Edwards v. Obama would frame issues for DEMS in a way the MSM has tried to avoid for years...

[Blackhatjack]

--(Cross-posted from a comment by Anon at www.talkingpointsmemo.com)

"An Edwards v. Obama contest from here on out would really frame the issues for the Democratic Voters in a way that the MSM has been trying to avoid for years. The truth is that the MSM has used BOTH Obama and Edwards as foils to promote the Hillary Clinton candidacy as 'inevitable' and now that Iowa Caucus-goers have rejected that the MSM still will not admit that they were wrong and the Democratic voters rejected Hillary's preservation of the status quo.

If Edwards and Obama come out of 'Super Tuesday' as the top viable candidates, Edwards will have an excellent chance to win the nomination because the Democratic voters have not been given coverage of Edwards' campaign like they have Obama --and it will resonate with those looking for a candidate who will fight for them and the 'change' they want as compared to Obama's plan to negotiate with the very corporate interests that have threatened the survival of the middle class.

THe sooner Hillary is off the radar screen the better for all Democratic voters, and the longer the MSM keeps Hillary in the fight the longer Edwards and Obama will split the 'anti-Hillary' vote in the Party."

[Selatius]

1. The real issue is the corporate news media itself. It must be broken as a monopolistic enterprise.

If it is not, then they will continue to ignore and bury stories, and people will have to go to the foreign press to find real, hard-hitting stories that are informative. Instead, they give us fluff stories on celebrities and missing persons cases.

They could be covering the war. They could be telling viewers exactly how the health care system is broken, getting into specifics. They could be informing viewers on the sad state of public schools in America or our failing infrastructure with antiquated power grids and collapsing bridges or a city still left in ruins years after a storm destroyed it. Do they cover that? No.

[Blackhatjack]

3. MSM is no longer a legitimate source for news. They have their own corporate agenda to push...

... and Edwards threatens that agenda.

The Fourth Estate will have to be reconstituted by breaking up the corporate MSM monopolies.

[CorpGovActivist]

12. .

[Sarah Ibarruri]

2. I agree. Time to dismiss conservative and centrist Democrats.

They put out the welcome mat to Repukes with their inability to see the ones who suffer most in our country.

[Blackhatjack]

4. There is no MSM agenda which will address those hurting the most and least powerful among us

[Sarah Ibarruri]

6. :( And the ones suffering the most, are the ones that need the MOST to be focused on...

the elderly, the poor, the lower middle class, the homeless, children, the disabled, women with children, people of dark skin, the weak, the ill, day laborers, the lost, people of low I.Q., etc. etc. It is they whose needs I want addressed the most. The rest aren't doing badly, and the rich are doing the best of all. In fact, the rich do famously when the economy of the majority is down, and usually it's because they are at their greediest that the economy of the majority is doing badly.

[CorpGovActivist]

14. .

[blogslut]

5. I agree, those two would frame the debate perfectly

I look forward to the discourse.

[Triana]

8. It certainly would! I'd look forward to that myself. (n/t)

[CorpGovActivist]

7. Splitting the Anti-Hillary Vote...

... plenty to go around, but to the point of your post: yes, I think that an Edwards/Obama matchup is terrifying Wall Streeters.

- Dave

[AzDar]

9. Makes me all trembly just thinking about it!

Substance and style over.... style.
Go, Johnny, GO!!:patriot:

[K Gardner]

10. I so totally agree with you on this. A message the MSM and D.C. would be UNABLE to

ignore, and one that all of America would hear loud and clear. The right wing, I truly believe, is going to fracture and nearly disappear into the unvocal minority it should always have been.

[bvar22]

11. K&R

I would love to see Obama forced to debate "specifics" and "implementation" with John Edwards.
Obama is great with the lofty generalizations.
Everyone loves a box of puppies.



"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans. I want us to compete for that great mass of voters that want a party that will stand up for working Americans, family farmers, and people who haven't felt the benefits of the economic upturn."---Paul Wellstone

[unc70]

16. I so like that Wellstone quote. Like most of his.

I knew him (acquaintance) when I was an undergraduate, he was in grad school at UNC Chapel Hill.

Carolina in the 60's and 70's somehow nurtured in us strong positions for social justice, tolerance, tolerance, and activism of all types. I remember being taught that we each were the beneficiary of the financial and other support from the citizens of NC which allowed us to receive a first class education at modest cost. In return, we were expected to be good stewards, to work to lift up and improve the lives of our fellow citizens, to treat each one with respect and compassion.

"Where the weak grow strong and the strong grow great"
from the official toast of the State of North Carolina

Go Heels.

UNC'70

[OzarkDem]

13. Change vs Status Quo

that is the discussion voters want to have right now. They're very dissatisfied with the current state of affairs and deserve to choose a candidate who offers change instead of more of the same.

[donkeyotay]

15. This is why I don't call them the MSM, or MainStream Media.

They don't reflect the mainstream of America. They work for a corporate elite and defense. They are anything but mainstream. They control the airwaves because, over the years, our government and its regulators stopped working for us and started working for them. I think calling them corporate media is more accurate.

[Blackhatjack]

17. Repubs tonight will not acknowledge this dynamic...n/t