New John Edwards Sells Less Biography, More Liberal Issues

[babylonsister]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/10/AR2007031001374.html

New John Edwards Sells Less Biography, More Liberal Issues

By Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, March 11, 2007; Page A01

COUNCIL BLUFFS, Iowa, March 10 -- When he first ran for president, then-Sen. John Edwards (N.C.) was the fresh face in the Democratic Party, a perpetually buoyant campaigner who built his candidacy around his own biography and whose success in the primaries earned him a place on the 2004 Democratic ticket.

Fast-forward to today, and there is a new John Edwards on the campaign trail. His demeanor is more serious and his elbows far sharper than four years ago. Two years after leaving the Senate, he rarely mentions his time in Washington. Nor does he talk about his experience as Massachusetts Sen. John F. Kerry's vice presidential running mate.

His political positions also have more edge. An emphasis on biography has given way to a focus on issues, where there has been a demonstrable shift to the left -- on the Iraq war, health care and the federal budget deficit. The changes have given him entree to the liberal voters and constituencies who are influential in selecting Democratic presidential nominees.

Although he labors in their shadows, Edwards has drawn attention from the party's two glamour candidates, Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) and Barack Obama (Ill.), this year's fresh face. Both rivals recognize the potential threat he carries to their candidacies, particularly in Iowa, Nevada, South Carolina and New Hampshire, states where the nomination battle begins.

Edwards's moves have raised eyebrows inside the party among those who wonder whether the differences indicate a genuine evolution or pure political calculation.

more...

[pstans]

1. Political calculation?

Edwards's moves have raised eyebrows inside the party among those who wonder whether the differences indicate a genuine evolution or pure political calculation.

I feel like Hillary's campaign is pure political calculation.

[BayCityProgressive]

2. even if he is calculating

at least he is calculating with the left and not the right like a lot of our "Democrats".

[benny05]

4. Hmmm

I'm not a FOH and for a good reason: I don't have a great bankroll to offer her.

[pstans]

5. I attended Edwards event in Iowa on Sat.

Here's the link... http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=152&topic_id=15878&mesg_id=15878. I even linked to your blog in the writeup.

[benny05]

12. Thanks for the nice shout out and report

I envy Iowans who get to see all of the politicians, as they wish, up close like this. I have traveled far and wide to do it.

I think my question is what will be on Iowan minds in the next 9 months: will Obama and Clinton (as Edwards does) try to really understand and see what they desire in the next President? My guess is that you are asking the same.

Unlike the past, the Dem preferred in the Iowa primary will go further this time into the Dem nomination and General Election in this cycle. This time we are all independent in our choices, not beholding to a sitting Pres or VP running for election in 2008.

BTW, Still I have your picture in my digital photos group and will give you an invite if you PM here (if I haven't offered be4). The e-people at the Edwards campaign have seen them and others I took that night in Iowa on Dec 28th when I met you. They appreciated the photos. That was one of best experiences I had: meeting you and other Iowans, albeit I traveled 6.5 hours, with only 2 hours sleep the night before. But I wanted to be there. Iowans are used to this better than an Illinois resident. :-)

Edwards campaign is finally getting into gear.

[w4rma]

9. Edwards has done a lot of research in the past few years. (nt)

[seasat]

3. Edwards has hit the books since the last campaign.

I like policy wonks. After the idiot we've had in the White House, I want someone that understands policy and the data behind it. In 2004, I supported Bob Graham because of his knowledge. Edwards didn't impress me in 2004 due to (it seemed) a lack of knowledge about details on issues. However, I am pretty impressed with what I've seen of him this campaign. He has obviously studied the issues and has greater depth of knowledge. Even though Richardson is my first choice, I'd definitely have no problem supporting Edwards if he gets the nomination.

[spooky3]

7. he offered very detailed plans in the 2004 campaign.

There were many links on his site to overviews of the plans and he took copies of his plans to events to distribute.

Unfortunately, most voters don't want to read lengthy descriptions and details and as the campaign wore on, he simplified his approach considerably.

[Clarkie1]

6. Just talking talk should never be enough to win the presidency.

I base my vote on proven judgment and leadership skills.

Just saying stuff won't win my vote.

[w4rma]

11. I'm beginning to believe that Clark isn't going to jump into the campaign.

He doesn't have the name recognition that would allow Al Gore to jump in at the last minute, or the fundraising ability. I think it's going to be either Hillary, Obama, Edwards or Gore. Clark would be my choice right behind Edwards. (Gore is my top choice, of course.) I can't stand Hillary, she's not trustworthy and does little else but pander. Obama doesn't address the issues directly, plus he seems like the "intellectual"/Adlai Stevenson candidate.

[Catchawave]

8. Nice article....

....looks like the MSM is starting to "get it".

:toast:

[saltpoint]

10. It feels good to me what Edwards' team is doing. It feels as if they

are much less likely to allow mainstream media outlets leeway in defining their intent and their mode of operation.

The FOX News debate in Nevada is one example, but with David Bonior aboard, I think the Edwards team is going to be coming at the public from many different angles, all of them effective.

If it frustrates Brit Hume that he can't pigeonhole a strong Democratic candidate, good.

[bluehighways911]

13. He'll Say Anything To Get Elected

He was gung ho for war, till he decided to run for veep.

[1932]

15. It's better than saying all the wrong things so that you lose.

And I think Edwards, more than most candidates, has a pretty clear moral center.

[1932]

14. Why would he go over his bio again? Everyone knows him after '04.

Now it's time to map the policies over the bio.