Edwards says he's most electable, but . . .What is a white man to do?

[DeepModem Mom]

LAT: Edwards says he's most electable, but . . .
The North Carolina Democrat treads gently in order to avoid giving impressions that his message is sexist or racist.
By Peter Wallsten, Times Staff Writer
October 23, 2007

WASHINGTON -- For many Democrats, the 2008 presidential campaign is a celebration of those who once only dreamed of gaining power, with "you go, girl" cheers for Hillary Rodham Clinton and black pride in Barack Obama. But as the top two candidates tap the excitement among Democrats over the prospects of a female or black president, a difficult question is confronting the field's No. 3 contender, John Edwards: What is a white man to do?

Edwards' status as a Southern white male -- characteristics that helped propel Democrats Lyndon B. Johnson, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton to the White House -- has this year offered some limitations, to the frustration of his campaign. "We can't make John black. We can't make him a woman," Edwards' wife, Elizabeth, told an interviewer in one moment of discontent this summer. "Those things get you a lot of press."

Now, as Edwards lays out the closing argument of his primary election campaign -- that he is the most electable candidate and the most able to help fellow Democrats in conservative states -- race and gender are forcing him to tread lightly. Edwards' claims are sensitive, given that he is asserting that he has more appeal to voters nationwide than do the front-runners, a white woman and a black man.

"He may not be saying it, but he's putting the argument out there that white male rural voters won't vote for a black guy or a woman," Taylor Marsh, a Democratic blogger and radio talk-show host, said in an interview. Marsh also recently raised the race and gender questions in a blog posting about Edwards' electability claims.

Garnet Coleman, an African American state lawmaker from Texas, said that Edwards was sending a subtle message about the risks of nominating someone who would be vulnerable to racism and sexism among the broader electorate. "He's trying to make sure that when Democrats make a selection, they realize that the world is not perfect and they have to consider the long haul," said Coleman, who has endorsed Edwards in part based on his electability in the South. "He has to be diplomatic," Coleman added. "He doesn't want to make it seem like he believes that an African American or a woman couldn't govern the country. It'd be real easy for someone to come out and say he's being insensitive to women and African Americans."...

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-edwards23oct23,1,2855155.story?coll=la-headlines-nation&ctrack=1&cset=true

[PresidentObama]

1. Give me a break. Assuming what Edwards meant is crazy.

He said the smart thing: I'm the most electable!! It's obvious that voters have some sort of doubt about the electability of Hillary Clinton, he's only exposing it and making the case he can win in red and blue states. When you're in third place and trying to pull ahead, it's smart strategy.

In no way is he saying I'm white and male, I can win because of that. His message is sticking, and he can compete in red and blue states. That's why he's making the argument.

[midnight]

3. It is John Edwards message and not his race or gender. His

message is more about creating a voice for those of us that don't have one, and I think that resonates greater than I'm a women, and, or I'm a black man.

[geek tragedy]

12. Then why is his supporter in Texas

coming out and saying he's making an issue of Clinton's gender and Obama's race?

I'm just assuming what his supporters are assuming.

[incapsulated]

2. I read you loud and clear, John

And I'm watching your electable white ass slip further down the polls every day.

[geek tragedy]

11. Rich white guys have a giant sense of entitlement.

He can go back to his MegaMcMansion the day after the Iowa caucuses.

He's a scumbag.

[Texas_Kat]

13. The best line of the article

....the closing argument of his primary election campaign -- that he is the most electable candidate...

"Closing argument" ..... heh

"Most electable...." is generally the final plea of a candidate that isn't getting enough traction to stay viable. It's pretty ironic that since Edwards started this unbelievably early campaign season by declaring in Dec 06.

[nightrider767]

4. Please, let's not destroy our own guy

All candidates will claim they are the most electable. I see no reason why we should assume the absolute worst interpretation of these words for John.

Now on the flip side, Hillary's incredibly high popularity rating would sort of disprove that theory...

John's problem is not race or gender related. John's problem is that he doesn't appear assertive or tough enough and has not articulated a distinctive agenda to shore up enough enthusiasm.

[geek tragedy]

9. He's using Clinton's gender and Obama's race against them.

That makes him a bad Democrat and quite frankly a bad person.

[cobalt1999]

5. Dumbest strategy of all the contenders...

If all he is pitching is his electability in the General, then he's doomed. It makes him sound as if we should be scared of republicans, rural voters, southerners, etc. Not exactly the message you want from your next president, nor is it a message that will work during the primaries.

His campaign manager needs to be shot for taking this tack.

[Yael]

6. Yep, that is all he has said to date.

"I'm electable. Thank you and good night."

On to the next town.

[Divine Discontent]

8. Yael, thank you!

John has said so much more than this, although it's a great reason to vote for him if wanting the most electable Dem is a priority (as it is for some. I'm trying to ignore the comments like 'white ass slide down' & 'screw him to hell' as just begging for a direct reply).

[cobalt1999]

10. Edwards lays out the closing argument of his primary election campaign...

"-- that he is the most electable candidate"

It's not the only thing he's said, but if this is his "closing argument", it's dumb, dumb, dumb. Bad move by his campaign.

[AdHocSolver]

20. If his message doesn't work in the primaries, start learning how to spell President Giuliani. n/t

[geek tragedy]

7. Screw John Edwards. Screw him straight to hell.

And bite me to all his apologists who claim he isn't race-baiting:

Garnet Coleman, an African American state lawmaker from Texas, said that Edwards was sending a subtle message about the risks of nominating someone who would be vulnerable to racism and sexism among the broader electorate. "He's trying to make sure that when Democrats make a selection, they realize that the world is not perfect and they have to consider the long haul," said Coleman, who has endorsed Edwards in part based on his electability in the South. "He has to be diplomatic," Coleman added. "He doesn't want to make it seem like he believes that an African American or a woman couldn't govern the country. It'd be real easy for someone to come out and say he's being insensitive to women and African Americans."...

"Don't vote for the woman or the black guy."

Fuck off, John.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

15. Support Biden.

I can understand a person having electability concerns about a non white male candidate, only because we have no track record of electing non white-male presidents in the USA.

But I don't understand why that would lead anyone to Edwards.

If conventionality of image is one's concern, Biden is vastly more presidential.

[dogman]

16. It must be that sense of honesty he shares with Jesse Helms. N/T

[geek tragedy]

17. "We can't make John black. We can't make him a woman."

But we can make his campaign a redux of Jesse Helms's tactics.

[FrenchieCat]

18. The truth is so sad.........and this is almost as bad as Guiliani campaigning

on Sept 11th!

Come one, John! What will happen during the GE when you become just another White Guy facing another White Guy who has the edge over you on national security? Where does your "electability" come from then? That you're better looking? :shrug:

One minute Edwards is preaching "Hope"....but the next minute he is running on old "Fears".

Sick and Sad.

[AdHocSolver]

19. Clinton's negatives are not that she is a woman, but that she is Hillary Clinton.

A different woman, without all of the negative baggage that Clinton carries, might have a chance of becoming president. Hillary has been demonized by the right wing since 1992 and that kind of Pavlovian conditioning has worked its way into the subconscious of many Americans over the past fifteen years.

When it comes time to actually vote, pangs of doubt are going to arise in many people, and even though they tell pollsters that they have no problem with voting for a woman way before the election, their deep-seated distrust, specifically of Hillary, developed over many years of exposure to anti-Hillary propaganda, will likely surface in the privacy of a voting booth, and they won't vote for her. Without some support from independents and Republican voters, the Republican machine will steal the election in 2008, just as they did in 2000, and 2004.

This is what Edwards is referring to when he says that he is the most electable. Edwards can campaign successfully in "red" states, whereas Clinton could not. If Kerry had ignored his handlers and campaigned more vigorously in "red" states, he would be president today. Nominating Clinton would very likely be worse for Democrats than Kerry's lackluster campaign. Whereas independents and Republicans showed lack of interest in Kerry, a Clinton candidacy would energize the right to come out against her.

As for Obama, he is just not ready to be the top of the ticket. While he has charisma, he is still an unknown quantity to many voters. These times are critical for the country, and many voters will be hesitant to vote for someone so new on the national political scene. More political experience and public exposure would make Obama a formidible candidate in 2016.

One possible winning combination in 2008 could be an Edwards/Obama ticket. This would allow the country to see Obama in action and become comfortable with him, and provide him with the experience that is needed for a successful presidential run.

[FrenchieCat]

21. Your opinion is your opinion, but does not come out of John Edwards' mouth......

and so it is "nice" for you to opine as to what makes John Edwards so much better than his Dem opponents, but he has already stated that he believes that he can "connect" better because he can campaign anywhere compared to the other two

In addition, I disagree with your opinion....as I believe that Clinton can campaign in the South, and saying otherwise is something "made up". She is currently leading in S. Carolina, and was the wife of the Arkansas Governor for many years....and so I'm not sure why she shouldn't be able to campaign anywhere? Can you provide us with some facts to back up this often repeated assertion?

As for Obama, he has more elected experience than does John Edwards, and is actually as much of a "known" quantity as is John Edwards. John Edwards' only claim to national fame is being on the last presidential losing ticket in 2004......and I'm not sure what Experience besides that Edwards can claim over Obama. Maybe John Edwards' many apologies for being on the wrong side of various issues is considered experience by some; me, I consider it simply a consistent lack of judgement.

At the end of the day, whether clearly stated or not, John Edwards really is running as being most electable simply because he is the White Guy from the South who will connect with "white voters" better than the Black guy and the Woman. For you to attempt to NOT make this be the case is intellectually dishonest.