contest, among thinking people anyway.

    that said, where has edwards been the past 3 years? not in the senate, where he might have done some good. he bailed after the 2004 election, and has been a non-entity since. this is tantamount to obama talking about what great non-decisions he'd have made, back in 2002, when he wasn't in congress. who cares?

    If Rudy is the best the GOP has to offer (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by Molly Bloom on Sat Nov 03, 2007 at 10:40:37 AM EST
    Then the GOP is in serious trouble. The man is  a authoritarian nutcase (and I know in the GOP that's a feature, not a bug); a serial liar (another GOP feature) who is seriously not ready for prime time. The problem is there are two standards.

    The SCLM make some attempt to hold Democrats accountable and make almost no attempt to hold the GOP accountable. Its almost because we expect accountability, they hold Democrats accountable. The GOP goes ballistic when someone holds them accountable, so the SCLM doesn't.

    Right now the GOP debates are about giving prizes to whoever will torture the most. Where is Russert et al asking tough questions about water-boarding.  It shouldn't end with a simple declaration that it is not illegal. Or in Rudy's words " it depends on how it its done, why it is done" etc. It needs to be squared with our prosecution of our own soldiers in Vietnam for water-boarding, our prosecution of Yukio Asano and giving him 15 years for water-boarding. Yet I hear nothing.

    Then there is the GOP complete incompetence at government (again, a feature, not a bug- according to the GOP) which is amply documented. Where's Russert asking the questions about how they govern? Russert is supposed to be a fiscal hawk, where's his tough questions on the GOP's only solution to any problem- tax cuts today, tax cuts tomorrah, tax cut forevah!.

    Oh I forgot, IOKIYAR.

    Kos (none / 0) (#1)
    by RedHead on Fri Nov 02, 2007 at 05:29:19 PM EST
    "The Edwards ad ripping Hillary has wowed some folks in the blogosphere."

    There's a diary on the recommend list and a post by Kos himself on the front page.  Together, they've generated over 1800 comments.

    Now I'm waiting to see if Olbermann picks it up.

    Well (none / 0) (#2)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Nov 02, 2007 at 05:30:51 PM EST
    You named them, not me.

    Parent
    I didn't like it (none / 0) (#3)
    by RedHead on Fri Nov 02, 2007 at 05:37:42 PM EST
    It made me wince on a personal level.

    And even for an internet ad, the style and production was substandard.  The musical the musical selection, for example, should have been "Imperial March" from Star Wars. ;)  

    Parent

    Are people aware that the Edwards ad (none / 0) (#14)
    by pioneer111 on Fri Nov 02, 2007 at 11:55:10 PM EST
    was in rebuttal to the Clinton youtube called The Politics of Pile On
    Therefore the style of the rebuttal was framed by the original Clinton ad.  
    That ad suggested that they were unduly focused on her.  The Edwards ad was a brilliant recast of that ad and much better than her original and it very cryptically pointed out her inconsistencies.  

    I really liked it.  It got the message through at many levels, and it has gone viral.  Over 78,000 views in 12 hours.  That is phenomenal.  That is the proof of its effectiveness.  The Clinton ad is now being seen more.  49,000 views in three days.

    The criticism of the ad should include the first salvo by the Clinton campaign.

    Parent

    MSM drum beat (none / 0) (#4)
    by RedHead on Fri Nov 02, 2007 at 05:43:58 PM EST
    Obama was on the Today Show and Matt Lauer takes up the drum beat, and Obama goes along.  This is a short clip, I'm sure the full clip is on their site.

    Obama needs a hair cut.

    This worked so well for Gephardt. n/t (none / 0) (#7)
    by Geekesque on Fri Nov 02, 2007 at 06:02:34 PM EST


    do you have a link to it? (none / 0) (#10)
    by Jgarza on Fri Nov 02, 2007 at 08:14:00 PM EST
    Edwards tends to be weak on substance and heavy on theatrics, not my cup of tea.

    OK just found it my take (none / 0) (#11)
    by Jgarza on Fri Nov 02, 2007 at 08:30:33 PM EST
    It's a good add in that its effective.  My guess is it will do some damage.  Its a bit ironic in that it complains about parsing, then proceeds to parse her  words.
    i don't think its fair but the reality of politics is that her gaffe at the debate will be damaging because it plays right into the criticisms of her.

    As far as Edwards is concerned i think he does Obama a favor by attacking Hillary.  I predict he gets a national boast, but both him and Hillary see a decline in Iowa (this may be part wishful thinking).  I really don't see how you can score points from being the hardest attacker of a fellow democrat that hard.  you want to win her supporters over not make them hate you.

    and by add i mean ad (none / 0) (#12)
    by Jgarza on Fri Nov 02, 2007 at 08:32:25 PM EST
    sorry i have dyslexia, ok so maybe i'm just border line illiterate.

    Parent
    Hilarious soundtrack (none / 0) (#13)
    by tnthorpe on Fri Nov 02, 2007 at 10:06:01 PM EST
    Love the waltz at the end.

    Film at 11, HRC talks out of both sides of her mouth. Well, that's what Edwards wants us to think, but after 2 terms of a bozo prez who gets his orders from his gut--when he's not talking to god on the phone that is--is it really all that bad to have a chief exec want to recruit the best and brightest to tackle big problems? Recruiting Russert's snark for his own attack ad stinks and demeans Edwards. I still like Edwards best for now, but this ad is bunk.

    Yet another shoddy (none / 0) (#16)
    by jondee on Sat Nov 03, 2007 at 09:37:50 AM EST
    example of what happens when would-be statesmen outsource their native intelligence to Madison Avenue.

    Parent
    No Substance To Edwards Critique | 17 comments (17 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment