Is the recent spate of Anti-Edwards posts a conserted effort to discredit him?

[NoodleyAppendage]

Poll question: Is the recent spate of Anti-Edwards posts a conserted effort to discredit him?

While not perfect by any means, Edwards seems to be the blunt of a conserted effort around here to discredit him as a viable 2008 Dem candidate. This shift in anti-Edwards posts has been very notable. So what do you think is behind it?

[OKNancy]

1. None of the above

I've been here since 2001. It's nothing new, and it's just typical DU. Not plants or anything else, in fact many who are upset about it are longtime posters. It will be something else and someone else next week.

( My opinion is I don't give a crap about the house )

Edit to add: and now that I think about it... I get pretty irritated when bad behavior of Democrats and liberals is blamed on some outside force or some evil bogeyman. The bad behavior here lies right here within our membership.

[Lex]

2. Yes, I agree.

It's the DU GD Shiny Object Syndrome™

[hyphenate]

6. aka "The McGuffin"

aka the "red herring"

[TorchTheWitch]

22. bingo

"The bad behavior here lies right here within our membership."

That's about the size of it.

[RiverStone]

29. Agree here to!

Geez, thank goodness we don't march in lockstep around here. I don't think its a concerted effort at all to diss John. No more then some grand scheme is behind all the anti-Hillary threads.

Simply, we are an opinionated -diverse -expressive lot that has every right to disagree about who we want for Pres (or not).

In any thread, there could be trolls who get their jollies off by stirring things up - alas, they can hide under rocks via the internet.

I believe we will come together wonderfully (as we did last Novemeber) - in 08. :) There are so many Pres candidates in the kitchen right now. IMHO, as the DEM Presidential cooks thin out, so will some of the flame wars directed at candidate A vs Candidate B.

Till then, we remain mostly in agreement across the board on why we ALL can't stand freeper trools and Shrub's minions.

[rodeodance]

53. Its 'the eating our Own syndrome"

[illinoisprogressive]

3. I think it's a combination of mostly people on each side over reacting

I think the Edwards supporters are oversensitive and a bit over zealous about him, casting him as some perfect hero and when confronted with the fact that he is just a human and a common politician they get overly upset to have the idealistic role they put him in dashed. But, it will be dashed alot until they realize he is not an ideal but, a person.

I think the other side is a combination. Some are trolls. Some are people who are overzealous of their chosen candidate. Some are people who just don't like or trust him for various reasons. Some are unfair in that they are being a bit harsh on him. If they want to trash him, do his position on Iran. To choose a stupid house is just a reason to take out their dislike on him and so, it got blown up into an issue. I think they have been unfair to use money as a reason when their obvious dislike is from something else and to use a non issue is silly.

I personally do not like or dislike the guy.

[Frank Cannon]

9. I'm sorry, but this guy is not gonna be President

I mean this dude, not John Edwards.

You are not going to have a broke guy in a trailer home running and winning the Presidency. It's just not gonna happen. Ever.

[JVS]

23. Why is there no middle ground between 30,000 sq foot and a hovel?

[Frank Cannon]

30. Well, please tell me what the acceptable square footage range is.

You can add it to the DU reference page, just so everyone knows.

[JVS]

32. No, You explain to me how criticism of consuming to much is advocating a vow of poverty

I'm sure that when you go to a restaurant you can understand that there is a level of consumption falling somewhere between eating nothing at all and gorging yourself to the point of nausea. Why is it so difficult to apply similar concepts of consumption to housing?

[Frank Cannon]

38. No, you go first. You postulate that a house can be TOO big...

for a Presidential candidate. I'm asking you to define what TOO big is: square footage, price, etc.

It's really kind of rhetorical request, since I know you can't do it.

[JVS]

40. You are the one who decided that suggesting a house is too big...

is equivalent to wanting him to be a naked man on a toilet outside of a trailer. You explain how you made the judgement.

I didn't postulate that his house was too big, I questioned your bullshit technique of claiming that any criticism of a massive house is demanding that he live in a trailer with a toilet outside. Why is there no middle ground? Answer me that question. Until then I'll give you nothing!

I don't have to say how big is too big. Edward's house is distasteful and grotesque. He should know better than to buy an offensively opulent house.

[Frank Cannon]

49. But I'm not offended by Edwards' house

He's a very rich dude who has a lavish home. There are a lot of people like this who run for President. Why the fuck should I care?

I'm not going to argue for the existence of a "middle ground" on house size for a Presidential candidate because I think the whole topic is horseshit.

[JVS]

46. .

[Nye Bevan]

51. My definition of too big...

any house that results in more than 100 threads here on DU is probably too big.

You won't be seeing any Hillary house threads here, because I don't imagine that she will be moving out of her fairly average suburban house into some enormous monstrosity anytime soon. In fact I would expect that most of the candidates would be smart enough to avoid this kind of controversy.

[demnan]

4. Who knows

Frankly I'm not as interested in the 08 campaign as in impeaching Bush. Unless we can impeach there might not even be an 08.

[Just-plain-Kathy]

5. You left out the option...found out he's a hawk

You see, Edwards isn’t like the other spineless senators who gave Bush the power to go into Iraq.

Edwards actually helped lead the war into Iraq. Edwards (along with the likes of John McCain and Zell Miller) co-sponsored Joe Lieberman’s resolution authorizing the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.

And now, as we’re all trying to get out of Iraq...he’s geting hawkish about Iran.


Here’s a link showing how Edwards co-sponsored Lieberman’s resolution to go into Iraq...

http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d107:SJ00046:@@@P


Here’s a news article reporting Edwards’ view on Iraq...

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3355802,00.html

...We don't need anymore hawks in the White House.

[Clark2008]

7. Tee hee....

Kathy - you'll need a flame-retardant suit now.

:applause:

[Just-plain-Kathy]

12. It's just the truth...

I know that Bush sqirmed his way into the White Houe...but he did have a strong following from the "Bush is such a regular guy" crowd.

We can't be fooled again.

[mmonk]

8. Opposition candidates' supporters (either party)

seems the most likely answer.

[peacetalksforall]

10. I don't think Edwards deserves the crap that is coming at him.. I haven't followed

the house stuff, it appears to be vile.

I admire wealthy people who work in the public sector if they DO and SAY the right thing - Kennedy rarely, if ever, disappoints.

I think I've been mildly disappointed with a couple of votes (K), but it's impososible to know if a vote I didn't like was caused by a trick of the Republicans that forced the vote to go the way it shouldn't have had Republicans been more ethical.

Kennedy is a hero. Edwards could be.

[KoKo]

11. All our Dem Candidates should be examined as carefully as

the Repugs will examine them so that we can reasonably separate the truth from the fiction and the "in-between." Just my opinion...but why should Dem Candidates be less scrutinized than we Dems do to the Repugs...NOW that we have tools available.

Hero Worship and imparting "Rock Star" qualities to any candidate will only end up in disillusionment and deception. Haven't we had enough of both in our American History? :shrug:

[mondo joe]

13. Or: Just the usual circular firing squad. NT

[Crunchy Frog]

14. The vast majority of posts that I've seen have been pro-Edwards.

A tiny number of posts critical of his new house, and a huge number of threads posting in defense of him. About ten threads defending him for every one thread that's critical of him. I think there's been a much bigger attempt to paint him as a victim of attacks than there have been actual attacks on him.

I really could care less about the house, and have been using the "hide threads" feature to avoid having to look at all those pointless discussions.

In my experience here, whenever someone's candidate comes under criticism, people think he's being uniquely targeted. I'm just not buying it in this instance.

[bling bling]

16. Thank you!!!

That's exactly what I've noticed too. I've also noticed that most of the people responding to the Edwards bashers are quite a bit nastier in the discussion.

Example:

DU'er: "I think Edwards house is going to hurt his campaign."
Responder: "I think you should STFU. You're just jealous."

DU'er: "I think Edwards house is obscenely big."
Responder: "Well this is AMERICA, so get the fuck over it, communist. The man EARNED his money and he can live wherever he wants to, however he wants to, and you have no right to judge him.

DU'er: "I think the Edwards' should lead by example and consider the impact of their footprint."
Responder: "I see the RW trolls are out in force again BASHING John Edwards."

[CarolNYC]

18. Yep, looks to me like a concerted effort

on the part of Edwards supporters to keep this issue in the limelight...Go figure....

[JVS]

24. Yes, it appears they are milking their "suffering"

[DiverDave]

35. HUH?

Thats some reach you got there.

Just amazing, as an Edwards supporter I never knew I craved abuse...go figure.

[Quixote1818]

20. Thats exactly right.

I posted on both sides. Some of my early threads were in support of Edwards then I changed my mind after reading a number of threads. It became an environmental issue for me.

[nedbal]

28. Thats exactly right. It became an environmental issue for me

[Quantess]

15. Edwards bashing is getting old.

Cheap shots and irrelevant criticisms. I like Edwards.

[donheld]

17. Character Assassination

Plain and simply

[Quixote1818]

19. None of the above. Just good honest debate. nt

[Bombtrack]

21. As someone who isn't supporting Edwards this time around, I just know its bullshit

maybe concerted bullshit, but certainly bullshit.

John Edwards is a good man. A person of vast wealth purchasing a very large house is the logical thing to do. People who don't buy houses when they could are really quite foolish the overwhelming ammount of the time. Investment 101 people.

[pennylane100]

25. Remember how the rest of democratic candidates tried to destroy Dean

when he was the front runner. Shame on them. The more I hear about the criticism of Edwards, the more I lean to signing up campaign for him. I am just waiting a while longer in case Al (the amazing) Gore decides to ender the race.

[RegimeChange2008]

48. The roots of the anti-Dean attacks were obvious from the beginning.

No names mentioned, but the initials are D-L-C.

As far as Edwards goes, it seems to me that it's the fact that two stories broke at around the same time.

The whole controversy about his big house is the one that is getting the most publicity. And while I see the point of those who object to Edwards' apparent hypocrisy, given his populist anti poverty message, this story pales in comparison to the fact that he gave a speech in Israel in front of a Likudist neocon audience which was very much in favor of expanding the Likud/PNAC insane, genocidal, imperialist, fascist foreign policy into Iran. Edwards claims to realize what a mistake Iraq was, but now is willing to make an even larger mistake, based on the same fabricated questionable evidence manufactured by the exact same people.

This simply isn't acceptable. Not from Edwards. Not from Hillary. Not from any candidate who wants the nomination of my party.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

26. Just typical election politics. Plenty more to come.

Since when has American politics ever been dignified, civil, or even, slightly honest?

Jeeez! You'd think mudslinging and irrelevance was a recent invention.

Edwards has plenty of questionable stances to answer for. As do all the candidates.

[Guaranteed]

27. Honestly haven't seen one in quite awhile now.

Seen a whole lot of posts complaining about all the "Edwards bashing," though.

[FreeStateDemocrat]

31. Only the start of money driven campaigns that are targeting sites like DU with operatives.

[NoodleyAppendage]

33. I've long suspected such plants attempting to sway webroots opinion.

I've long thought that there was a corp of Kerry supporters (some of which may be paid) who vociferously advocate for Kerry whenever their guy was on the ropes. I kept on seeing the same DU names pop-up on threads critical of Kerry and even asked some if they were connected with his campaign...most did not respond to repeated requests on possible conflicts of interest.

If I were a betting man, I would peg the anti-Edwards effort on Hillary. She has the most to gain from a maximal influx of anti-Edwards online sentiment. She's still a Net grassroots neophyte, so putting Edwards on the defensive in this domain gives her some breathing room and forces Edwards to fight to keep his Web base/presence.

J

[LSK]

34. the issues?

:shrug:

[NoodleyAppendage]

36. His house. His wealth. The majority are trying to say he's hypocritical because he's not a pauper.

Those issues...

J

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

37. Concerted?

No.

[WI_DEM]

39. it's from certain supporters of other candidates who see him as a threat

to the chances of their own candidate, somebody they see only through rose colored glasses.

[NorthernSpy]

41. Lord, I hope so!

Given the noises Edwards has made on the subject of Iran, "a concerted effort to discredit him" is entirely in order -- and the sooner it happens, the better.

I want the war stopped. I don't want it escalated into other countries. We cannot afford another warmonger in the White House.

[dogman]

42. True, but how can war with Iran be overblown?

I think the failure of the Iraq War is behind it. I don't think we can wait till we are deep in another quagmire to receive an apology. The home threads are of no interest to me, but that does not make the concern of others irrelevant. His supporters aren't being restricted from defending him.

[chaska]

43. Another badly worded poll. It's either/or thinking....

People (Dems) are genuinely concerned. The problem is that they don't stop to think that a person can do something negative like buying a house that is less than friendly to the environment and still be doing good things for said environment. People are complex ... and they screw up too. Doesn't make them evil.

[NoodleyAppendage]

44. Get over it. What's he supposed to do...live in a recycled cardboard box??

We ALL leave an imprint on nature. You can't escape it.

J

[KoKo]

45. Many of the Homeless live in recycled cardboard boxes, though.

:eyes:

[chaska]

47. Get over what? I wasn't condemning him....

Just trying to explain the over-reaction(s).

[leftofthedial]

50. As one of the posters of a thread critical of Edwards,

I assure you I am part of no concerted effort. I am not a disruptor (which I have been called). I am not a freeper (which I have been called). I am not a "paid operative" (which I have been called). I expect much--as should we all--from anyone who expects my support for become President at the most challenging juncture in human history.

[Skidmore]

52. I'd say this is in the NoPoopSherlock thread category.