Democrat Edwards looks to pull a surprise in Iowa

[Amerigo Vespucci]

Source: Reuters

DES MOINES, Iowa (Reuters) - While all eyes are on the heavyweight Democratic bout in Iowa between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, a revamped John Edwards is looking to steal the presidential campaign's first big prize.

Edwards, the former North Carolina senator, has eased off his attacks on rivals, dusted off the populist rhetoric of his 2004 race and primed his campaign for the sort of late charge that carried him to a strong second-place finish in Iowa four years ago.

Edwards probably needs a win or a strong second to stay in the race. Either would dramatically reshape a Democratic contest dominated for months by the showdown between Clinton, a New York senator, and Obama, an Illinois senator.

"When the caucus-goers in Iowa rise up, there is going to be a wave across America that absolutely nobody can stop," Edwards said at a recent rally in Des Moines.

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN2023049420071221

[SteppingRazor]

1. "dusted off the populist rhetoric of his 2004 race"? Um....

has this writer been living on Mars for the entire campaign season? Populist rhetoric has been the standard boilerplate of Edwards' stump speeches from Day One.


In any case, we don't have a lot of history to go on, but in the few races we've seen, Edwards has been a remarkably good finisher, so I don't think anything can be ruled out.

[Rambis]

2. No surprise here

the media finally has to report that Edwards is going to win even though they wanted the Hillary/Obama dustup to sell more papers etc. He has been saying the same thing since 2004 but no on reports it. He is not the VP candidate now so he can say what he wants to say and it resonates with Iowan's.

[Counciltucky]

51. Rambis speaks truth.

He and I are both Iowans. Trust us when we say it: It won't be a surprise if Edwards wins Iowa. Apparently it'll only be a surprise to everyone who doesn't live in Iowa. Which could be a good sign...

[CTyankee]

55. From your mouth to God's ear! I am encouraged by

what you are saying. I kind of felt that might be the case, but I wasn't sure. You have helped nail it for me!

I also think his kind of rhetoric will really inspire voters of every party to think about a future with some hope. Plus be tough about getting it done!

[Counciltucky]

61. Agreed.

Edwards knows how to campaign in Iowa, which is really the bottom line. His events are less style and more substance, which plays well in Iowa, especially the rural parts. He's the only candidate of the top three who is willing to speak with people on an individual basis. I know this from experience, as I have had multiple conversations with him. Admittedly I wasn't as impressed with the last event I saw him at, but I think that's because I've seen him enough times and know his platform enough that it was basically old hat. That said, most people haven't seen him, and he touches them. If he can keep reaching people like this, he'll get the nomination.

[Political Heretic]

53. You are so 100% right. The corporate media is so chagrined that it might be Edwards.

[aquart]

3. "Dusted off" is a deliberate and demeaning insult.

Really, all English classes need to be taught this as part of critical thinking.

[SteppingRazor]

4. I think whether it's insulting is all in the usage.

In this case, it makes it sound like Edwards is making a deliberate, calculated move at this late stage in the game to garner votes -- which is both a lie (he's been talking this way all along) and insulting. But in other uses, the phrase isn't insulting at all.

The old gunfighter dusted off the leather-bound, black box. Its hinges creaked as he opened it, revealing his Colt .45 Navy revolver. "Damn, but I never thought I'd have to use you again," he whispered.

In the admittedly overly maudlin example above, the phrase "dusted off" merely conveys a sense of age, rather than an implicit insult.

[bvar22]

18. The Problem is;

Edwards NEVER put his guns away.
The reference in the piece is not only negative, but absolutely FALSE.

[SteppingRazor]

21. Right. That's what I said in the first line of my post.

"In this case, it makes it sound like Edwards is making a deliberate, calculated move at this late stage in the game to garner votes -- which is both a lie (he's been talking this way all along) and insulting."

[aquart]

31. In the sense of ideas, "dusted off" means old and not used anymore.

That ain't a compliment.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

5. That was my first impression...

...there's more than a little bit of condescension woven throughout the piece.

[Jackpine Radical]

6. Edwards isn't on the Approved List. All M$M talking heads are therefore

required to discuss him in demeaning terms.

The corporations have decided they would rather put up with Hill or Obama than with a nutcase like Huckleberry or Mutt, but they are not gonna permit an anti-corporate lawyer guy to get anywhere if they can help it.

[surfermaw]

9. No corporation, can control, all the people all the time, part of some but not all

We just need to push the point that corporations are trying to control the race

[Jackpine Radical]

10. Like I said,

"if they can help it."

There is certainly historical precedent for the American people wresting power from the corporations. The whole Progressive Era and early labor movement were all about that.

Right now the corporations have total control over the classic broadcast media, but they haven't much of a clue how to deal with the new, interactive media. It's a new world, in which ordinary people can exchange information directly among themselves. Distributed knowledge rather than centralized authority; it's a whole new paradigm fo organization, just now being born.

[bearfan454]

15. But they can control the voting machines unfortunately.

We all know junior didn't win in 2000 or 2004. You are correct though they ARE trying to control the race any way they can.

[dmosh42]

7. If he does, look for big anti- money from the corporations....

For him to win, it would mean people are looking past the crap being dished out by the media, trying to keep Hillary and Obama in the spotlight.

[Jackpine Radical]

11. Yes, yes, hell yes.

The rise of the starfish, the death of the spider.

[lisainmilo]

8. Keep up the good work John!

:applause:

[LibDemAlways]

12. An Edwards victory would mean Iowans were paying attention to

the candidates' message rather than the corporate whores, who desperately want this to be a Hillary/Obama race.

[wryter2000]

13. That's all I need for Christmas

:applause:

[onehandle]

14. An Edwards landslide would greatly expand our control of Congress.

A Greater Majority + A Strong President = Braver Democrats

[bearfan454]

16. I believe it will be an Edwards landslide. nt

[Emillereid]

17. I hope this is true - of the three so-called heavyweights, Edwards is the most

progressive.

[ihavenobias]

20. Yes, he is

http://www.whytuesday.org/challenge/

[MilesColtrane]

27. Unfortunately, that may not be what Iowa Democrats are looking for.

I think, on the whole, they are more conservative than the rest of the country.


Edwards needs this state badly. I hope he pulls it off.

[acmavm]

19. Bwahahahahahaha! He who laughs last and all that jazz...

go Johnny go! Take us all the way home.

No more bush**s! No more Clintons!

EDIT: To add my exclamation points!

[debbierlus]

22. Edwards will take it - The Kucinish voters will align with him

If they don't have 15% for Kucinich, they will caucus with someone else. Edwards will win Iowa.

[Phx_Dem]

28. I was wondering about that

Do you think the Kucinich supporters will caucus for Edwards?

[Cairycat]

39. Last weekend in my town

Obama spoke in the morning, and Edwards in the afternoon. I personally know several people who are for Kucinich but realize they need to figure out who their second choice is. Listening to both decided them for Edwards.

Edwards is the progressive who can win the GE. He has been building up a solid Iowa organization and presence for four years. I do believe he will take Iowa, and I hope that momentum can carry him through to the election.

[MilesColtrane]

33. He'll need all the Kucinich and Dodd supporters plus about 2/3rds of those who will stand...

...for Biden and Richardson.

This is assuming that those switching, and who are not voting for Edwards, split their support evenly between Clinton and Obama.
That's no sure thing.

It's going to be a damned close race.

[tinrobot]

23. I'm hoping he does win.

He's the best chance we got.

[truthisfreedom]

24. I'm voting for the Democratic candidate, whomever that is. Good luck to Edwards.

He's a great candidate. Perhaps the best.

[disndat]

25. Is it possible

that the HC people are behind an Edwards win to stop Obama? If so, this strategy could have "unintended consequences."

[CottonBear]

26. The MSM has ignored Edwards. I think he has a chance to win the nomination.

He would be a very appealing candidate against ANY Republican.

I voted for him in the last primary and I will vote for him again this time. Of course, I'll support who ever gets the nomination but I really like John Edwards.

[Plucketeer]

30. Can you IMAGINE????

JRE's truth to power talk against the crap that would discharge from ANY of the GOP candidates in a debate?!!!!! I CAN NOT WAIT to see those sparks fly! GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Johnny GO! :kick:

[CottonBear]

37. I think he would do much better than Kerry did. Kerry won the debates

but the MSM portrayed him as a "patrician, upper-crustBoston Liberal" and Bush as an "authentic, plain spoken everyman" and manged to convince 30%-45% of Americans that Bush won.
:grr:

The MSM will have a much harder time doing that to John.

[surfermaw]

47. Plain spoken , doesn't describe his gibberish well!

[CottonBear]

49. I know! But, his gibberish makes sense to the 30%! n/t

[syberlion]

29. "All Eyes on..."

This is not journalism. This belongs on the Editorial page far from real news. The only problem is, if everything that belonged on the Editorial page of the news, there wouldn't be anything left but ads on the rest of the pages of the paper.

MSM has killed the news and we haven't done enough to resurrect the news.

[Alexander]

32. Nice how the article said Edwards wanted to "steal" Iowa.

"While all eyes are on the heavyweight Democratic bout in Iowa between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, a revamped John Edwards is looking to steal the presidential campaign's first big prize."

Nope, no bias there. :eyes:

[nxylas]

35. Sad thing is, the bias probably wasn't deliberate

I suspect it was a Freudian slip on the part of the "journalist". The M$M genuinely believes that Clinton or Obama are the Anointed Ones, and actual elections are mere formalities in the coronation process.

[Mountainman]

34. I would like to see him take it

[Divine Discontent]

36. "looking to STEAL", "DUST OFF his RHETORIC of 2004"

what an asshat! the Edwards camp should question the reuters writer on this double dosing of negativism. He's been talking this way SINCE 04, and he's working for the victory, not stealing it.

[Fried Bread]

38. He doesn't have the money to compete!

Say he does win Iowa...then what? Has he even been campaigning in New Hampshire? He likely won't win there. Hillary will then likely win NH, where she wil then snowball that into a SC victory (where she is already polling well). I simply do not see how John Edwards can win the nomination. In fact, should he win Iowa, it makes Hillary's road easier.

[jsamuel]

40. watch this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfX5zk5amK0

[Fried Bread]

41. Watch this

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3873495

[saracat]

50. Ah.The rationalization HRC will use for losing!Reminds ne of my cat "pretending"

his "slip" was intentional!

[RBInMaine]

52. EDWARDS IS THE MOST ELECTABLE!! SUPPORT HIM !!

Edwards is the most electable Dem in the general election against the Republican attack machine.
This guy is a FIGHTER for the middle and working classes and for the poor, and he will go the offensive against the corporate Republicans. He is also a charasmatic southerner who has the best chance to expand our map into red territory. Hillary and Obama are both too risky in the general election. Edwards is a true populist ready to fight for average Americans because that is where he came from. Again, EDWARDS IS OUR BEST CHANCE TO WIN THE GENERAL ELECTION and that is the ball we must keep our eye on. For the sake of our party and the nation, SUPPORT JOHN EDWARDS !!

[Omaha Steve]

42. Like Dean snowballed his Iowa win four years ago?

OOPS. Never mind.

[Fried Bread]

44. Kerry didn't have Hillary and Obama as opponents.

Edwards, should he win Iowa, does. Both Obama and Hillary are equally capable of winning SC ahead of Edwards (whereas Howard Dean was never going to do that).

[lovuian]

43. Edwards moving up He's against the corporations

I wouldn't mind him as the Democratic Nominee

[sellitman]

45. What none of the polls tell you are

that more than half the people who can vote in the Primary are still undecided.

This thing can go to any of the top 3 candidate.

Easily.

[focusfan]

46. I think Edwards is our best man

because I'm telling you Hillary has done said she isn't gonna
send the troops home if she gets elected she said they will
still be a patrol over there.while John Edwards said he will
bring our troops home.

[Brrrp]

48. He has pledged to bring all combat troops home in his first year of office.

http://johnedwards.com/news/press-releases/20070910-petraeus-crocker/

Edwards has staked out a position to the left of the other two main candidates--anti-war and anti-corporate. He is betting that this is the time for these ideas, and that he can ride them to the Presidency. Is he right?

[yurbud]

54. kick

[ryanmuegge]

56. The punditocracy scared to death of this guy

They've been running smear stories and downplaying the legitimacy of his candidacy since day one. The latest line is, "he's got no chance of being the nominee." I love how this guy is the most in touch with the mainstream of public opinion but FOX laughs at everybody and pretty much says, "yeah, this is supposed to be a democracy, but we will make sure that the candidate who represents you can't get elected."

I think Edwards will win Iowa, but it's questionable as to whether the momentum from that win will be enough to propel him in the NH and SC.

[ozone_man]

57. That's the funny thing about momentum.

I think support is really soft at this point. People are waiting for someone they can feel good about. Hillary Clinton doesn't give that feeling. Obama does to some extent, but he doesn't have a progressive enough message. As long as Edwards can keep driving home the populist message, I think he can win, building momentum as he goes.

[ryanmuegge]

58. Hopefully it pans out like that. He represents the most significant and viable change

from business as usual.

If the punditocracy is scared of him, it's an encouraging sign.

[PATRICK]

59. I smell panic on the GOP side too

I hope the people of Iowa sense their power at this point and value it for the raw hope it is- and then help start getting us up and out of this mess.

About time fear starts spreading where it should.

[humbled_opinion]

60. Encouraging... Hope he stays away from the negative though...his message

is so true and resonates with a majority of Americans... How about Edwards/Obama ticket ... I love it.

[humbled_opinion]

62. Oh I seriously hope so...

He is far and away the best candidate to win the General Election;