Next to the unviable Dennis Kucinich, I thought John Edwards was the second most progressive candidate and Hillary Clinton was the least progressive candidate. Thus, for me the choice is now between John Edwards and Barack Obama. Of course, my dream presidential candidate would be Russell Feingold--and what does Feingold have to say about Edwards?
On the Democratic presidential candidates I did notice that as the primaries heated up, all of a sudden, all the presidential candidates - none of whom voted with me on the timeframe to withdraw from Iraq - all voted with me when we did the Patriot Act stuff.
The one that is the most problematic is (John) Edwards, who voted for the Patriot Act, campaigns against it. Voted for No Child Left Behind, campaigns against it. Voted for the China trade deal, campaigns against it. Voted for the Iraq war ... He uses my voting record exactly as his platform, even though he had the opposite voting record.
When you had the opportunity to vote a certain way in the Senate and you didn't, and obviously there are times when you make a mistake, the notion that you sort of vote one way when you're playing the game in Washington and another way when you're running for president, there's some of that going on.
On whether he'll make an endorsement in the Feb. 19 Wisconsin primary
Probably not. I'm having a hard time deciding between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, as are many people. Those are the two I take the most seriously. I go back and forth, to be honest with you. I'm torn on this whole issue of who's more likely to be progressive and really seek change vs. who's ready to do the job today. It really is a true dilemma in my mind.
Sounds like Feingold thinks Edwards is an opportunistic phony.
Last month, Kim spent a lot of time working on getting volunteers to head up to canvas in New Hampshire. After the New Hampshire primary was over, she started her new job working for Common Cause. At Common Cause, she needs to be non-partisan, so I'm picking up where she left off.
On February 5th, voters from Connecticut will go to the polls to vote for their candidates in the Democratic Presidential primary. If the race were simply decided by who can raise the most money or get the most media coverage, we have a two-person race. Those candidates have strong organizations here in Connecticut as well. However, if you want the candidate with the strongest message who is most capable of bringing about the change we need in Washington you need to look at the other candidate who has finished in the top three in both Iowa and New Hampshire, John Edwards.
If last night's New Hampshire Democratic Party 100 Club Dinner in Milford, NH is any indication we may be seeing the sudden and dramatic end to Hillary Clinton's presidential ambitions. Hillary was booed a few times, mainly by inciting the vocal and derisive Obama supporters, but worse for her Obama absolutely slayed the audience with another memorable speech to end the evening for a raucous crowd of 3500. This morning another 2500 packed an event in Nashua for Obama.
On Monday I attended an Edwards event at Exeter Town Hall in NH. It was NH Retail at its very best.
The Edwards stump has taken a major step forward since I saw him two weeks ago, the content has changed and the tone has shifted to that of an urgency in his current speech. The distinctions are now razor sharp between John Edwards and the rest of the field, "you have choices in this election and you need to be aware of them." The reality of where we are as a country today and the vision for where we all want to be as a people are now painted in excruciating and moving detail on one issue after another: universal health care; corruption; disenfranchisement of the citizenry; economic fairness; our two unequal school systems; global warming and conservation the list goes on ...
And it's only about 23 minutes so you can imagine, man. Follow me below the fold for the full video and the antidote.
Last Sunday evening at the end of a long, hot, winding road through the state the Edwards family wrapped up their bus tour of NH. They were greeted by well over a thousand people at a Town Hall event on the banks of the river at lovely Prescott Park in downtown Portsmouth NH.
His remarks were sharp, clear and passionately delivered to an enthusiastic crowd.
He threw down the gauntlet on universal health care in the field and challenged the entire Democratic party on financing campaigns through lobbyist money. He presented the voters in attendance not only with his vision for change in this country, but he gave us a very clear picture of the kind of America that he wants us to create together. The grassroots are not only central to the campaign in this vision, but they need to be central going forward from January 20, 2009.
The full Q and A is now posted also: click here to see all of that tape.
On Saturday, I went to vlog an Edwards Town Hall in Dover, NH. It was a day marked by torrential thunderstorms yet about 300 NHer-ites turned out to see the candidate speak and take hard questions from Granite State voters. They, my neighbors to the north, know they're king makers and they take their job seriously. Thank God that at least "some people" still have respect for the process.
Overflow crowds and running behind schedule were the order of the day. Edwards only had time to take a few questions at the end of his remarks. They are presented here in Part Two. If you're going to an event in NH, for a Democrat, then you'd better plan to get there early. All the passion and attention seems to be on our side this time. Thank God that at least "some people" know what the GOP is doing to our country these days.
Part One of this vlog covers the remarks and makes the case that the Edwards message is a populist message that we, as a party, can be proud of and one that is long overdue. I don't think that any other candidate in this race deserves the mantle of progressive populist the way the Edwards does. That's why I support his candidacy for President.
I went to vlog an Edwards Town Hall in Dover, NH on Saturday. It was a day marked by torrential thunderstorms yet about 300 NHer-ites turned out to see the candidate speak and take hard questions from Granite State voters. They, my neighbors to the north, know they're king makers and they take their job seriously. Thank God that at least "some people" still have respect for the process. The media is certainly not capable of any meaningful discussion of the issues in this campaign and they will not be reformed in time for the primaries. Nary a patriot in the DC press corps.
Before the event started I heard some of the Edwards advance people talking about the overflow crowds they had seen at the stops all day long. He had done a bunch of house parties that were packed with 200 to 300 people. The Epping event left about 100 people standing out on the lawn under threatening skies. In this clip posted by the campaign at YouTube he's talking to an overflow crowd - in a garage in Nashua.
If you're going to an event in NH, for a Democrat, then you'd better plan to get there early. All the passion and attention seems to be on our side this time. Thank God that at least "some people" know what the GOP is doing to our country these days.
This represents a joint effort by ANN GALLOWAY and ROBIN WINICK. The first of two posts about AIPAC, this piece will deal primarily with domestic issues; a subsequent discussion on global impact will follow in a few days.
It has become dangerous to suggest that AIPAC may be exerting undue influence on both US and Israeli policies. Critics have been accused of anti-Semitism; and politicians who hope to remain in office (as well as those who seek political office) have been silenced by the enormous influence that AIPAC wields - including its ability to direct the use of mega dollars, either to support or defeat those it targets.
For the record, both authors of this piece are Jewish women, and both have been to Israel; one's daughter studied at Tel Aviv University; the other has worked for a major American Jewish organization and has taught in two Jewish day schools. Both strongly believe in the importance of the existence of the State of Israel. However, they also believe that just as our country's founders would turn over in their graves to see what the right wing has done to compromise our democracy, so Israel's founders would be appalled at the damage its extremists have done to compromise the very existence and safety of Israel's citizens.
This represents a joint effort by ANN GALLOWAY and ROBIN WINICK. The first of two posts about AIPAC, this piece will deal primarily with domestic issues; a subsequent discussion on global impact will follow in a few days.
It has become dangerous to suggest that AIPAC may be exerting undue influence on both US and Israeli policies. Critics have been accused of anti-Semitism; and politicians who hope to remain in office (as well as those who seek political office) have been silenced by the enormous influence that AIPAC wields - including its ability to direct the use of mega dollars, either to support or defeat those it targets.
For the record, both authors of this piece are Jewish women, and both have been to Israel; one's daughter studied at Tel Aviv University; the other has worked for a major American Jewish organization and has taught in two Jewish day schools. Both strongly believe in the importance of the existence of the State of Israel. However, they also believe that just as our country's founders would turn over in their graves to see what the right wing has done to compromise our democracy, so Israel's founders would be appalled at the damage its extremists have done to compromise the very existence and safety of Israel's citizens.
Giuliani 48%, Clinton 42%
Giuliani 44%, Obama 42%
Giuliani 45%, Gore 42%
McCain 40%, Clinton 47%
McCain 38%, Obama 46%
McCain 41%, Gore 45%
"Connecticut voters credit New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani for his role in the 9/11 recovery," said Quinnipiac University Poll Director Douglas Schwartz, Ph.D.
"This follows the pattern of another neighboring state, New Jersey, where Quinnipiac University polls show Giuliani running strong," Schwartz added.
I think this one works. I'm usually loathe to say anything good about political ads which "pull at the heartstrings" but they've stripped this one down to the bare bones. The people in it look dead serious and not full of sanctimony for a change.
Last Monday night I attended a Town Hall meeting on the UNH campus in Durham, NH. Both John and Elizabeth Edwards were there to talk and take questions from a group of about 500 attendees. Rep. Carol Shea-Porter (NH-01) was there and received a very warm reception from all in attendance. When I left she was in a circle of at least 15 kids discussing her current work in DC as the US Rep from their district.
The questions were tough, but I think fair. This is NH after all and these voters are very savvy to say the least. They were there to hear the candidate speak, but they also had a lot to say to the Edwardses and those that asked a question generally conveyed their concerns in doing so.
Most people do not want to speak on camera at all and as I canvassed the crowd before the event I told many of those on line that I do this because I don't think the media gets it right, everyone agreed.
Here's today's Hartford Courant editorial lede on the decision by the Edwards family to continue John's presidential campaign after learning Elizabeth's cancer has metastasized.
The blogosphere wasted no time attacking John Edwards as heartless for continuing his presidential campaign as his wife struggles with a new bout of cancer.
Um, what? And more importantly, who?
Despite two articles in the Courant yesterday on onlinepolitics, the Courant doesn't seem to have a damned clue as to what the blogosphere is. Does the Courant realize that "the blogosphere" has polar opposite political spheres? Does it realize that even within the liberal blogosphere some people aren't Edwards supporters?
The Courant editorial never again references "the blogosphere" or any attacks on "John Edwards as heartless" in the remainder of the piece. But because the majority of news coverage of blogs is about the liberal blogosphere and because the most successful campaigns organizing online are Democrats, the implication is that Democratic blogs are somehow the culprits that the Courant wishes to attack. But the editorialists don't have the courage or knowledge to get specific, instead leaving a massive straw man at the start of their piece.
The Courant's lack of specificity when levying this grand charge -- a charge that is in part true for Republican bloggers and some anti-Edwards Democrats, though more accurate when applied to Rush Limbaugh -- is nothing less than a deliberate effort to discredit all blogs and blogging, this site included. I could say "The media wasted no time attacking John Edwards as heartless for continuing his presidential campaign as his wife struggles with a new bout of cancer," and I'd be more accurate than the Courant thanks to the "some people" work of Katie Couric and the conspiracy theories of Rush Limbaugh.
The Courant editorial board is clearly threatened by blogs. While it's unlikely that David Lightman will be replaced by a swarm of committed citizen journalists stomping the halls of Congress to report the day's news, opinion journalism and news analysis provided by blogs gains attention because it is on whole a better alternative to the work of people like the Courant editorialists. Their generic, pro forma smear on blogs is evidence of both their fear of blogs and their willingness to resort to shoddy arguments in their editorials. The piece on whole is a solid justification for why Edwards should suffer recriminations for continuing to campaign; the attack on blogs is a straw man that diminishes the Courant's work tremendously in my eyes. Attacks on blogs are weak and played-out -- the Courant isn't doing itself any favors by picking fights with blogs.
An interesting piece by Lindsay Beyerstein in today's Salon.
I tried to suggest that the campaign might not want high-profile bloggers. I thought it might be better off hiring a well-connected political operative with good connections in the blogosphere.
Bob listened attentively, scribbling copious notes. I didn't feel I was making much headway. The Edwards team was obviously looking for the blogospheric equivalent of star power, but they weren't looking for another high-powered blogger/political consultant like Tim Tagaris or Matt Stoller. They wanted a charismatic audience-builder who could connect with readers who weren't political junkies.
I tried to explain this as delicately and clearly as I could: A-list polemicists are popular because they say things you don't hear on television. The blogosphere isn't just "The Situation Room" with swear words, it's a space for writers to explore ideas that are outside the bounds of mainstream discourse.
Well, I was off by a day, but sure enough, Gerstein was on MSNBC today as a "Democratic strategist" lending his discredited voice to the right-wing attack on the blogs:
"There's a big problem in the Democratic Party right now," says Dan Gerstein, political strategist and Lieberman's 2006 campaign spokesman. "I think for a lot of Democratic bloggers, there's extremism, there's an anger, and there's a lack of accountability for what people say and do."
After being so utterly destroyed online throughout the 2006 race, Gerstein seems to be making it his life's sole mission to wedge the netroots from campaigns and the party infrastructure, even going so far as to delusionally claim in a DLC magazine article that the 2006 election results were all about voters wanting more "bipartisanship." He is joined in this mission by fellow DLC dead-enders and many of the same right-wing blogs that backed Lieberman last year.
They are fighting the same fight. The man certainly has no shred of credibility as a "Democratic" strategist.
Actually, he retains no shred of credibility as a human being. Here's the short version:
In the spring and summer, Gerstein - anonymously and unofficially - went after the Huffington Post demanding Howie Klein be censored, smeared Ned Lamont as anti-semitic by going after Maxine Waters, defended Lieberman's race-baiting flyers in CT, and much more.
In September, Gerstein lied and said Lieberman had not "taken a significant amount of money from registered Republicans".
Right after the primary, Gerstein went absolutely nuts in an inverview with a Hartford Courant columnist Helen Ubiñas.
In October, Gerstein wrote a seriously unhinged, furious letter to the NY Times all but claiming that they had been brainwashed by bloggers, after they endorsed Ned in the general.
Interesting. No calls for dismissal. Good enough that the candidate spoke his mind and that intolerance would not be tolerated in his campaign.
These look like serious folks. Their voting guide is front and center, and they pride themselves on grassroots action. Not sure how influential they are, but this makes for a nice headline should it get picked up. I found it via Raw Story.
"Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good condemns these and all religiously intolerant remarks. We accept Senator Edwards' assurances that he too was offended by comments made by recently-hired staffers and that religious intolerance has no place in his campaign. Catholics comprise more than one quarter of the U.S. public, and neither John Edwards nor any other candidate can afford to take this constituency for granted."
"We hope this unfortunate incident will initiate a deeper conversation on the part of all presidential candidates regarding the broad range of issues and values of primary importance to the Catholic community, including the Iraq War, a concern for the poor, human life and dignity, the availability of health care, and a commitment to the common good."
I imagine you and your staff have followed the Edwards/blogger staff controversy pretty closely. In the end, Senator Edwards did the right thing and stood by his staffers and, by extension, the netroots. The netroots is a constituency of dedicated activists who fight for Democratic success night and day. They deserve support from all Democratic presidential candidates. I say "support" because it's all too easy for established political figures to throw their base under the bus for personal gain. The last thing our party needs is for a presidential candidate to Sister Souljah the netroots to appease the likes of Bill Donohue and Michelle Malkin.
I'm writing to you today to ask that you pledge to stand by the netroots throughout your presidential campaign. There are a few simple things you can do to make and honor that pledge.
1. Pledge to never use a Democratic opponents' blog staffer's past writings as fuel for attacking that candidate. What someone wrote before they joined a campaign should be outside the discussion of ideas during the primary. It's in every Democratic contenders' interests to keep it this way during the primary.
2. Pledge to stand by your staff and the netroots base in the face of any attack campaign on them by radical right wing activists. The netroots are your base, your voter pool. Partisans like Bill Donohue would never, ever ask his supporters to vote for you. The priority for honoring these two groups' concerns should be self-evident.
3. Publicly condemn the attacks authored by Bill Donohue's Catholic League on Senator Edwards' bloggers. This election is too important to be decided on through debates about relatively low-level personnel decisions.
I recognize that this may seem like a lot to ask of a presidential candidate following many days of blogger-related controversy. But I believe that you can offer leadership by setting a tone of civility for the Democratic primary. The respect that is needed now is not just for your fellow candidates, as I am sure you maintain collegial relationships with them, but for the base of activists who will not stop working until one of you is elected president.
Many bloggers will come to your side over the coming months. Will you come to our side today?
Well, it took more than 24 hours, but he seems to have made the right move in the end. And he needs our support. From an email (more here and at the Edwards blog):
EDWARDS STATEMENT ON CAMPAIGN BLOGGERS AMANDA MARCOTTE AND MELISSA McEWEN
Chapel Hill, North Carolina - The statements of Senator John Edwards, Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwen in reference to their work as independent bloggers before joining the Edwards campaign are below.
Senator John Edwards:
"The tone and the sentiment of some of Amanda Marcotte's and Melissa McEwen's posts personally offended me. It's not how I talk to people, and it's not how I expect the people who work for me to talk to people. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but that kind of intolerant language will not be permitted from anyone on my campaign, whether it's intended as satire, humor, or anything else. But I also believe in giving everyone a fair shake. I've talked to Amanda and Melissa; they have both assured me that it was never their intention to malign anyone's faith, and I take them at their word. We're beginning a great debate about the future of our country, and we can't let it be hijacked. It will take discipline, focus, and courage to build the America we believe in."
Amanda Marcotte:
"My writings on my personal blog, Pandagon on the issue of religion are generally satirical in nature and always intended strictly as a criticism of public policies and politics. My intention is never to offend anyone for his or her personal beliefs, and I am sorry if anyone was personally offended by writings meant only as criticisms of public politics. Freedom of religion and freedom of expression are central rights, and the sum of my personal writings is a testament to this fact."
Melissa McEwen:
"Shakespeare's Sister is my personal blog, and I certainly don't expect Senator Edwards to agree with everything I've posted. We do, however, share many views - including an unwavering support of religious freedom and a deep respect for diverse beliefs. It has never been my intention to disparage people's individual faith, and I'm sorry if my words were taken in that way."
The tone and the sentiment of some of Amanda Marcotte's and Melissa McEwan's posts personally offended me. It's not how I talk to people, and it's not how I expect the people who work for me to talk to people. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but that kind of intolerant language will not be permitted from anyone on my campaign, whether it's intended as satire, humor, or anything else. But I also believe in giving everyone a fair shake. I've talked to Amanda and Melissa; they have both assured me that it was never their intention to malign anyone's faith, and I take them at their word. We're beginning a great debate about the future of our country, and we can't let it be hijacked. It will take discipline, focus, and courage to build the America we believe in.
On Monday I attended an Edwards event at Exeter Town Hall in NH. It was NH Retail at its very best.
Last Sunday evening at the end of a long, hot, winding road through the state the Edwards family wrapped up their bus tour of NH. They were greeted by well over a thousand people at a Town Hall event on the banks of the river at lovely Prescott Park in downtown Portsmouth NH.
On Saturday, I went to vlog an Edwards Town Hall in Dover, NH. It was a day marked by torrential thunderstorms yet about 300 NHer-ites turned out to see the candidate speak and take hard questions from Granite State voters. They, my neighbors to the north, know they're king makers and they take their job seriously. Thank God that at least "some people" still have respect for the process.
I went to vlog an Edwards Town Hall in Dover, NH on Saturday. It was a day marked by torrential thunderstorms yet about 300 NHer-ites turned out to see the candidate speak and take hard questions from Granite State voters. They, my neighbors to the north, know they're king makers and they take their job seriously. Thank God that at least "some people" still have respect for the process. The media is certainly not capable of any meaningful discussion of the issues in this campaign and they will not be reformed in time for the primaries. Nary a patriot in the DC press corps.
cross-posted at 
MLN is powered by