On Thursday I wrote about how Ed Fallon’s I’M for Iowa movement has become an issue in the campaign for the Democratic nomination in the third Congressional district.

I am returning to the topic to address some points Chase Martyn raised in an article for Iowa Independent, “FEC disputes Fallon campaign statement,” and in the comment thread below that article. I agree with Chase on a couple of specifics, but disagree with the larger point he is making.

My post included the text of an April 2 press release from Fallon’s campaign titled, “FEC Confirms Boswell’s Allegations Baseless Against Fallon.” It asserted that the information services department of the Federal Election Commission “confirmed that Ed Fallon has done nothing illegal or unethical.”

An FEC spokesperson told Iowa Independent, “No Commission employee made any determination relative to the specific circumstances of any campaign. Only the Commission can make such a determination.”

Reading Fallon’s press release, it appears that a campaign official reviewed the relevant portions of the rules with someone from the FEC in order to confirm the content and/or intent of those rules. But the release should not have claimed the FEC confirmed the Fallon campaign’s position regarding I’M for Iowa.

I have to agree with Chase that this kind of “amateur mistake” is not going to cut it. Fallon’s press shop needs to have an extra copy editor and tighter supervision to make sure nothing like this happens again.

Chase is troubled by the fact that I’M for Iowa is not legally obliged to disclose its donors:

What if Leonard Boswell sent out an email from his personal email account soliciting donations to his personal bank account in exchange for intangible political advocacy services?

Don’t you think Ed Fallon would be the first in line to criticize him for inviting corruption?  Even if, as Fallon says (and I believe him), he respects Boswell and doesn’t think he’s an evil or dishonest man, Boswell’s actions would introduce too many ethical questions to allow him to effectively represent us in Congress.

I agree that if Fallon were elected to Congress, it would be inappropriate for him to continue to raise money for outside political advocacy by I’M for Iowa. In that event, it would be best to shut down I’M for Iowa or transfer it to new ownership outside Fallon’s household, so as not to create any opportunities for (or even the appearance of) corruption.

Chase’s larger point seems to be that Fallon should have made I’M for Iowa a 501(c)4 organization rather than a general partnership.

I don’t know the details about what it takes to set up a 501(c)4 compared to a business like I’M for Iowa. I know from friends who are in the small business world that it gets complicated when you are trying to decide whether to establish a general partnership, an S-corp, a limited liability corporation, etc.  Each variant has pros and cons.

I am involved in several non-profit organizations, and it is frustrating not to be able to take a position on certain issues because of limitations related to 501(c)3 status. While 501(c)4 organizations can undertake political advocacy, the reality is that some controversial issues get overlooked by 501(c)4s as well.

So I see a niche for a business like I’M for Iowa, although as I wrote in my previous post, I have never contributed to I’M for Iowa and haven’t followed its work closely. If people are willing to contribute money to support Fallon’s political advocacy related to CAFOs, eminent domain, coal-fired power plants and so on, I have no problem with that.

It’s not as if I’M for Iowa is hiding what issues it works on.

Chase is concerned that Fallon could evade contribution caps for Congressional candidates by taking unlimited large donations for I’M for Iowa, paying himself a large salary through I’M for Iowa, and then turning around and writing large checks to his own Congressional campaign.

Fallon lives simply and has disclosed his modest income, so it would be a huge red flag if he started writing big checks to his Congressional campaign (which we would learn about from campaign disclosure documents).

Meanwhile, Boswell has already had American taxpayers write large checks to his campaign, in effect, by using his franking privilege to send out three glossy direct-mail pieces that had the look and feel of campaign literature. Those were very different from the typical constituent letter you get from Boswell’s office on regular paper in a regular envelope.

The Des Moines Register has given Boswell a “thistle” for using his franking privilege to send out material that “crashes across” the line between “legitimate constituent communication and overt political campaigning.” I have seen no estimate of how much these mailings cost taxpayers. Will Boswell’s office disclose those numbers?

Chase notes in a comment that

The issue of Boswell receiving corporate PAC money might be of concern to many, but we are only able to complain about it because he is forced to disclose it.

So now I am supposed to be more worried about hypothetical scenarios related to potential I’M for Iowa donations than I am about real, existing sources of Boswell’s campaign funds.

I know from experience that Boswell will often not represent my views on matters of great importance to me. I know that for years I have been getting numerous action alerts from progressive groups urging me to contact Boswell on this or that bill.

Invariably, they are just trying to get Boswell to take the mainstream, majority Democatic position for or against whatever bill is the issue.

Matthew Grimm recently noted in a piece for the Down with Tyranny! blog:

A more sophisticated rating [of Boswell’s voting record] at Progressive Punch’s When The Chips Are Down scale shows that when substantive matters with sharp partisan divides are voted on, Boswell is frequently ready to rubber stamp much of the Bush corporate agenda.

Here is a link to Progressive Punch’s scorecard for all House members. Boswell ranks 188th in terms of his support for progressive stands “when the chips are down.”

I don’t know why Boswell has voted the way he has. I don’t know if it has any relationship to campaign contributions from corporate PACs that promote different policies from the ones I favor. Ultimately, his reason for not consistently representing the Democratic Party’s views and values is irrelevant to me.

I want to worry less about whether my member of Congress will vote with the Democratic majority consistently, particularly if we end up with another four years of a Republican president.

I want to address one more point related to I’M for Iowa. While not claiming that Fallon has broken any laws, the Boswell campaign is trying to undermine the legitimacy of political advocacy work as opposed to a “real job.”

Boswell spokesman Mark Daley has suggested there is something illegitimate about I’M for Iowa:

“If he’s going to run on clean elections, then he should come clean about what he’s doing,” Boswell campaign spokesman Mark Daley said.

[…]

The ethics questions are the latest jab by Boswell ahead of the June 3 primary.

“On the surface, this looks like a fund to give him a job,” Daley said.

I notice a similar theme running through the comments by some Boswell supporters on various blogs: Fallon has never had a “real job.” I object to the idea that political advocacy and community organizing are not real jobs. Furthermore, I am active with 1000 Friends of Iowa, for which Fallon served as executive director for a number of years. Just because it’s in the non-profit sector doesn’t mean it’s not a job.

If Fallon decided to pursue political advocacy work full-time after the 2006 gubernatorial campaign, and people were willing to contribute money to I’M for Iowa, why is that less legitimate than getting people to invest in a different kind of business?

To me this looks like a smokescreen by the Boswell campaign to raise doubts about Fallon.

Why doesn’t Boswell want this campaign to be about his voting record and what he has done as representative for the third district?  

As I’ve noted recently, the primary to represent Iowa’s third Congressional district has taken a strange turn, whereby the incumbent seems to be trying to make the race primarily about the challenger’s faults rather than the incumbent’s record of service.

I’ve been too busy in non-blog life to write up the day to day sparring following a recent e-mail from Leonard Boswell’s campaign, which attacked Ed Fallon on several fronts.

The criticism of Fallon by Boswell’s surrogates and supporters has focused on four issues in particular:

1. alleged ethical questions related to Fallon’s work for the Independence Movement for Iowa (I’M for Iowa)

2. the salary Fallon drew from unspent campaign funds following the 2006 gubernatorial primary

3. allegations that Fallon pondered running for governor as an independent after losing that primary

4. Fallon’s stand against taking contributions from PACs while allowing PACs to encourage their individual members to donate to his campaign.

I will cover each of those issues in a separate diary, because I don’t have time to write about all of them at once. Today, I will address the allegations related to I’M for Iowa.

Chase Martyn of Iowa Independent published a piece on March 20 called “Fallon Faces Campaign Finance Questions.” Martyn raised questions about I’M for Iowa’s ability to collect unlimited donations without disclosing the sources:

Although I’M For Iowa participates in political advocacy and relies on contributions to stay afloat, its financial status does not fit the typical mold for this type of organization. Rather than registering it as a nonprofit organization with the Internal Revenue Service under sections 501(c)(3), 501(c)(4) or 527, Fallon runs the organization as a for-profit general partnership, making its tax status no different from most home businesses. He and his current campaign manager, Lynn Heuss, co-own the business.

But there is a difference between I’M For Iowa and most typical businesses: Rather than sell products and services to customers, it accepts donations for its political advocacy work. While the donations are not tax-deductible, the business can accept unlimited amounts of money. And because of its tax status, it is not required to disclose information about its sources of funding.

Martyn also noted that two e-mails sent to I’M for Iowa’s distribution list appeared to have promoted Fallon’s Congressional campaign:

On Feb. 29 an e-mail Fallon wrote to his I’M For Iowa group invited readers to visit his campaign Web site and participate in campaign activities to coincide with his 50th birthday. And on Jan. 12 he sent an I’M For Iowa e-mail announcing his candidacy for Congress and providing a lengthy critique of his primary opponent’s voting record.

The result is a complicated question involving the nuances of campaign finance law. Can an unincorporated business accept unlimited contributions without the requirement to disclose its contributors and then use contributed funds to promote a congressional campaign?

Martyn suggested that even if no laws were broken, the questions could hurt Fallon’s image, since he has been a strong advocate of clean-elections laws (such as the Voter-Owned Iowa Clean Elections Act, which would create a voluntary system of public financing of election campaigns).

The Des Moines Register didn’t follow up on the Iowa Independent story until after the Boswell campaign drew attention to it a week later. Thomas Beaumont examined various questions related to I’M for Iowa in the Register on March 29:

The organization is a trade name registered with the Polk County recorder. Small businesses such as lawn care services and other sole proprietorships register this way.

However, some other advocacy organizations, such as the 15-year-old, Des Moines-based State Public Policy Group, is also registered the same way as Fallon’s group.

I’M for Iowa is not a corporation, over which the Iowa secretary of state has regulatory authority.

Fallon’s group does not have to report its sources of money or what kind of business it is. But it receives no money from corporations, said Lynn Heuss, Fallon’s partner in the organization.

It runs on contributions from individuals who support its agenda, which includes limiting large livestock confinements, curbing global warming, promoting campaign finance reform and preventing abuse of eminent domain.

It seems clear that there is no legal barrier to using the I’M for Iowa e-mail list to promote Fallon’s Congressional campaign.

Martyn wrote in Iowa Independent:

A representative of the Federal Elections Commission would not comment on any matters that regulators may have to rule on, but FEC regulations do not seem to explicitly prohibit coordination between a campaign and an unincorporated business entity owned by a candidate.

Beaumont’s March 29 article for the Register notes that

Campaign finance law bars corporate contributions from federal races. However, the law specifies corporations and limited liability companies, which Fallon’s group is not.

According to a press release from Fallon’s campaign on April 2, the information services department of the Federal Election Commission “confirmed that Ed Fallon has done nothing illegal or unethical.” The full text of that release is after the jump, but here is a relevant excerpt:

Fallon campaign manager, Lynn Heuss, provided the rules the campaign reviewed with the FEC Information Officer: From the FEC Candidate Guide, Chapter 4, Section 10, “Partnerships are permitted to make contributions according to special rules. 110.1(e) and (k)(1). For further details, see Appendix B.”

In addition, Chapter 4, Section 12 of the FEC Candidate’s Guide says, “When candidates use their personal funds for campaign purposes, they are making contributions to their campaigns. Unlike other contributions, these candidate contributions are not subject to any limits. 110.10; AOs 1991-9, 1990-9, 1985-33 and 1985-60. They must, however, be reported (as discussed below).” And a little further down under “Definition of a Candidate’s “Personal Funds” it says, “The personal funds of a candidate include: Assets which the candidate has a legal right of access to or control over, and which he or she has legal title to or an equitable interest in, at the time of candidacy; income from employment; ….”

Heuss clarified the only contribution the business has made is sending out two email messages, which constitute an in-kind donation, and is not in violation of FEC regulation.

(UPDATE: Chase Martyn reported on April 3 that the FEC denied making “any determination relative to the specific circumstances of any campaign”. Martyn added that Iowa Independent had merely questioned the ethics of how I’M for Iowa was used and not alleged that any laws were broken.)

If no laws were broken, what is the problem? The Boswell campaign has tried to suggest that there is something underhanded about I’M for Iowa. From the Register’s March 29 article:

“If he’s going to run on clean elections, then he should come clean about what he’s doing,” Boswell campaign spokesman Mark Daley said.

[…]

The ethics questions are the latest jab by Boswell ahead of the June 3 primary.

“On the surface, this looks like a fund to give him a job,” Daley said.

Although I’ve donated to Fallon’s gubernatorial and Congressional campaigns, I have never contributed money to I’M for Iowa. As a result, I haven’t followed the organization’s work very closely.

But if individuals want to give money to help Fallon advocate for clean elections, or organize opposition to coal-fired power plants and CAFOs, what is the problem?  

Non-profit organizations are unable or unwilling to take a position on some kinds of political disputes, so there is a niche for a business like I’M for Iowa.

Does the Boswell campaign mean to suggest that advocacy work is not a real job? That seems strange. Barack Obama’s supporters and television commercials have praised that candidate for working as a community organizer after finishing law school.

Frankly, I’m a little surprised the Boswell campaign wants to go down this road, since Boswell’s campaign accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars from corporate PACs in 2007 alone. I’m supposed to be concerned about the hidden agenda of individuals who have contributed to I’M for Iowa?

Asked to comment in the Register article of March 29, Fallon characterized the allegations as typical establishment politics:

“The political establishment attacks a candidate on his strength,” Fallon said. “My strength is my commitment to issues. They are looking for ways to discredit me.”

Fallon’s campaign addressed the controversy in more detail in statements released on March 31 and April 2. The full text of those press releases are after the jump.

I am surprised to hear that the Republican National Committee’s Rules Committee has approved a proposed 2012 nominating calendar that would keep the Iowa caucuses first, followed by New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada:

http://www.desmoinesregister.c…

I had assumed that the GOP establishment would have the knives out for Iowa, since Mike Huckabee’s triumph here hurt establishment favorite Mitt Romney, while this year’s nominee John McCain, another establishment favorite, finished a distant fourth place.

Keeping Iowa first is not a done deal:

The measure, which passed 28-12, must now be approved by the rules committee meeting in August, scheduled for the week before the Republican National Convention in St. Paul. Finally, the measure must be approved by delegates to the convention.

Still, it’s interesting that this calendar has support within the RNC rules committee for now.

Since Barack Obama seems very likely to become the Democratic nominee, I would assume that the Iowa caucuses are safe if he wins the general election. If he loses to McCain, however, I expect members of the Democratic National Committee to change the calendar. A lot of angry Democrats will blame Iowans for picking a loser again.

I just got a robo-call from Governor Chet Culver inviting me to a fundraiser that he and Lieutenant Governor Patty Judge are hosting for Congressman Leonard Boswell this Saturday, April 5.

The event starts at 6:30 pm at the Hotel Fort Des Moines (10th and Walnut in Des Moines). The Too Many Strings Band will perform.

I received an invitation to this event in the mail two or three weeks ago. It looks like they are expecting contributions of at least $25 to Boswell for Congress, with hosts, sponsors and patrons donating at higher levels.

If any Bleeding Heartland readers attend this fundraiser, please put up a diary afterwards to let us know how it went, how big the crowd was, and anything interesting the speakers may have said.

I expect they will raise quite a lot of money for Boswell’s campaign this Saturday.

I didn’t see this last week, because despite my requests, the Boswell campaign is still not sending their press releases to me (desmoinesdem AT yahoo.com). But on Friday the United Auto Workers came out for Boswell in the Democratic primary to represent Iowa’s third Congressional district. Via Iowa True Blue, here is the release from the campaign:

Des Moines, IA – Congressman Leonard Boswell received the support of the Iowa United Auto Workers State Community Action League (CAP) today.  “I’m honored and proud to have earned the support of the UAW,” said Boswell.  “These hard working men and women share my commitment to protecting working families, making college more affordable, creating jobs that can’t be outsourced and bringing health care to every American.”

“Leonard Boswell stood by our side time and time again in pushing for CAFE standards that help the environment, lessen our dependence on foreign oil, and produce manufacturing jobs across our country,” said Dennis Walker, President of the Iowa UAW State CAP.  “He fought to stop the sale of Maytag when our jobs were attacked, and has worked tirelessly to bring jobs back to the Newton area.”

The UAW has approximately 30,000 active and retired members in Iowa.

It’s not clear how many UAW members in Iowa live in the third district. There used to be a sizable number in Jasper County, but that was before Maytag closed.

So far Boswell has swept the union endorsements, including the Service Employees International Union, despite Ed Fallon’s rock-solid voting record on labor. It’s extremely rare for unions to back a challenger in a primary.

How many foot soldiers will these unions provide for Boswell this spring? I think he will need the help to match the volunteers organized by the Fallon campaign.

Typically, a challenger needs to run a somewhat negative campaign in order to convince voters to reject the incumbent. The incumbent normally is content to ignore the challenger and run on his or her record of service.

In Iowa’s third Congressional district, a strange role reversal is underway, in which Ed Fallon is calling on Leonard Boswell’s campaign to “stop the negative attacks.”

Last week I posted the text of an e-mail from Boswell, which charged that Fallon is “no Democrat” and “has never acted in the best interest of our party.”

On March 24, Fallon issued a press release and a letter to his supporters responding to the attacks from the Boswell camp. It once again addresses Fallon’s support for Ralph Nader in 2000, and also responds to claims that Fallon’s work for I’M for Iowa has run afoul of ethical or campaign finance rules.

I am working on another post about the financing of the Boswell and Fallon campaigns, and will write more about allegations surrounding Fallon and I’M for Iowa in the near future.

For now, I will note that the Boswell campaign probably would not have stepped up the attacks on Fallon in March if their internal polling and voter contacts were encouraging. (I got a call from a field organizer for Boswell during the first week of March, and my husband got a call from an organizer for Boswell this past week.)

An incumbent who is not worried doesn’t go after a challenger this way two months before the primary.

When the first public poll of this race is released, I wouldn’t be surprised to see Fallon within striking distance of Boswell.

The full text of Fallon’s press release of March 24 is after the jump.

Wake Up Walmart has released its first video of 2008.  Walmart is a key issue for progressives to focus on- because of their awful health care benefits, Iowa citizens are estimated to be paying $10,059,698 a year in taxes to cover poor Walmart employees and their families with health care- while Walmart is making huge profits.

Please check out this video, and let your friends know why we need to “Wake Up Walmart”.

Cross-posted around the blogosphere yesterday. I am posting here because a few of the links have not appeared in previous posts at Bleeding Heartland. -desmoinesdem

Welcome to the latest diary in my series on the Democratic primary in Iowa’s third Congressional district. Ed Fallon is challenging Leonard Boswell, who was first elected to this seat in 1996.

Today, I consider who would represent this district more effectively in Congress.

Here are links to my previous diaries on this campaign:

the introductory diary, with biographical information on Boswell and Fallon

The cases for Fallon and Boswell

Boswell and Fallon pick up the pace

Will Democrats vote on the issues?

John Deeth wrote a great piece for Iowa Independent about “The Battleground Districts” that will decide who controls the Iowa legislature.

You might want to bookmark this analysis of five House races and 10 Senate races for future reference.

The topic of earmarks is one that has been frquently chatted about on many of the Republican blog posts. I hear a lot of Democrat so and so did this and Liberal So and So did that, so I thought I should share a few facts about Pork Barrel Spending and our Representatives here in Iowa.

Fact 1: The leader among senators in earmarks?

Republican Thad Cochran Mississippi, with $837,000,000+!!!!!!

Fact: 2: The leader among Senators in Iowa?

Republican Chuck Grassley with  $323,000,000+!!!

 Fact 3: The Leader among Iowa congressmen?

Republican Tom Latham with $69,000,000+!!!

Fact 4: Notable Legislatures that have less ear marks than Latham's 63

Democratic Sen. Obama 55

Democratic Sen. Feingold 0

Democratic Sen. McCaskill 0

Democratic Rep. Boswell (IA) 26

Democratic Rep. Braley (IA) 27

Democratic Rep. Loebsack (IA) 25

Here is to hoping Latham's hypocrasy doesnt go unnoticed.

Happy Easter!

I received an e-mail from Kurt Meyer’s campaign in Iowa’s fourth Congressional district, and it mentioned that incumbent Tom Latham is one of the Republicans being targeted by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

I hadn’t realized that the DCCC planned to put resources into flipping that seat. It will be an uphill battle, but if the climate is right for Democratic candidates nationwide and in Iowa, it should be within reach.

I am staying out of the primary battle in IA-04, but I plan to donate $100 to the campaign of the winner of that primary. I would love to see that district turn blue.

While digging around on the DCCC’s website for more information, I noticed that they have also named Leonard Boswell as one of 29 “frontline Democrats.” I do not know whether that means the DCCC will put resources into the primary race in IA-03.

Here is the ActBlue page the DCCC set up for all of its “frontline Democrats”:

http://www.actblue.com/page/fr…

Here is a map you can use to find all of the districts the DCCC is targeting this year, either for pickups or defense:

http://dccc.org/page/content/r…

UPDATE: brownsox analyzes the list at Daily Kos and says the DCCC is targeting 59 Republican-held seats for pickups and 31 Democratic seats for defense:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/…

I just got an e-mail from Leonard Boswell’s campaign. It confirms my belief that they are very worried about Ed Fallon’s primary challenge.

Most of the e-mail contains negative information about Fallon, including a lead paragraph citing Fallon’s support for Ralph Nader in 2000 and a closing paragraph stating flatly, “Ed Fallon is no Democrat.”

Positive information about Boswell makes up a small portion of the message, mostly near the bottom. It mentions that Knowlegis has ranked him the 135th most powerful member of the U.S. House, making him “more powerful than nearly 70 percent of other Members of Congress.”

It also cites Boswell’s endorsements from AFSCME, SEIU, the Des Moines Police Association, Des Moines Association of Professional Fire Fighters, and UAW, as well as his support from Senator Tom Harkin, Governor Chet Culver, Lieutenant Governor Patty Judge, Congressman Bruce Braley and Congressman Dave Loebsack.

The message mentions Boswell’s loyalty to the Democratic Party twice.

I would like the incumbent to address his tendency of voting with the majority of House Republicans, and contrary to the majority of House Democrats, on issues such as:

the 2005 bankruptcy bill

the 2005 energy bill

permanent repeal of the estate tax

the Bush administration’s warrantless wiretapping

weakening the right of habeas corpus

I would also like to know why I continually get action alerts from environmental groups asking me to contact Boswell about this or that bill, when Braley and Loebsack seem to know instinctively what position to take on these bills without getting a barrage of phone calls from constituents.

Boswell’s e-mail also features an article by Chase Martyn for Iowa Independent: Fallon Faces Campaign Finance Questions (that link works, although the link in Boswell’s e-mail was broken). I will write more about that piece in a forthcoming post about the financing of the Boswell and Fallon campaigns.

The full text of the Boswell campaign’s e-mail is after the jump.

On the fifth anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the Stop the Arms Race Political Action Committee (STAR*PAC) endorsed Ed Fallon in the Democratic primary in Iowa’s third Congressional district.

From a Fallon campaign press release:

“STAR*PAC believes that Ed Fallon understands the challenges we face in the 21st century and is the best-equipped candidate to represent the Third District in the difficult times ahead.”

Additionally, they stated, “we remain concerned that Rep. Boswell has too often supported the Administration’s war policy by voting to authorize the war, and voting to continue funding without timelines for troop withdrawal.”

Fallon’s campaign will not receive any monetary donation from STAR*PAC, in keeping with his policy of not accepting funds from PACs.

The full release is after the jump.

On Wednesday, March 19, Ed Fallon is holding a town-hall meeting on Iraq and veterans’ issues from 8:30 to 9:30 am at the Old Fire Station #4, 1041 8th St., Des Moines.

I can’t go to this event, but if any Bleeding Heartland readers are able to attend, please put up a comment to let us know how it went.

Whether or not you can go to this meeting, how important do you think the Iraq war will be in the IA-03 primary?

Which statehouse races are you watching especially closely this year?

As I’ve written before, I will be helping Jerry Sullivan, who is running for the open seat in House district 59.

I learned a few days ago that Ro Foege is retiring from House district 29. Nate Willems is running in the Democratic primary for that seat. You may remember his front-page posts last year at MyDD. I don’t know anything about the other Democratic candidate in that district.

Consider this an open thread for talking about interesting races and candidates for the Iowa House or Senate.

I encourage any and all Democrats running for the legislature to drop by and put up a diary here from time to time.

I missed this last week, but Daily Kos user mcfly brought it to my attention: a Republican has filed to run for Congress in Iowa’s third Congressional district.

Today, Clive Republican Kim Schmett announced his run for United States Congress in the 3rd Congressional District.

Schmett, 55, says the district needs a representative who will fight for lower taxes, fiscal responsibility and more quality jobs for Iowa workers.

“My goal in Congress is to rein in spending, so people can keep the money they have worked so hard to earn,” said Schmett. “They should be able to spend it on their families, not support a bloated government. For far too long, government has failed to weed out inefficiencies and waste. Congress just passed a Democrat budget bill that will cut the earned income credit in half and increase an average family’s taxes by $3,000 dollars. Too often, politicians forget that it’s the people’s money first, not theirs.”

Schmett, a veteran of the U.S. Army, is the executive director of the state association for children’s homes and shelters. He is the former director of the Iowa Department of Inspections and Appeals, and served as the chief of staff for former Congressman Greg Ganske.

Bleeding Heartland readers, I would be interested in your views on how the Iowa caucuses might have turned out differently.

Let’s assume that Barack Obama runs the exact campaign he ran last year in terms of strategy and execution, and has the same monetary resources he had available.

What, if anything, could other candidates have done to beat Obama in Iowa? Keep in mind that both Clinton and Edwards executed their strategies pretty well in Iowa (in my opinion), with

both of them getting more than 70,000 people to stand in their corners on January 3. That “should” have been enough to win, even if turnout had been “only” 50 percent greater than the previous record for Iowa Democrats.

Given the Obama campaign’s excellent strategy and execution, as well as their virtually unlimited monetary resources in Iowa, what could other candidates have done to win the Iowa caucuses?

These are examples of the kinds of questions I’m interested in:

Should Hillary have used Bill more, or used him less?

Would it have helped Clinton or Edwards to go negative on Obama?

Were there better methods Clinton could have used to identify and turn out supporters?

Was there anything Richardson could have done in the summer to build on the bump he got from his television commercials in May?

Would Edwards have done better if his stump speech and advertising had focused on different issues?

Should Edwards have spent some money on advertising in the summer, when he slipped behind Clinton in the Iowa polls, rather than keeping his powder dry?

Feel free to post your insights about these and similar questions on this thread.

Alternatively, if you have thoughts you’d rather keep off the record, please e-mail them to me at desmoinesdem AT yahoo.com, or e-mail me your phone number and I will call you to chat. I will keep your views confidential.

In a rare post not related to Barack Obama, Gordon Fischer put up a press release from Leonard Boswell’s campaign over at Iowa True Blue. (Note to the Boswell campaign: please start sending your press releases to desmoinesdem AT yahoo.com.)

The release notes that the Drum Major Institute for Public Policy recently gave Boswell a 100 percent 90 percent “A” grade for his work on behalf of the middle class. Boswell’s campaign also mentioned that a different group recently named him the most powerful U.S. representative from Iowa, and was ranked the 135th most powerful person among the 435 members of the U.S. House.

You can find more details about how the Drum Major Institute compiled its Congressional scorecard on middle class issues, as well as ratings for all 535 members of Congress, by clicking here.

The full text of Boswell’s press release is after the jump.

The national organization eQualityGiving, “The Online Donor Community for LGBT Equality,” has endorsed Ed Fallon in the Democratic primary in Iowa’s third Congressional district. A press release from Fallon’s campaign notes that eQualityGiving has endorsed only nine federal candidates this year, and that Fallon is the “only candidate in the nation to earn this endorsement twice.”

The full text of the release from Fallon’s campaign is after the jump.

Noneed4thneed is posting about the Marshall County Democratic convention over at Century of the Common Iowan.

If you've got a story to share about your county convention, I encourage you to comment on this thread or put up a diary here.

UPDATE: John Deeth has the story from Johnson County here (not many changes, as Edwards delegates did not realign):

http://jdeeth.blogspot.com/200…

Noneed4thneed says the Edwards delegates realigned in Marshall County, and 90 percent of them went to Obama:

http://commoniowan.blogspot.co…

There’s more info in this Iowa County Convention results thread at Daily Kos:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/…

I am a volunteer with the Fallon campaign (we need more of you guys!!!)

 I am also involved with getting more Deaf people involved in politics. I am trying to do outreach to the Deaf community in IA-03 and all over to support Ed Fallon – why?

 I made a short video to explain! Hope you all like it.

**hattip to Desmoinesdem for suggesting me to post this here**

Video is below 

Elisha Gayman is one of our most progressive state legislators. I recently happened upon an extreme right wing blog suggesting that there readers start out on a smear campaign against her, in an attempt to turn over her seat (which she won by 200 votes last election). This really boiled my blood. He also continued to talk about McKinley Bailey, A veteran, and also announced that there should be a smear campaign against him.

This had really motivated me to do whatever I can to help these progressive democrats against a very desperate, un-American, values-lacking Republican Party of Iowa.

I would also like to plug one of my favorite Reps, Susan Radke in the 10th district.

Thanks for hearing my rant, and I hope you all will check out these candidates and help if you can.

I urge all of you to click on this diary by MyDD user Silver Spring, who analyzed the county-level results from Iowa and New Hampshire.

I am not convinced by all of the arguments in this diary, but it is a great piece of work. I have asked Silver Spring to cross-post here, so I can promote it to the front page. In the meantime, you all should head over to MyDD and read it for yourself.

I haven’t yet had a chance to dig into the county-level results from Iowa, so I greatly appreciate this effort.

This kind of in-depth analysis sets the blogs apart from superficial mainstream media coverage.

and anyone asks me how she did it, I will point them to this recent article in the New York Times. Yes, Hillary’s got a lot of advantages: she raised a ton of money, she’s hired a huge Iowa staff (approximately 400 people), she’s got a former two-term governor and former two-term president campaigning for her.

But there are smart ways and dumb ways to spend money. Reading this article, I was impressed with some of her campaign’s tactics.

We Iowans joke about how there’s always a presidential candidate willing to pour us coffee, take out the trash and shovel our snow. But Hillary’s precinct captains really are going to shovel snow for her supporters:

Mrs. Clinton’s office here is filled with hundreds of new green snow shovels that were being strategically distributed on Saturday to precinct captains to clear the walks of older women who might be particularly wary of going out to the caucuses in bad weather. The campaign has printed doorknob hangers with caucus locations printed in extra-large type, also to accommodate these older first-time caucusers.

The article talks about microtargeting methods that both the Clinton and Obama campaigns have been using. That’s not surprising, but I thought this was truly a master stroke:

Mrs. Clinton’s campaign, in the first mailing to first-time caucusgoers who pledge to support her, includes porcelain lapel pins identifying them as Clinton supporters. Mrs. Clinton looks for women wearing those pins at her events and praises them for caucusing for the first time.

What a great idea. A lot of women will wear that lapel pin, and it’s an easy way for Hillary to spot first-time caucus-goers in a crowd. I would think that once someone has been singled out and thanked by Hillary, she would feel an extra obligation to show up on caucus night.

It is not easy to turn out thousands of people who have never caucused before. Hillary’s not my first, second or third choice, but if she can pull this off, her campaign deserves a lot of credit.

The article also alludes to Clinton campaign plans to have caterers bring food to serve to her supporters at pre-caucus parties on the caucus sites. Nate Willems suggested that was treading close to the vote-buying line and sparked an interesting discussion at MyDD tonight.

Finally, a quick question for Bleeding Heartland readers. The NY Times article quotes Michael Whouley, who came to Iowa last time to help with John Kerry’s field operation. It identified him as “a veteran Iowa caucus organizer, who is supporting Mrs. Clinton but is one of the few major Democratic strategists who have not come to Iowa for this fight.”

I thought I heard somewhere that Whouley was in Iowa to help the Clinton campaign. Anyone know if he’s been here?

UPDATE: Another thing money can buy is two minutes of television during the 6 pm newscasts in Iowa. Here is her final pitch. I think it hits the themes she needs to emphasize, but I am not convinced it will bring over a lot of undecided voters:

The sprint to the end had begun! We all know that Edwards is workaholic. He’s worked very hard for this nomination. He came prepared with plans, ideas, goals and ATTITUDE. This dude knows how to fight. He has been outspent by millions and millions of dollars by two celebrity candidates and he’s STILL in the race. That goes to a testament of how strong his message is and how much people are to take their country back. AGGRESSIVELY. He didn’t come to the table as entrenched insider and he brought a lot more than something and flighty and wishy-washy than hope. He came prepped with the plans and the fight to actually give REAL hope to millions of Americans.

cross-posted at Daily Kos

In December 2003, as John Edwards yard signs were sprouting like weeds around Des Moines, I knew Edwards was coming on strong when I spoke to a friend who had described himself and his wife as firm Howard Dean supporters in the spring. Not only were he and his wife now backing Edwards, he had signed up to be a precinct captain.

I was surprised, because he had indicated that the war was his number one issue, and I wanted to know why he was willing to overlook Edwards’ vote on the AUMF.

I can’t remember his exact words, but they went something like this: I want Edwards to make the case against George Bush with the American people as the jury.

In other diaries, I have explained how I came to support Edwards for president, and have written about various policies he is proposing.

Today I want to focus on Edwards’ skills as an advocate. I think he’s the best in our field to make the case for Democrats and for the progressive change we need.

Greetings and Salutations, to Edwards supporters far and wide.

This Edition is dedicated to that exciting phenomenon called Momentum! The Big Mo.  

All Candidates want it. Lately though it seems the fight and the message of John Edwards has captured it. So take a quick tour of all the hopeful signs that since the People are finally tuning in, that more and more People are connecting to what John Edwards is saying …

I’ve been feeling for months that in December, when undecided Iowans started making up their minds, there would be significant movement toward one of the second-tier candidates. Some politically active Democrats are not satisfied with any of the top-tier candidates and are willing to give underdogs a chance.

This diary is about how Joe Biden, Bill Richardson and Chris Dodd are campaigning in Iowa, how I think they will do on January 3, and how their showing could affect John Edwards, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

A few other observations related to these candidates’ prospects can be found in How the Iowa caucuses work, part 8, which you may not have seen over the weekend.

Much more is after the jump.

I've noticed a lot of grumblings around “the Internets” lately, about all these “partisan” Candidate Diaries — hogging the limited real estate of the Recommended List.

Out of respect to that Audience, those who have had their fill of Candidate News,

Here's the Executive Summary:

“Stuff happened in the Edwards Campaign.”

And for the Edwards supporters, out there in audience, those who may be expecting a “little more detail” about your Candidate, continue reading please … well because “Something IS happening in the Edwards Campaign …”

In a primary or general election, you win your precinct by getting more people to vote for your candidate than for any other candidate.

But in the Iowa caucuses, there must be 50 ways to win your precinct.

OK, maybe not 50, but a lot of ways. I’ll go over them after the jump.

cross-posted at Daily Kos and MyDD

A few weeks ago I wrote a diary on where the Democratic presidential candidates have field offices in Iowa.

My purpose was to document the information so that after January 3, we can see whether campaigns with the most field offices did better in the counties where rivals had field organizers and volunteers working without the visibility of an office.

I am publishing a new version of this diary because several campaigns have added more field offices this month. Also, someone at the Iowa Democratic Party informed me of slight adjustments to the number of state delegates awarded by a handful of counties.

More information than you probably wanted to know is after the jump.

Earlier today someone called asking for my husband (mispronouncing his name). I offered to take a message, and she said she'd call back later.

She called back during dinner. We took the call, and once he realized what kind of poll it was, my husband put it on speakerphone so that I could listen.

After the jump I've put the questions as closely as we can remember them.

Once again, a Beltway anti-immigrant group has chosen to make a brief appearance in Iowa to inject their brand of nativism into the American body politic.

Four years ago, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) was responsible for ads which WHO-TV called “unnecessarily inflaming and borderline racist.” FAIR was met by widespread community condemnation. And yet, they’re back. This time, FAIR is importing radio talk hosts to poison the airwaves.

The Center for New Community’s Building Democracy Initiative explores the latest desperate attacks by the nativist group the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) in a new article, The Federation for American Immigration Reform Defends the Pioneer Fund.

The article examines the latest attempt by FAIR President Dan Stein to gloss over FAIR’s relationships to white supremacist groups in a December 14 web posting, and discusses how Stein’s ploy may have just made the situation for his organization a whole lot worse.

The article is available here.

This is very funny and well-done:

OK — whose campaign does the next Christmas song parody?

(1) Here is an interesting Edwards Headline, from the Wall Street Journal:

WSJ

Iowa Farmers Union Embraces Edwards

Dec 21, 2007

John Edwards will get a welcome endorsement this evening from the Iowa Farmers Union, the state’s biggest advocacy group for family farmers and rural communities.
…

[Note: other Sources have Reported that it's only the President of this Farmers Union, and NOT the Union itself that is Endorsing Edwards — WSJ needs to hire back its Fact-Checkers, it seems.]

And the WHY behind the Endorsement?

“All the Democrats have good things about them,” Peterson said in an interview, but “Edwards cleaned house in rural areas in 2003” because “he’s against corporate farms and for localized economies.”

Here's a few more reasons from this “influential Iowa agriculture leader”, Chris Petersen:

Chris Petersen, who is currently the president of the Iowa Farmers Union, endorsed the former North Carolina senator at a Friday rally in Nevada.
…
Petersen said he picked Edwards because of his strong views on the enforcement of anti-trust laws and competition in the livestock industry.

A vocal critic of the agribusiness conglomerates that have rapidly changed the face of agriculture in the Midwest, Petersen said “it’s time we got some political courage and leadership” to solve those problems.
…

(2) Here is an interesting Edwards Headline:

Edwards Unveils Stimulus Plan To Strengthen Economy And Create New Jobs

Dec 22, 2007

On final day of the “Fighting for America's Voice” tour, Edwards urges Congress to pass $25 billion job creation plan

Lisbon, Iowa – On the final day of his “Fighting for America's Voice” tour, Senator John Edwards proposed an economic stimulus package to strengthen our economy and create new jobs. Edwards urged Congress to act immediately to pass at least a $25 billion jobs plan in early 2008 and be ready to pass $75 billion more if there is more evidence that we are entering a recession. Edwards believes that every American should have access to a good job and the chance to build a better life. …

the specifics

Yet again John Edwards is Leading with very specific comprehensive plans, to deal with REAL Problems faced by REAL Americans! One of those REAL Americans was there to speak up for Edwards' Plan today:

About Doug Bishop:

Today, Edwards will be joined on the tour by Doug Bishop who, in September 2004, was among the first wave of employees to be laid off at the Maytag plant in Newton, Iowa. … Edwards is running for president to make sure the voices of hard-working Americans like Doug get heard in Washington.

And the WHY behind the Endorsement?

John Edwards – Introduction by Doug Bishop – Newton, Iowa

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stncVK7ANew
—-

Doug Bishop:

“The American Dream is being taken away slowly, and surely, by some powerful people, who have No Respect for the American Workers in this country.
…
People like my grandfather, and hundreds before him, and hundreds after him, they didn't strive to be rich. They didn't strive to work their way through the Company and become the CEO …  at Maytag he was chasing the American Dream, and he was allowed to finish that out. … As of yesterday, I had several relatives and neighbors who had that Dream taken away from them.
…
It's happening all across this Country. We have tried, and tried, tried to get these unabated Trade Agreements — which are robbing Americans of their Livelihoods — stopped!
…
and most importantly, and this is something I'll never forget, he grabbed my 7 year old son by the hand, he dropped to one knee, and he looked him straight in the eye, and he said: 'I'm gonna keep fighting for your Daddy's Job, I promise you that.'  

Two years later, a man of his word — you know that stuff sticks with you —  
… with no media, no press, no big event, it was just one man being a good person. Two years later he sets up a meeting at the Maytag Plant after they announced the closing. …
He wanted to sit down with the People who were effected, in that Plant, that day. 'What are you going to do with your lives? What can I do to help? Where do we go from here?'

That's the kind of things we need in a Leader in this Country!

… I want a guy who's gonna sit down, and look a 7 year old kid in the eye, and tell him, 'I'm gonna fight for your Dad's Job'.  That's what I want!”

{applause} …

You know, fighting for the dignity of the American Worker, and their families, is at the very core of what it means to be an American. Or at least it used to be …

Franklin D. Roosevelt called for Four Freedoms …

They were the basis of FDR's vision of Economic Fairness. Unfortunately, not all of these Freedom were fully incorporated in the New Deal legislation, that pulled the Country out of the Great Depression in the 1930's

Here are those 4 Principles:

FDR's Four Freedoms:

   1. Freedom of speech and expression
   2. Freedom of every person to worship in his own way
   3. Freedom from want
   4. Freedom from fear

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Freedoms
—-

A network of bloggers are carrying on with FDR's Vision today. And guess who they just Endorsed for their Candidate for President?

(3) Here is an interesting Edwards Headline:

Four Freedoms Announces Endorsement of John Edwards

12/21/2007

And the WHY behind the Endorsement?

WALTHAM, MA – December 20, 2007 – The influential non-partisan discussion board and blog ‘Four Freedoms’ (http://www.fourfreedomsblog.com/) announces its endorsement of John Edwards in the Democratic Primary.

Senator Edwards has been a longtime supporter of the downtrodden, from his early days as a litigator to his Senate track record. John Edwards dwells not on the past, but on the hope for the future, and is the only candidate that truly understands what is important to average Americans.
…
The founders of Four Freedoms urge all true Americans and Patriots to vote for Senator Edwards, and calls upon citizens to cross party lines if necessary in order to advance Senator Edward’s campaign and restore hope, decency, and civility to the American Political Process, something that has been lacking for quite some time. Senator Edwards may not have all the answers, but he is our best hope for true change and progress towards what all Americas believe in…that is, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Now that's truly a New Deal Endorsement! That is quite the statement about exactly WHO is ready to Fight for US.

(4) Here is an interesting Edwards Headline:

Des Moines Register

Surgery gives man a chance to speak his mind

Dec 22, 2007

If you've been to a recent Edwards event in Iowa or watched television, odds are good you already know Lowe's story. He was born dirt-poor in Kentucky with a cleft palate. He moved to a mill town in the Appalachian Mountains and worked in coal mines for decades before an injury broke his back and put him on disability.

Lowe never had surgery to fix that cleft palate because he could not afford health insurance.

And for the first 50 years of his life, Lowe could hardly speak. He was an incomprehensible mumbler until about a year ago when a doctor donated cleft-palate surgery and, literally, gave Lowe a voice.
…

Now, Lowe has become a metaphor for the stated goal of Edwards' campaign: to give a voice to the voiceless.

“I had an emotional reaction listening to his story,” Edwards said Friday in an interview. “I had a sense of outrage that somebody had lived for 50 years in America not able to speak because they had no health care. How could my country let people like James down like that?”

And the WHY behind the Endorsement?

Edwards invited Lowe to the microphone, hugged him, and then Lowe spoke for about 45 seconds.

“He cares about people like me and you all,” Lowe said in his Southern accent that's tinged with a speech impediment.

Then he pointed at Edwards and said, “This man is number one man for president.”
…
Best of all, Lowe said, he has the guts to stand up in front of hundreds of people – and he's got the voice so he can say something.

That is how the flame of Outrage is lit:  

[John Edwards meets James Lowe]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7rcRA1YQZ0
—-

And well, for some people, that flame never does go out, until Justice has been done … and until, what was wrong, is set right again.

(5) Here is a heart-wrenching Edwards Headline:

TPM

Edwards Mailer In Iowa Touts His Trial Lawyer Representation Of Injured Girl

By Greg Sargent – Dec 21, 2007

“John Edwards gave our Family hope … And then he walked into that courtroom and gave that irresponsible company hell.”

And the WHY behind the Endorsement?

Sandy Lakey Introduces John Edwards, West Des Moines, Iowa

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyrWX9g9-VQ
—-

Sandy Lakey:

“I know John because, he saved our daughters life …

[the unthinkable happens to their family]

… so we began talking to attorneys, which was a new experience for us. I was in such a haze of grief, shock, and exhaustion, that little of what anyone said penetrated my fog. The only words I wanted to hear were: 'I can help Valerie'.

And then we met John Edwards. When he held my hands and looked in my eyes, I saw the compassion, honesty, and integrity that is John Edwards. When he said the magic words I wanted to hear, I knew in my heart, that THIS Man would Fight as hard for Valerie, as if she were his OWN Daughter.

Because of John, I began to feel Hope.

We quickly realized John Edwards wasn't just Valerie's attorney — He was her Champion.

John Edwards took on the irresponsible manufacturer of the defective product that had caused Valerie's injury. And we learned she wasn't the FIRST Child to be maimed, or even killed by this Companies absolute indifference!

Even worse the company knew their product was defective, but hid the truth. John exposed their negligence, and Won Justice for Valerie.

John Edwards gave us hope in our darkest hours. He ensured that Valerie's Medical Expenses would be taken care of for the rest of her life. And he helped change the ways companies do business, to make swimming pools safer for children.
…

Recently she told me, that she occasionally feels happy. That's not something I thought I'd ever hear her say because her life hasn't been easy. She's suffered through horrors, that NO ONE should have to deal with, especially a child. She lives with pain everyday, and probably will for the rest of her life. But she's strong, and with the help of people like John Edwards, she HAS survived.

She is here with me today to show her support, and love, for John Edwards. We believe that John has the intelligence, the determination, will power, integrity, and above all, the heart, to be a great leader to all of us in the United States.

We are honored to know him, and feel privileged to be here today. He talks about the heroes that he has met in his life, and during his campaign travels. But to us, He is the Hero!  Thank you John.”

{applause}

WOW! That's what it means, to fight for the “little guy”. That's the same way John Edwards will fight for US, if we have the “same determination”, to help send him to the White House. If we do, Edwards will give Voice again, to us — the forgotten American People!

(6) Here is an interesting Edwards Headline:

seacoastonline.com

Bonnie Raitt, Jackson Browne stump for Edwards

By Elizabeth Dinan

Dec 20, 2007

PORTSMOUTH — Wooing 700 voters at the Frank Jones Center on Wednesday, presidential candidate John Edwards pitched his plans for health care, warfare and education with a live rock 'n' roll sound track, a whiff of Hollywood and an endorsement from a local nuclear submarine welder.

Wrapping their endorsements for Edwards around a four-song set, Grammy-winning musicians Bonnie Raitt and Jackson Browne were introduced by actor Peter Coyote.

And the WHY's behind the new ground swell of New Hampshire Excitement?

I Am A Patriot with backing by Bonnie Raitt and Jackson Browne

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQCiTIevzdU
—-

Here is what a few of those New Hampshire citizens have to say about WHY they are NOW supporting John Edwards:

Citizen one:

“Seeing John Edwards speak tonite, and you know just listening to him answer the questions — and feeling the Energy in the Audience, in the crowd, he definitely has my Vote”

Citizen two:

“I love how straightforward he is, but I think also, how brave he is.”

Citizen three:

“He's talking, he's talking … fighting … the big corporations — Nobody else is saying that.”

Citizen four:

“I do feel like there is a lot of momentum going on, and I think that, John is going to take it over the top. And I think that he's gonna win this Election.”

Hey, for you other New Hampshire citizens who have finally found your Candidate in Edwards, you too, can get involved to “help win this thing.” Here's how:

http://johnedwards.com/nh/volunteer/signup
—-

For more voices from New Hampshire, their stories start here:

http://johnedwards.com/nh/
—-

(7) Here is a different Edwards Headline (with the Media Reporting on the Blogs — now that's a switch):

startribune.com

Minneapolis, MN

Blog House: Edwards remains a wild card as caucuses near

…
The most surprising development is that Edwards, who's been consistently third in most Iowa polls, seems to have a little heat behind him.
…

And the WHY behind those blogs which are buzzing about Edwards?

Marc Ambinder:

“On Monday, the Edwards campaign recorded more e-mail sign-ups than almost any day in its history,” Marc Ambinder (1) reported. “Over the weekend, the campaign was forced to add four new servers to handle all the Web traffic. Contributions are up online: Thursday and Friday, the two days after the debate, made for one of the highest 2-day totals they've seen in months.”

David Mizner:

In this race, Edwards could prove to be the tortoise and Clinton and Obama a pair of hares, according to David Mizner at MyDD (2). “It wasn't supposed to be this way, with Edwards still in the thick of the race. Clinton and Obama had planned to out-spend and out-celebrity him into oblivion. The best-laid plans.”

So that's it for tonite's Roundup. Thanks for taking a few moments to reflect on the type of Leader, you would like to see running this country. I hope these “behind the news” snapshots, help give you some insight into the character, passion, and determination, that an Edwards Presidency would bring to Washington DC.

Most of these people Speaking out above, have given you a window into some of their reasons to “Why I'm with Edwards?”

SO, “WHY am I, with Edwards?”

Simply stated, out of all the Candidates running, John Edwards speaks out the most passionately, and clearly, and bravely, on nearly all of the Issues, that matter to me and my family!

And on top of that, in nearly every case, Edwards was the first one to take a bold stand, with thoughtful and detailed plans to the many problems this Country faces. “Fixing America” and “Restoring the American Dream”, for ordinary hard-working Americans, is more than just talk with John Edwards — it's the cause of his life!

Such a Fighter, for real Progressive Democratic Values, will get MY Vote, every time!

Please, Edwards supporters, take a few moments, to add a comment or two about, if you can, about “WHY you're with Edwards, too?”

(I'm sure there are still some undecideds out there, lurking, who would probably like to know.  Thanks.)

Crossposted from DailyKos

With less than two weeks before the voting begins in Iowa and New Hampshire, John Edwards is delivering his closing argument to voters, something Edwards is well known for. As one of the top trial attorneys in the nation, Edwards is no stranger to taking on a fight and then driving it home, with a powerful closing argument.  

A fun Christmas card from Obama supporters in New Jersey, wishing you all the best and thanking you for all your hard work.  Posted on YouTube by AkinScribe5:

Merry Christmas everyone! 

Edwards Evening News RoundUp: Middle Class Rising

The Edwards campaign is picking up steam, and a lot of people are noticing, even some of the Media.  That Poll yesterday showing Edwards in the Lead in Iowa at 30%, certainly helped to get people talking. The Chris Matthews Interview with Edwards in New Hampshire was certainly a breath of fresh air too.  

The race just got VERY interesting …

Highlights of the Main Street Express Iowa Bus Tour

Senator Edwards wrapped up his Main Street Express Iowa Bus tour today after being greeted by “frenzied enthusiasm” and bringing large “Iowa crowds to their feet with America Rising” throughout the state.

Watch Senator Edwards’ Inspiring Speech, “America Rising” Here:

12.16.07

Our Country needs, Hope … yes very much so.

Our Country also needs Competence in SO many Government Positions of power … NO more 'Heck of Job — Brownies' PLEASE!

But the one thing America needs even more than Hope and Competence — it's Real Leadership!

What is Real Leadership made up of?

More Compromise and Committee meetings?  (I hope not)

Media Fanfare and soaring rhetoric?  (nice, but …)

How about Honesty, How about taking a real Stand?

How about talking straight with the American People, and detailing all the 'Hard Work' and 'Sacrifice' that Real Change will ultimately require?

That's what Real Leaders do.

They tell you the Truth, and speaking the Truth eventually leads to widespread Action, and the Changes we need.

Once again John Edwards, has NOT failed to Lead on the Issues, so important to everyday Americans …