John Edwards for President? for Friday, December 14, 2007

According to this incredible story in the Burlington Hawkeye earlier this week:

It was a touch after 3 p.m. Monday and Carrie Duncan had just finished another day on the job.

Now she was ready to go the extra mile for John Edwards.

Make that 6.1 miles.

Duncan, a 47-year-old food service employee for the New London School District, is walking home each work day until the Iowa caucuses carrying a sign for her favorite presidential candidate.

...Duncan got her itchy feet a few weeks ago after spending the better part of a day canvassing her community in support of Edwards. As the hours dwindled, her body wore down but her spirit swelled.

"The people invigorated me," she said. "I realized how important it was as an American to be able to go up and knock on someone's door and not be, you know, met with a gun or something. ... And that freedom is on the line."

..."I feel John Edwards is a man of his word and honor and he is determined to give America back to the people," she said, "and I'm determined, no matter what, to get out and tell people how much I believe in this man."

The snowstorm gave her plenty of opportunity to do just that, what with all those motorists who pulled up to offer her a lift.

..."I am honored and humbled to have the support of people like Carrie all over Iowa who are dedicated to ending the war, passing universal health care, and restoring our country's promise," the candidate said by e-mail Wednesday. "The lobbyists have too much power in Washington -- it's hard working Americans like Carrie who need and deserve to have a president who will fight for them every day."

According to this New York Times story, people running for office across the country for state-wide offices, are starting to be concerned about their prospects if Hillary Clinton is the nominee and on top of the ticket.

Nancy Boyda, a Democrat who ran for Congress in this district last year, owed her upset victory partly to the popularity of the Democratic woman at the top of the ticket: Kathleen Sebelius, who won the governor's seat. Now, with a tough re-election race at hand in 2008, Ms. Boyda faces the prospect that her electoral fate could be tied to another woman: Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Mrs. Clinton is a long way from winning the Democratic presidential nomination, and over the last few weeks has struggled to hang on to the air of inevitability that she has been cultivating all year. But the possibility that she will be the nominee is already generating concern among some Democrats in Republican-leaning states and Congressional districts, who fear that sharing the ticket with her could subject them to attack as too liberal and out of step with the values of their constituents.

And few incumbent Democrats face a greater challenge next year than Ms. Boyda, whose district delivered almost 60 percent of its votes to President Bush in 2004.

Ms. Boyda, 52, is a former Republican who represents the state capital, Topeka, and a surrounding expanse of prairie and pasture interspersed with conservative small towns, military posts and this college community, home to Kansas State University . It was by appealing to conservative Democrats and moderate Republicans that she was able to defeat Jim Ryun, a five-term congressman, by 51 percent to 47 percent last year.

This time both Mr. Ryun and another Republican, Lynn Jenkins, the state treasurer, are lined up to run against her. And while vulnerable Democrats like her are not likely to have an easy time even if Senator Barack Obama, John Edwards or any of the other Democratic presidential candidates wins the nomination, Republicans in Kansas say Mrs. Clinton's presence on the ticket would unite their party in opposition to her and give dispirited conservatives a reason to get excited about the race.

The fact is that Senator Edwards puts many red states in play. Red states that Hillary and Obama wouldn't even bother campaigning it let alone competing in and winning. The fact is that there are many purple states out there that could be in play for Democrats if Edwards is on top of the ticket.

This is why his numbers are so significant in terms of winning against every Republican -- unlike Barack and Hillary -- and winning with the widest margins!

From an excellent article earlier this month that matches the findings of a recent Harvard study and admission by the New York Times public editor, the fact is that the media decided long ago that this Democratic presidential nomination race was between Obama and Hillary, when actually Edwards had been systematically talking about the issues and reaching out to voters in all four of the first primary states and many visits to states like California.

What about John Edwards? The big media portray the Democratic race as a death-match between the Clinton machine and the Obama phenom. Edwards comes off as a plodder in the shadow of two glamour pusses.

Back in the world of plain people, the story looks somewhat different. A new Des Moines Register poll shows 28 percent of likely Iowa Democratic caucus-goers preferring Barack Obama, 25 percent for Hillary Clinton and 23 percent for Edwards. That sounds like a three-way race to me.

Also consider the caucus rules. Within a caucus site, people whose candidate gets less than 15 percent of the total can throw their support to another contender. Edwards now leads the Democratic pack as the likely participants' second choice, according to a recent Rasmussen poll.

The former senator from North Carolina seems definitely in the game. So why is the race commonly seen as a two-titan contest? The easy explanation, that much of the media are lazy, would not be far off. But something else is going on.

We live in a political culture dominated by celebrity journalists covering celebrity politicians. Big media want to consort with the big stars — currently New York Sen. Clinton (plus Bill) and the charismatic Illinois Sen. Obama (with Oprah in his entourage).

...The big-gun cameras rarely focus on less-glamorous candidates discussing middle-class anxieties in small auditoriums and town halls. That's why they don't watch Edwards the way they do Clinton and Obama. Only the public watches.

According to a recent American Prospect story:

...as we draw closer to actual votes being cast, the value of punditry and speculation begin to fade and the Democrat who seems most comfortable in his own skin and most secure at his core is John Edwards, who is neither the Establishment candidate nor the Excitement candidate. Still, as Clinton and Obama increasingly find themselves playing call and response, saying things to upset and derail each other, Edwards is emerging as the feisty voice in the back field talking most directly to the voters.

As a firm believer in the man/woman-of-the-moment doctrine, I hardly expected to be contemplating John Edwards' prospects at this late stage in the game. The early rounds of the campaign seemed to firmly establish that his moment had passed and that what he offered the American people was not what they were interested in.

...Edwards does have a few things in his favor. The top three are:

1.        Sitting senators don't get to be president.

2.       The best preparation for running for president is to have run for president.

3.       More than anyone else, Edwards seems to be running on something he believes in.

...with Clinton and Obama focused on sparring with each other, Edwards has been hard at work to develop a rapport with voters -- who, in the end, are the only ones that count.