Edwards 2.0 came across really well on Charlie Rose last night

[Armstead]

My opinion, of course.

I was very impressed -- and somewhat reassured -- by Edwards in his interview with Charlie Rose.

Rose asked many of the questions I and others have had about the inconsistencies between Edwards 1.0 in the Senate and 04 campaign and the Edwards 2.0 of his current campaign.

I believe Edwards responded candidly. He acknowledged that he himself was guilty of the behavior he criticizes. He also made the totally reasonable point that the system pressures good people to do that, and he succumbed to it as much as anyone else.

More importantly, he displayed a clear grasp of the overall situation, and the causes for the nation's current malaise. In that sense he reminded me a bit of Al Gore, in terms of connecting the dots, and emphasizing that no issue or problem exists in isolation. And that requires systemic reform to move things in a better direction.

He also struck me as a hopeful realist. In other words, he recognizes all of the forces working against such fundamental reform, but he believes that it is possible to move towards bigger goals in incremental steps without selling out. He was willing to say what he believes can be done in the near term, and what will take longer.

Did anyone else see the interview? If so what were your reactions?

If you didn't catchg it, it is available online. It's worth watching, regardless of which candidate you currently favor (or even if you don;t like Edwards.)

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/11/29/194750/33

[Benhurst]

1. I thought he came across quite well. He went up a notch on my list.

[The Traveler]

2. That has been my sense of Edwards

That at some point he had been co-opted, brought into the outer circle of the vile network and saw that as being normal. And then he changed his mind. If that is indeed true, he may never win the Presidency but he at least reclaimed his stature as a man.

That is my sense ... but I am sceptical. Edwards has almost closed the deal with me ... but only almost. But of our candidates, it seems to me that he and Kucinich are the bravest, the most clear, and the most relevant to the challenges of our times. So it seems to me. I know Dennis is real. Unelectable, perhaps, but real. Let us see now about John Edwards.

[blm]

6. Edwards has a greater shot at winning with his newfound candidness than he ever had in 2004

He never came off as sincere in 2003-4, and maybe it was because he was not yet comfortable with his own voice on the issues. Of course, it was hard when the two biggest issues of the day were terrorism and Iraq war and the last Dem president was siding with Bush on those decisions, more than with the Dem candidates and their criticisms of Bush's decisions.

Edwards is a FAR, FAR better candidate today. Some people NEED to leave DC to get a grip on America's needs. Open government is priority number one for me.

[smokey nj]

3. I thought it was a great interview for all the reasons you mentioned.

[asdjrocky]

4. Saw it.

Thought it was great when he showed some passion, when talking about the poor. Can't remember the last time I saw a candidate, other that Johnny of course, mention poor people.

It's like most of us don't exist out here.

[Beaverhausen]

5. saw the last half- I support him but I was really impressed

He seemed so at ease speaking on every topic Rose brought up, especially foreign policy in the long and short term.

It's just nice to hear intelligent answers to the problems we have, not more war-mongering and hate speech, like we heard in the GOP debate the other night.

[frogmarch]

7. I missed it, but I'm

going to watch it online. Thanks for this thread.

[donkeyotay]

8. Edwards has been impressive.

This is off topic, but I have a small question maybe you know the answer to. What's that circular lapel button he's wearing stand for?

[JohnLocke]

9. It's an Outward Bound pin.

His son Wade's Outward Bound pin.

[donkeyotay]

11. Thank you. But can you tell me briefly what Outward Bound is? nt

[JohnLocke]

15. Here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outward_Bound
http://www.outwardbound.com/

Wade died when he was 16, and Edwards wears his pin in his memory.

[Beaverhausen]

23. oh- you just made me...

:cry:

I didn't know that. thanks! :hug:

[Armstead]

10. I was wondering the same thing about that pin

[waiting for hope]

12. He's worn that pin since his

Senate Race as a tribute to Wade. There is so much about the Edwards' I admire and that's one of them.

[donkeyotay]

13. Ahhh, I'm starting to get it. Outward Bound is that program

for building character through physical challenges, and Wade is the son he lost. I'm getting it. Thanks.

[Tactical Progressive]

14. As a Clinton supporter I was impressed with Edwards on Charlie Rose

I like John, but I haven't been happy with him attacking Hillary. I see no good reason for it since it is only helping Obama who throws mud and starts fights then backs away to let John do his dirty work. Moreso because I've been thinking that Edwards would make a good VP choice for Hillary, even though I think they've decided that he won't be.

He's got his brief down. His speech at the Dem conference today was basically what he said on Charlie Rose. It's like he broke his whole spiel up into topical responses to Charlie's questions. I was impressed with both his beliefs and his control in delivering them piecemeal to Charlie. He was also good 'on his feet' in responding to Charlie's more off-center questions.

He's gotten alot better since 2004.

I also noticed that he seems to have stopped throwing mud at Hillary - we'll see for sure at the next debate - so I'm still hopeful that he might be on a short list for VP.

[PurityOfEssence]

16. He was sort of sloppy and unfocused, and I actually liked him more for that

Admittedly, I'm a longtime partisan here, but he was speaking very frankly and trying to clearly field the questions as they came. Accepting that he was in a bit of a grilling, he followed the rules of the game and showed what many of us like about him: a true desire to connect with people, rather than hijack control at all times and dominate.

I think he's a bit too quick to dismiss the true progressive nature of his tenure in the Senate, but there's an air of humility that isn't just posturing. He also stood his ground on this to a certain degree, and did so in a fairly modulated way.

More important than anything else is that he delineated the difference between rich v. poor and rich v. everybody else. He runs a great risk of being against "the successful", and he really gets it on the concept of how the best years were those after WW2 and because of FDR's policies and Truman's stewardship.

This guy means business: he's tough without being fearsome and approachable without being a pushover.

It was a bit boring and wonky at times, but there was a true sense of reality about it. Quite refreshing.

More than anything or anyone else, this person could be a true rallying point for this country; I hope we don't blow it again. Who else is as approachable by so many different types of people?

The commitment to ban nuclear weapons is a frank and honorable thing to do, and the instant admission that such a thing couldn't happen immediately or even within a two-term presidency is indicative of what many of us like about him: he's got a serious case of the realities.

[Armstead]

18. That sense of possibility....

>>>>...he really gets it on the concept of how the best years were those after WW2 and because of FDR's policies and Truman's stewardship.<<<<

As one of those dreaded baby Boomers ( a contemnporary of Edwards)that's one of the things that resonated with me. I can vividly recall the same differences between what seemed possible for the average person in the 60's compared to now. It was not a utopia back then, but there was much more sense (and reality) of opportunity back then compared to today.

people in our generation seem to have fallen into two camps. Those whose ideals have been beaten down over the last 30 years and have become excessively fatalistic ("realistic") compared to those who recall the differences and yet still believe in that sense of possibility....I'm glad to see that Edwards seems to be in the latter group.

[Mark Twain Girl]

25. Good points, though I think he ended up focussing Rose's unfocussed poverty question

Taking it apart and trying to address the multiple enormous issues Rose raised. That's not a criticism of Rose or the interview -- this was a refreshing change from the CorpNewsInfotainmentCircus.

"he's tough without being fearsome and approachable without being a pushover" <-- Yes, well put -- he came across as calm and under control, yet enthusiastic and ready to fight. There was, as you say, a true sense of reality that came through. He was unpolished yet still poised. I imagine it's all subjective and arbitrary, this "candidate chemistry" thing, but I thoroughly enjoyed it. Then again, I like the boring/wonky interviews!

It's funny -- I started this wanting Bushco out. ABB. I didn't expect to find a candidate who instilled hope in my cynical heart.

[Nutmegger]

17. R&K [n\t]

[bunnies]

19. The Charlie Rose interview on Kos is from 2006.

Do you have a link to the one you're talking about? I missed it.

[Armstead]

20. Try this

http://www.charlierose.com/home

[frogmarch]

22. Thanks! Downloading it now. :-)

[AnneD]

21. I think he is our best hope....

not only for wining the election, but our future. At least he remembers what it is like to be middle class. I trust his jugdement.

I'm tired of Clinton/Bush. I want Obama in office but he needs more seasoning. Perhaps as Edwards' VP. I would feel safer knowing he was a heart beat away too.

[Carrieyazel]

24. Edwards did well, but Richardson was far better when he was on.

Richardson was more conversational, more likable and more concise. Still, this is the best I've seen of Edwards all year.

[Armstead]

26. It creates different perceptions when the candidates have a chance to actually talk

All of the candidates are better served by this format of actual questions and the opportunity to give real answers instead of having some moron anchorbot saying "That's all" after 30 seconds.

[frogmarch]

27. I totally agree! n/t