cross-posted from MyDD and Daily Kos
I’ve noticed a meme developing in the blogosphere, that John Edwards supposedly is only attacking and not providing any positive message for his campaign. I encourage you not to confuse what you read on the blogs (reports by journalists obsessed with process stories or diaries based on a campaign press release) with what Iowans have been seeing and hearing from Edwards lately.
The weekend before Thanksgiving, volunteers hand-delivered the 80-page policy book containing details on Edwards’ proposals to thousands of Democratic households in Iowa.
Since late October, active Iowa Democrats have received direct-mail pieces from Edwards about once a week. I diaried the first two of these, about his biography and his most important policy proposals and about his plan for Iraq. Since then, he has sent out a mailer on health care, a Thanksgiving card, a piece on proposals to benefit American families and a piece on providing a better life for our children. At the bottom of this diary I will reproduce the text of one of these mailers, “Fighting for American Families.”
But before I do that, I want to talk about a theme underlying Edwards’ communications with Iowans, which I believe will resonate with caucus-goers.
More is after the jump.
The message goes beyond any laundry list of policies. He is tapping into the frustration Democrats feel about our party’s failure to advance core Democratic values since taking control of Congress.
In the first tv ad Edwards aired in Iowa this fall, he said:
“It is time for our party, the Democratic Party, to show a little backbone, to have a little guts, to stand up for working men and women. If we are not their voice, they will never have a voice.”
If you listen to Clinton, Dodd, Richardson and Biden campaign in Iowa, they talk a lot about their experience, their ideas that would benefit the middle class, and the fact that they are ready to lead. You get the impression that the main problem of recent years has been the total failure of presidential leadership, and that if we put someone capable in White House, we will quickly turn things around.
Barack Obama also touts his personal leadership qualities (judgment, vision), as well as some policy ideas, but he adds a promise to change the system. He suggests that he can move our country beyond bitter partisan divides and the culture wars that are rooted in the 1960s.
But if you ask most Democrats what the big systemic problems are in American politics, are they going to say partisanship and the culture wars?
I don’t think so. I think that active Democrats are angry that our Congressional majorities seem unable to stand up to the deeply unpopular Bush administration. Why aren’t our leaders showing more backbone when it comes to funding the Iraq war or restoring our civil liberties?
Why are corporate interests still able to stifle reforms, such as last month’s effort to close a loophole allowing people earning tens of millions of dollars a year to pay only 15 percent taxes on their income?
Democrats in my county, which will contribute nearly 15 percent of the state delegates, are represented in Congress by “Bush dog” Leonard Boswell, who has failed to stand up to Bush on torture, Iraq funding, and big subsidies for the fossil-fuel industries.
Most of the other large counties in terms of Democratic state delegates lie in Iowa’s 1st or 2nd Congressional districts, where last year voters finally elected Democrats to represent them. Bruce Braley and Dave Loebsack have solid, progressive voting records so far, but don’t you think many of their constituents are disappointed in the party’s Congressional leadership?
John Edwards is not only advocating policies that would benefit the middle class, but also tapping into the sense that Democrats need more backbone, not more accommodation.
He recognizes that our willingness to fight for systemic change will affect the legacy we leave to the next generation. This ad went up on the air in Iowa on Monday:
What we want to make certain is true is that our children have a better life than we’ve had. Twenty generations of Americans before us have ensured that that was true.
And if we want to do that, we’re going to have to be willing to take on this corrupt system and change it. And if we’re not going to do it, we’re going to have to be willing to look our children in the eye and say we’re going to leave this mess for you.
This is the great moral test of our generation, and we will meet that test.
I’m John Edwards and I approve this message.
We need a president who is determined to fight the interests that frustrate progressive change.
The text of one recent mailer from Edwards is below. Next week I will diary another direct-mail piece, which I also thought was very strong.
This mailer is on one piece of legal-size paper. One side has photos of Edwards and some of his supporters, along with this text:
Fighting for American Families
JOHN EDWARDS–Standing up for the dignity of a job and doing what’s right for America’s workers
This is the text on the other side:
John Edwards–The backbone to stand up for working people and restore the promise of America
“My parents taught me to believe in people, hard work and the sacred obligation of each generation to the next.”–John Edwards
The system in Washington is rigged
It is rigged by the powerful special interests and their lobbyists to benefit the very few at the expense of the many. NAFTA shipped American jobs overseas and the tax code rewards corporations for it. And big insurance and drug companies spend millions to block health care reform.
We need to say no to corporate greed
We need a leader with the courage and the strength to say no to corporate greed and stand up for working America. Together, the American people can restore the promise of our great country.
John Edwards has been fighting for regular Americans his whole life
Going to the mill alongside his father, John learned the meaning of hard work and perseverance. The first in his family to go to college, he worked his way through school and then walked into courtrooms on behalf of children and families against armies of corporate lawyers…and won. We can count on him to stand up for is.
The John Edwards Plan to Fight for American Families
Smart and Safe Trade
John opposed NAFTA and will reform our trade policies:
Will only sign trade deals that help workers–not multinational corporations.
Stop Chinese currency manipulation
End tax breaks for shipping jobs overseas
Block unsafe toys and food at the border
Pension and Retirement Security
John will end special treatment for CEO pensions when workers are cheated out of theirs. He will require every business to provide a pension plan or retirement account, and the government will match middle-class savings.
True Universal Health Care
There’s no excuse for politicians in Washington having health care when 47 million Americans do not.
Require universal coverage
Make businesses help pay
Stand up to HMOs and drug companies to cut costs
Restore Tax Fairness
John will rewrite the tax code to make it simpler and fairer and to help working families:
New middle-class tax relief
Shut down special loopholes for insiders
Repeal Bush tax cuts for people making more than $200,000 a year
Read all the details at www.johnedwards.com/iowa
5 Comments
Positively...Not
As with seemingly every argument in favor of John Edwards, this one is undercut by the candidate himself. To wit, today’s launch by the Edwards campaign of the “America Belongs to Us” website, featuring its uplifting and positive “Outrage of the Day” section.
John Edwards has a serious political anger management problem. As irresistible as it evidently is for him to try to turn this election into a national therapy session, there is too much at stake to permit John Edwards to indulge his need for catharsis at the expense of delivering the big change the country needs.
I don’t yet know who I’ll be supporting on caucus night, but I do know I will be opposing John Edwards.
~iPol
ipol Wed 28 Nov 12:56 PM
if you're not outraged
you’re not paying attention.
Seriously, the one trying to turn this campaign into a national therapy session seems to be Barack Obama, whose volunteers are handing out literature including this quotation from Obama:
I don’t need a vehicle for my dreams and aspirations. I need a candidate who will aim high and try to address the systemic problems in Washington.
desmoinesdem Wed 28 Nov 1:28 PM
After the last 15 years
the last thing I feel we need is more anger. Some national therapy is certainly in order. Both Hillary and Edwards will guarantee we’ll continue the mindless partisan fighting. After W, I don’t blame D’s for feeling that way. But we need to get over it and act like reasonable adults.
With Edwards, I’m also very concerned about the electability issue. This country does not like to elect angry candidates. Also, I’m absolutely amazed at the number of progressive/lefty D’s who are lining up behind him. Nobody exemplifies Kucinich’s good debate line about wanting a president who is right the first time better than Edwards. He’s been late to the game on so many big progressive issues. Like Romney, at some point of time constant “maturing” and “evolving” starts to look an awful lot like politically convenient positioning. With his history, I just don’t have faith in him making the right calls when new, unexpected challenges come up.
rf Wed 28 Nov 7:36 PM
he has been very consistent
on trade and labor issues (97 percent rating on voting record), and those are important to many lefties, especially when you see so many in the Robert Rubin crowd lining up behind Hillary and Obama.
He is the only candidate to give significant attention to a comprehensive strategy to battle the root causes of poverty.
He is against building new nuclear power plants (which Obama will not rule out) and does not have a history of voting for coal interests as Obama does. So I give him the edge on environmental issues as well.
His voting record on women’s rights was 100 percent. Obama voted “present” on several key votes relating to a woman’s right to choose when he was in the Illinois Senate.
So no, Edwards has not been “late to the game” on many big progressive issues.
desmoinesdem Wed 28 Nov 8:40 PM
and speaking of electability
Six months ago I would absolutely have agreed that Obama was more electable than Hillary. At this point I would no longer agree (though I still think Obama would be a better president than Hillary).
desmoinesdem Wed 28 Nov 8:41 PM