January 30, 2008
Missed Opportunities (John Feehery)
John Edwards and Rudy Giuliani will always be linked in history as the candidates who dropped out the presidential derby of 2008 on the same day.
They will also be linked by their missed opportunities to win their parties’ nominations.
Edwards bizarrely decided to run to the left of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Let’s face it. There is not much room to the left of the two Democratic front-runners. But Edwards decided to prove to all the Democrats that he was as wild-eyed and socialistic as Dennis Kucinich, except he had a Southern drawl.
It didn’t work. Edwards got no credit for being a liberal from the liberal wing of the party, and his aggressive anti-capitalist message turned off any moderate who was looking for somebody else to vote for.
In other words, he got all the baggage of being a white Southerner and decided to forfeit all of the advantages.
Giuliani was a victim of a bad campaign strategy combined with a bad communications strategy.
We all know now that waiting out the first four primaries is really not a good idea, especially if you are going to get beat by Ron Paul in a couple of them.
Perhaps the most frustrating thing was the lack of a coherent message that went beyond Sept. 11. Rudy never expanded his argument beyond that one day.
I knew the campaign was in trouble once it announced its Twelve Commitments. It sounded to me like a cross between an Irish Rock Bank and a pledge made at an AA meeting, not a strategy for winning the election.
And then Giuliani made a big deal about his foreign policy and national security experiences, which were the weakest part of his résumé.
Rudy should have been talking consistently about how he cleaned up New York and his plan to clean up Washington. Instead he got caught talking to smaller and smaller crowds about his dozen commitments that nobody cared about.
True, the mayor didn’t get an even break from the media. But it is not clear if he really tried to make any positive news in the months that followed his brilliant attack of MoveOn.org. If he did, I didn’t hear about it.
He just drifted along, getting pelted by old stories of former associates and the romance of his third wife.
I really liked Rudy, and I thought he would have been the best candidate in either party to bring real change to Washington. Too bad his campaign couldn’t get off the ground.
Permalink TrackBack
Email This Post
Share this post
What's This 9 Comments
»
The Hill welcomes comment from anyone and will almost always post it whether it is favorable or critical, as long as it is substantive and advances debate.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Liberals balance the budget we can't afford any more big government like the No Child Left Behind Act and the Department of Homeland Security or deficits replacing surpluses.The trickle down voodoo economy has proved to be what we always said ti woud be -a bust.Now we have to loan ourselves money we do not have to bailout greedy bankers and traders.Your darn right we need a liberal to restore fiscal sanity in the USA.Bush's deficits are only bested by Reagan's.Restore America vote for a liberal.
Comment by Linda M — January 30, 2008 @ 4:08 pm
The National Debt almost doubled under Bill Clinton which means he came close to spending more than all previous administrations combined.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — January 30, 2008 @ 5:08 pm
I agree with the previous comment. We clearly don't have the money to be handing out as loans to ourselves. The 'Go spend, go spend to stimulate the economy!' tactic is not what is going to get us out of this recession, made clear by its many failed attempts. How about the government takes back those tax cuts (which we all have to eventually pay back, nothing is free in this world) for the top 5% of the moneymakers, and generate those 9 billion dollars back into the economy? Thanks, but those $600 you're handing me are merely a bandaid for my cancer. There is a FUNDAMENTAL problem with the economy. Simply bribes are not going to fix it.
Let's find a real solution.
Comment by Aileen — January 30, 2008 @ 9:07 pm
Let's face it - Americans are generous and compassionate and most people are sympathetitic to the spirit of John Edwards quest. But many of us didn't feel that he exhibit the necessary "Presidential" qualities to lead the nation in a new direction for the 21st century. The new President will need to lead the American people past the divisive and polarizing politics-as-usual.
Comment by Smilinjack — January 30, 2008 @ 11:02 pm
Edwards: Not much room to the left of Hillary and Obama? If you think that, then despite your credentials, you don’t know what true left is.
Is left asking government to participate in keeping its people and corporations healthy so they can better compete in the international market? Is left working to get manufacturing jobs back in the U.S. in order to give honest but under-educated citizens good jobs so they can raise their families well and by demanding that other nations value their currency fairly? Is left taxing corporations who go offshore rather than pay their fair share while giving hard working (and that is “hard” as in back breaking and poorly paid work – real work) tax breaks and asking the wealthier workers to shoulder more of the responsibility? Is left ensuring that imports and our food is safe for us?
Mr. Feehery, if those issues are “left” and therefore unacceptable to you, then you shouldn’t even bother to call yourself a member of the human race, because you haven’t evolved to that level yet.
Comment by Rowland — January 31, 2008 @ 1:48 am
Edwards cared deeply about the people and was passionate about what he believed. It is a loss to the US that he dropped out. Big corporations own this country and if they are not stopped we will all be slaves to them. They call the shots in Washington and around the world. Just look at how the insurance and drug companies have controlled the seniors prescription drug program. Since Bush & Co. have been in Washington every one of the big corporations has controlled legislation. If you look at Cheney and the big oil companies meeting in secret (our people were not able to find out what was done at their meetings) we have paid up the gazoo for fuel. If there was nothing to hide Cheney would have disclosed who attended those meetings and what was discussed. People wake up before it is too late!!!
Comment by sharilynr — January 31, 2008 @ 6:45 am
At a recent debate, a reporter asked Hillary about the dislike between the Latino and Black populations, and she answered back quickly "well that's Historic" and that was it. But what she did not Say or try to Do spoke volumes — which is to try to bridge the historic divide by stating something like "yes, that is too bad" or "there are some differences, however, we will try to work on bridging any differences." NO!
Recently, a TV reporter asked her if she thought she was snubbed by Barack Obama and instead of trying to defuse the situation (like Barack would have for unity's sake) she commented on how she put her hand out in friendship and is still waiting. A statement which further incites the situation and causing more division within the Democratic Party. It is a statement concerned about ego rather than a statement of one who is concerned about the group — and let's every one get along.
Maureen Dowd in her current op-ed piece "Seeing Red Over Hillary" gives an insightful glance into the personification of Hillary. Ms. Dowd writes that it was Hillary from the beginning of Barack's announcement that he would be running for the Presidency would Snub Barack on the Senate Floor, not the other way around. It seems that Hillary is one way for the cameras and another way when she thinks no one is apparently looking. It also seems that it is to her advantage to pit one group against the other — women against men, black against blacks, Latinos against Blacks, for her own personal gain. In this type of divisive behavior for personal gain it shows clearly she is no Change Agent and is no Real champion for unity. However, I do think the facade is coming off.
Comment by Angellight — January 31, 2008 @ 8:51 am
Yes lets tax the corporations more, that will keep them in the US.
No Child Left Behind was written by Sen Kennedy and signed by Bush.
Dept of Homeland Security was the Democrats idea and they lambasted Bush until he supported.
So Linda M, can I have your history glasses so I can see what you do?
Comment by Jon Pemberton — January 31, 2008 @ 7:49 pm
Pemberton, maybe Rosie can share his meds with you to help get you through 2008.
Comment by Lester — February 1, 2008 @ 3:40 pm