Why We Will Miss John Edwards

John Edwards was a flawed candidate and the media made sure to tell us all about his flaws from the very beginning. He was vain and liked expensive haircuts. He was an opportunistic rich guy, who, even though he talked about poverty and class, was building the biggest house in North Carolina.

He was supposedly a late convert to his class based populism and had voted as a Southern moderate in the Senate. He was ambitious and wanted to run for President from the time he first campaigned for the Senate in North Carolina.

I don't know John Edwards but I can see there's probably some truth in these charges. Personally though, the reason I will miss John Edwards in this race is simply because now I don't have anyone to vote for.

What was different about Edwards was that he was running against the system, whereas Hillary IS the system and Obama would like to be. Edwards took strong stands early that became progressively stronger as the campaign wore on.

Edwards made clear that the Insurance companies were the reason we didn't have Universal Health Care and that they would have to be beaten to get it. He asserted that the system in Washington was rigged by corporate power to protect corporate interests.

Edwards made clear that the interests of Wall Street were not the interests of Main Street; that fairness to the tax code had to be restored; that every trade deal had to put workers and wages first.

Edwards proposed Public Financing of political campaigns. He asserted that the corporate lobbyists would have to be driven from the halls of the Capitol if we were to have a chance at real change, but noted that real change also demanded "corporate power be put at the service of democracy and not the other way around."

Edwards proposed capping greenhouse gases and "ratcheting down the cap every year" if we were to have a chance at stopping global warming. He was honest enough to say upfront that sacrifice was going to be required from all of us if we were stop ecological disaster, but also that the bottom line on Wall Street was going to have to be weighed against a standard of sound environmental practice and policy.

These were pretty radical positions, but the way Hillary and Obama ended up mimicking many of them you wouldn't have known that one candidate was running against the system and the other two were running to be in charge of it.

However this was supposed to be a change election. It was important for Hillary and Obama that Edwards not outflank them on the Left by too much lest he be identified as the REAL candidate of change. So rather than a verb, change became, in this election, first a noun, and then a commodity.

It was so disgusting to watch -- and so effective -- that we should probably count on this kind of Hillary-Obama newspeak becoming a feature of future Democratic primary campaigns from now on.

In fairness to Hillary-Obama, it is also possible that Edwards did not mean to get so far ahead of himself, that he would have preferred to situate himself closer to the political center. It is possible that Edwards was actually forced to the hard populist positions he ended up embracing by the soft center-left focus of the other two campaigns.

It is possible, but nevertheless the fact remains that Edwards went there and the other campaigns were dragged far beyond their consultant driven comfort zone because of it.

In leaving the race, Edwards maintained that we are at a transformational moment--that there is no going back. I think this is true though we can be sure that whoever the eventual nominee is will try to go back. On the real side we know that Hillary is a creature of the corporate status quo and Obama, like Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter before him, has a genuine emotional need for compromise and consensus politics.

But I think events will outrun them. As Humphrey Bogart once said to Paul Henreid, "Well Mr. Laszlo, it seems like Destiny has taken a hand."

Comments

[Spookcatcher]

The Election Process has been reduced to American Idol. It is a popularity contests but the voting as well as the coverage is fixed and the outcomes are programmed. We are living back in the fifties when the games shows finally got caught fixing the shows everyway possible. Only washers, dryers, and trips and Tv's and Cars as the aren't the prize, its the existence of a Democracy or at the very least a lttile bit of a Republic left standing.

[Nutcase]

Why will we miss Edwards? Clinton. Obama. McCain. Romney.

cognito ergo populistae

[sterniklov]

With all due respect to everyone...get a grip! Yes, John Edwards was running the most progressive campaign in the race, at least in rhetoric. Yet it's worth noting that Russ Feingold would not endorse him because he felt Edwards was either a hypocrite or very late to the game, supporting all sorts of thing that he voted against while he was actually in office.

Barack Obama, on the other hand, had the most liberal voting record in the Senate last year. Anyone doubting that he is truly a progressive candidate—and marks a clear difference from Hillary Clinton—should look at Saturday's NY Times. In the Times (a paper which endorsed Clinton) Obama spells out how he wants "bottom-up economic growth," to be sparked by "shifting the tax burden more the wealthy and making investments—in health care, alternative-energy research and education..."

In the same piece, we are told, "Clinton advisers say Mr. Obama has been unrealistic about paying for his tax cuts and would end up forfeiting the Democrats' hard-won reputation for fiscal discipline."

Mr. Abrams claims to be able to see into Obama's soul, or at least his "emotional need." But here's a real policy difference, in black-and-white—and one worth voting on.

Under Hillary Clinton, we will do the same thing we did under her husband: spend all our hard-won political capital balancing the budget on the backs of the middle- and working-classes, and thereby shrink the size of the Democratic party and disillusion millions of new liberal voters once again. Under Obama, there is at least a real chance for a politics that will put our money where we want to see it, and expand the liberal base.

I realize others may see it differently and believe that Clinton is the more liberal candidate. In that case, I say...act on your conviction! Vote for her!

Whatever you do, don't be holier-than-thou. Don't give in to despair, or waste your vote on a campaign that has given up.

A. Sterniklov

[outnow]

Larry,

You said it all. There are two issues that always seem to rear their ugly heads. One, is the eternal class struggle that John Edwards and FDR saw so clearly. While Ronald Reagan was busting unions and declaring class warfare against the middle class, America bought into the propaganda and real wages declined for the rank-and-file worker in America.

Hillary is totally wrong. She is not the antidote to Bush. She is the placeholder, as was Bill Clinton, triangulating their way to the bank with oil deals from the Caspian Sea during the mid-90's. The Clintons waged class warfare by so-called free trade agreements. They did not and will not fight back for the middle class.

Secondly, the growth of the religious fundamentals worldwide threatens us with various permutations of a Taliban, Christian, Jewish, or Muslim. John Edwards did not stoop to pandering to these ultra-right wing zealots for political gain. Instead he threatened to break up the media conglomerates and bust the trusts. Jim Webb is an example of a progressive. He knows that the right will resist any progressive legislation and fight to the death to eliminate social security and resist universal healthcare.

Obama is being dishonest or naive to think that the trillions of dollars in social benefits deserved by the People will be willing turned over because he will go on C-Span! He is even sending fliers to scare people out of universal coverage.

While Karl Marx is vilified he was right about the the fact that the communal system breaks down and that capital enslaves labor by fancy economic systems that are rigged. Without "religion" this could not be legitimized. Edwards knew the truth, Obama and Hillary won't admit it.

[nellie]

The Edwards campaign was an education for all of us about the media and how it manipulates our ability to govern ourselves—how it ensures that business will maintain control over our laws and our policies.

From the beginning, Edwards was maligned, ridiculed, and marginalized. The public never got exposure to his policies until they became the platform policies of Clinton and Obama. The real crusader for justice in this campaign was denied any real opportunity to win the nomination.

Proof of this is coverage of his second place win in Iowa. The outcome of this caucus was covered as if it was an Obama victory over Hillary Clinton.

Until we reform the media, or build a media that we can trust, worthy candidates like Edwards will continue to be discounted until they withdraw from elections—at which point they will be hailed as the only true champion of the American people.

[factanonverba]

I intend to vote for John Edwards on Tuesday and I urge others to do the same. It is a protest no doubt but what else can one do when one's voice has been silenced by the powers that be.

[amberglow]

i'm voting for him anyway on Tues--you all can too.

It'll send a message to the others, and to the party, i'm hoping.

[jwarrener]

I have been following politics for the past 38 years. I have supported my share of candidates.
I am amazed to admit that John Edwards' withdrawal was the only one that ever really depressed me. Somehow he swept me up in his visage of America. Not too many politicians have that ability anymore. What is also interesting is the many people saying that no matter what they will still vote for him in the primaries and many even saying they will write his name in on the general election.

I really hope that we see him in the political arena again.

[GreedyOldPsychopaths]

"I don't know John Edwards but I can see there's probably some truth in these charges."

And if you, Larry, a proclaimed Edwards supporter, concede the power of Kool-Aid, then what suppose we of the general public?

All candidates, to some degree, espouse certain hypocrisy, real or perceived. Yet it was Edwards that received an inordinate focus of sincerity speculation and "labeling" by the media and his opponents' supporters, especially the Obama crowd.

When we as an electorate accept as substantive the "labeling" and "categorizing" of individuals by others, then we condemn and subjugate ourselves to their control.

Thanks Larry for a great post!

[raymichael]

I miss John reminding me of the message he had and still does. Of all the actions that we can take now is to remember the message he had and act on it. John advocated publicly financed campaigns. Get on the email lists of organizations that are backing public financing and then support them in their efforts to get it. Global warming- get on the email lists of organizations involved in this and support them in their efforts. Think about what John said and advocated for, then support something! It doesn't have to be money although it could be. Writing emails and letters is an effective way you can support causes. When you shop, buy as local as possible and USA if possible. You can help keep John alive by keeping his dream alive. John is keeping his message alive by not 'endorsing' anyone for as long as possible. Other candidates are talking about his message to pander your vote, but as soon as he endorses someone his ideas will be talked about less if at all.

[WASanford]

I'm 74 years old and I've voted since my 21st birthday. In all that time with only very few exceptions, I've had to vote for the lesser of two evils. I had real hopes that this time would be different; then Edwards dropped out ot the race.
Our choice is less than sterling. Between two people and their followers who can't seem to stop bickering with each other and bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran McCain.
Now all we have left is our party and we must work keep it intact. It's our only hope! Try to encourage our candidates and their followers to stop the stupid arguing and aviod splitting our party. In the national election, reject the tempation to pick up your marbles and leave, vote for the Democrat. Once he/she wins, constantly remind her/him of John's message. We just may get some of John's agenda accomplished anyway.
Read RJ Eskow's "Warning: This Party May Self-Destruct in Ten Months" here on today's Huff Post.

[MyThought]

Edwards worked hard for the victims of Katrina and we know that Bill Clinton worked hard to raise funds - does anyone know what Obama did about Katrina?

Also, I'm curious about the health care issue - because Clinton is closer to Edwards on this issue that is very important to Edwards.

[Bsonder]

I too will be writing in John Edwards name on the ballot when the primaries finally get to Pennsylvania. Anyone working in the film industry knows that professional hairdressers, makeup artists, etc. earn a minimum of $400 whether they are used for one scene and work one hour or an 8-hour day, plus expenses and overtime. So the story about the $400 haircut was totally bogus. And as for the mansion he built for his wife and family, how big are Mitt Romney's many mansions? At least John didn't buy up companies and then fire all the employees and sell off the rest of the assets to earn his millions. And Mitt would make Blackwater his army of choice.

I hope that Hillary or Obama make John Edwards their next Attorney General if he wants the job. Chris Matthews was pushing for making him the next Labor Secretary but as AG he would have the most power to make real change.
I want to continue to see lots more of John Edwards,
whoever wins. I miss him already.

[WorkingClass]

The Democrats have chosen Hillary and Obama because the corporate media told them to. They are sheep. I encourage Edwards supporters to bolt the party. It is to corrupt to be reformed from within and the voters are to easily fooled to reform it at the ballot box. If you are a committed Democrat you are as much a part of the problem as committed Republicans.

[pmorlan]

John Edwards was the best candidate in the race and like fools we allowed the Media to convince us otherwise. What a bunch of silly lemmings we've become.