Why Edwards Is Done In Iowa: Change vs. Experience

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Sun Nov 25, 2007 at 09:52:35 AM EST
Tags: John Edwards, Iowa 08 (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

The much touted WaPo Iowa poll gives us a clue:

Which of these is more important to you in a candidate for president: (strength and experience) or (a new direction and new ideas)?
Strength New direction
33 55

These words mean next to nothing in real life but they have become the narrative for the coverage of Iowa and I think most Iowa caucus voters will think of it that way.

These buzz words are emblematic of two candidates now - Hillary Clinton means strength and experience. Barack Obama means new direct and new ideas. Forget the fact that the phrases mean nothing. They are standins for a Hillary Clinton referendum.

For reasons unfathomable, John Edwards seems to believe that attacks on Hillary Clinton's trustworthiness and candor will make him the alternative to Hillary. He has left Barack Obama unscathed. In the face of these results, it is hard to imagine what Edwards is thinking:

Who is the most honest and trustworthy 11/18/07 7/31/07
Barack Obama 31 30
John Edwards 20 24
Hillary Clinton 15 14

Edwards is losing ground here? Not really. HE is losing SUPPORT. The attacks he is engaging in give him no benefits whatsoever.

And the end game seems set to me - Two choices - "strength and experience" (Clinton) vs. Change (Obama). Where is the Edwards choice? He ceded it to Obama. In my view, he is finished.

< Comparisons | Globalization, Trade And NAFTA: A Defense of Trade Agreements >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Why Edwards Is Done In Iowa: Change vs. Experience | 9 comments (9 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

I haven't kept up (none / 0) (#1)
by Militarytracy on Sun Nov 25, 2007 at 10:13:35 AM EST

been busy with family obligations. Is Edwards STILL on the attack. Has he not "gotten" what he's doing yet?

I think you are right about Edwards (none / 0) (#2)
by Rick B on Sun Nov 25, 2007 at 11:52:24 AM EST

I regret that. I distrust Hillary as too 'status quo' and much too likely to cooperate (triangulate) with the worst of the Republican ideas. Edwards was and remains my preference.

Obama lost me completely when he stupidly bought into the Republican attack on Social Security. Democrats won the battle to protect Social Security in 2005, and as an issue it was regaining its status as the third rail of politics. Then Obama used it to attack Hillary, opening the whole damned thing up to Republican demagoguery during the general election.

I can't tell if he was just desperate or if he - in his lack of national campaign experience and his "Let's sing Kumbaya with the Republicans" politics just stupidly raised the issue and failed to realize what a dangerous issue is could be.

So now it appears to me to be a two-person race (Clinton - Obama) with Obama being unsuited as too young and inexperienced for the nomination.

Damn!

: Too Young? (none / 0) (#6)
by Natal on Sun Nov 25, 2007 at 02:41:59 PM EST

People keep saying Obama is too young and experienced etc. JFK was only 43 years old when he became president. Obama has had 10 years senatorial experience counting his Illinois time. George W had less political office experience. And Guiliani's political office experience has been confined to be being a mayor for 7 or 8 years. I don't think singling out Obama in this way is valid.

There are more than 3 candidates... (none / 0) (#3)
by Lynne on Sun Nov 25, 2007 at 12:47:27 PM EST

None of the top 3 get my vote. I'm voting for the person with the most experience. Joe Biden. A lot of us have woken up to understand that he is the choice. There are huge undercurrents at work in Iowa, and Biden is the one who is honest, dedicated, experienced, genuine, and is gaining support because of it.

Go to youtube, and Joe's site, and read, really listen to what he says. Just this morning people were all glowing over Edwards plan to help people in Iowa, and New Hampshire with their heating cost. Thing is, Joe Biden said it first, in the debates a long time ago, and as recently as October, but no one cared when he said it. This 3-way race isn't about the best candidate. It's about the 3 with the most money.

I'm voting for the one who has risen above the petty attacks, and actually has plans that will work. The genuine person, Joe Biden.

Running for VP? (none / 0) (#4)
by fishbane on Sun Nov 25, 2007 at 12:55:22 PM EST

Maybe he's hoping for the VP slot under Obama. (This is speculation, not an endorsement of the strategy.)

JRE is Not Done in Iowa (none / 0) (#5)
by rosie on Sun Nov 25, 2007 at 01:24:03 PM EST

I think that voters in Iowa will end up supporting JRE because he is a change candidate and he is not as polarizing as Hillary and he is not as inexperienced as Obama. I think that voters will realize he is the best candidate.

John Edwards in Iowa (none / 0) (#7)
by reder01 on Sun Nov 25, 2007 at 04:57:13 PM EST

Big Tent Democrat, you seem so biased against Edwards. He is my candidate of first choice, then Obama, then Clinton.

Why I don't prefer Obama first. He has said some stupid things about a "crisis" in Social Security. This buttresses Bush's overt desire to privatize a great program that is not in emergency straits.

Why I will never vote for Hillary. First, she refuses to admit her mistake about the War. She is just like Bush on refusing to admit mistakes. Second, she is too secretive, again just like W. Thirdly, she needs to declare how she views the concept of the unitary executive. I get the impression she would prefer to keep Bush's power grabs, the constitution notwithstanding.
Roberto in Utah

"secretive" HRC (none / 0) (#8)
by diogenes on Sun Nov 25, 2007 at 11:14:45 PM EST

HRC isn't secretive like W. She's secretive like Nixon. Not a good choice of personality to lead.

It's not the attacks. (none / 0) (#9)
by DA in LA on Mon Nov 26, 2007 at 01:46:09 AM EST

Come on, politicians attack each other. He is losing support because the more people get to know Obama, the more they like him. Clinton and Edwards were the only known candidates. That is now changing.

And most of Edwards supporters will shift to Obama, not Hillary, as has already been happening. I think she's in quite a bit of trouble at this point.