LOGO: Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines. A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.  
December 2, 2009
Log in / Register

 Choose a size
Text Size

Most Read

Addicted to Nonsense

Kucinich on Obama's Escalation: Great Speech, Bad Policy

Rep. Dennis Kucinich Addresses Escalation in Afghanistan

Canada's Olympic Crackdown

Reality TV Hits a New Low With Disabled Model Show?

Most Comments
Most Emailed

Reports

Ear to the Ground

A/V Booth

Arts & Culture

Digs
Financial Meltdown 101
Vetting Sarah Palin

Truthdig Bazaar
Street Without Joy

Street Without Joy

By Bernard Fall
$16.47

Kalki book cover

Kalki

by Gore Vidal
Very Fine, Collector's Copy $150 NOW $80

more items

 
Reports

Message From Third Place

Email this item Email    Print this item Print   
Posted on Jan 24, 2008

By Eugene Robinson

LANCASTER, S.C.—Ralph Stanley and the Clinch Mountain Boys took the stage at a rally for John Edwards here Wednesday, and out of a clear sky it started raining metaphors.

    Stanley, who turns 81 next month, is the country music legend—I’m talking authentic country music, not the formulaic schmaltz manufactured these days in Nashville—whose work was introduced to a wider audience by the film “O Brother, Where Art Thou?” If you remember the movie, you may remember two songs in particular, and Stanley performed both of them for the candidate who needs to win the Democratic primary here Saturday, but almost surely won’t.

    First he sang “I Am a Man of Constant Sorrow,” about a gentleman who’s seen trouble all his days. Then Stanley dismissed the band and gave a haunting, a cappella performance of “O Death,” a dirgelike lament whose title is self-explanatory. They don’t make metaphors any more obvious.

    But when Edwards made his choreographed entrance—bounding in from the back of the hall and coming down through the audience, shaking hands all the way and flashing his movie-star smile for the cameras—he looked neither dead nor sorrowful. Of the three candidates leading the race for the Democratic nomination, Edwards is the most consistent performer at campaign events. He never seems tired or preoccupied, never has the wrung-out look of someone who has been riding a bus all day. He always dazzles when he enters the room.

    Still, Edwards is in third place. He was born in South Carolina, not far from this mill town, and if he finishes third in the primary here on Saturday, it’s hard to imagine how he keeps pace with the better-financed front-runners, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

Advertisement

    “I am the underdog,” he told the crowd, in a part of his stump speech that’s new since I last heard it in Iowa. “I don’t have $100 million like the other candidates. ... And I don’t stand at the debates and have petty arguments.”

    Since Obama and Clinton smacked each other around at the debate Monday, Edwards has been running as the mature adult in the race. “I was proud to be there representing the grown-up wing of the Democratic Party,” he said at the rally, to warm applause. “I realize that this is not about us personally.”

    Gil Small, the chairman of the Lancaster County Democratic Party, was wearing an Edwards button at the rally. He said he thought the debate had “helped him a lot,” but wouldn’t venture any bold predictions. Hopeful is probably the best description of the local campaign’s mood.

    Ben Jones, who played Cooter on TV’s “The Dukes of Hazzard,” was the emcee for the event, and much of his warm-up monologue was about how the media keep forgetting that there are three major candidates in the race, not two. Truth be told, he has a point. Edwards has a coherent, consistent message and is running a top-shelf campaign. He has beaten his rivals to the punch on several issues, and he’s the most skilled debater of the bunch. The problem is that Clinton and Obama aren’t candidates so much as phenomena. They take up so much space that it’s impossible to see the other guy.

    Such is politics. But every time I go to an Edwards rally, I come away feeling disheartened—not for Edwards, but for the people whose disappointment and disaffection he captures in his cadenced rhetoric about taking back the country from “special interests” holding it for ransom. Dismissing him as a born-again “populist” ignores the fact that Edwards has touched a nerve, especially in small towns and rural areas where, for the unskilled or the unlucky, “the economy” basically means Wal-Mart.

    “You have been ignored too long,” Edwards told the people in Lancaster. And he’s right.

    In campaign appearances and television ads, Edwards cites an aging CNN poll (it was published Dec. 11) showing that he would defeat any of the top four Republican opponents in the fall. Maybe, but how does he get to the fall? Given the power of the Obama and Clinton juggernauts, how does he even stick around long enough to be there if they falter? 

    For a while, it looked as if his strategy was to team up with Obama to knock Clinton off her stride. But in the last debate, he joined Clinton against Obama—and then met privately with Clinton afterwards.

    I asked him what they had discussed. “We talked about how the media isn’t giving me enough coverage,” he said with a smile.   

    Eugene Robinson’s e-mail address is eugenerobinson(at)washpost.com. 

    © 2008, Washington Post Writers Group


Elsewhere: .

Comments

Are you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig.

By Hammo, January 26, 2008 at 3:45 pm #

Edwards seems like the best candidate in many ways, with a better message and a better chance of winning against the Republican candidate.

The Democrats are heading toward nominating a flawed candidate and possibly losing the presidential election.

See the article “Democrats risk self-sabotage in presidential race ... again” on the Web site of the Populist Party of America at:

http://www.populistamerica.com/democrats_risk_self_sabotage_in_presidential_race_again

Report this

By Eric Arnow, January 26, 2008 at 10:48 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

Hi

The US is going broke because the military industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us about has a stranglehold on both the budget as well as political discourse.

All three candidates support war and subscribe to the discredited idea of Iran as a nuclear threat. We lived with the Soviet Union and Communist China that have far greater arsenals, but lied about Iraq’s WMD, and now all three of these candidates including Edwards demonize Iran, a country whose democratically elected government the USA undermined and overthrew.
Don’t you people know the history???

As for Edwards, Obama, Clinton—who cares—?? Until you get the bogus war on terror, that Bush deliberately orchestrated with CIA recruit and 911 fall guy, Osama Bin Laden exposed as the fraud it is,
the whole election is no more real than anything the Soviet leadership put on—they had elections too.

But the brainwashed public who thinks it lives in
“the greatest democracy in the world” sleepwalks through this ridiculous campaign. It is really pathetic to watch.

Report this

By jackpine savage, January 26, 2008 at 1:33 am #

Today, John Edwards was the first presidential candidate to come out and support Sen. Dodd’s plan to filibuster the FISA bill. (Strange that the only candidate who can’t actually do something about it is the only one who wants to…)

Granted, he did vote for the PATRIOT Act, but so did most people.

And an Obama/Edwards ticket (that’s certainly how it would play) would be an almost sure winner.  Hell, with all the power the VP has these days, its probably the better job.

Report this

By William Ries, January 25, 2008 at 10:46 pm #

I like edwards and intend to vote for him on super tuesday.  Among the Dems, to me he is the most presidential.  I think he is a long shot, given the way the MSM plays the other two. 

This is my take on illegal immigration…the repukelicans made this an issue about the same time as they favored privatizing social security.  I believe their motivation against illegals is simple..they don’t wan’t to pay for any of the benefits the illegals currently obtain. 

It’s not about security, they really like to have their lawns mowed and houses painted, they just don’t want their tax dollars suporting non-citizens (or citizens either).

They just want their taxes lowered..jeez…same old song..

Report this

By MrJJ, January 25, 2008 at 5:16 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

Mr Edwards needs to get a strong second place in SC. MSM wont give him much more airtime. I’d take Mr Edwards or Sen Obama as a Dem nominee in a heartbeat.

Report this

By Bboy, January 25, 2008 at 4:02 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

Celebrity candidates are all we have? Get real and get behind someone who isn’t bought off like all the mainline candidates are. Join American Democracy and get involved and participate. Don’t do what the mainstream wants, not caring. We need to get the votes out and the votes tabulated correctly. There are issues galore that the main liners choose to not takes stands on.

When we break the two party system monopolys, is when real change can occur in this present system of lawlessness and corruption institutionalised.

Report this

By reason, January 25, 2008 at 3:47 pm #

I am a moderate independent, I like John Edwards and Barack Obama. I would like to see them as President and Vice President. I believe together they would offer hope for the average American. I wish I could feel there are two candidates from the republican party who came even close to offering what Edwards and Obama can. Hilary Clinton is a very experienced politician and because she is so experienced I have little trust in her wanting to make any change in partisan politics that has done so little for this country. I have had enough of the Bushs and Clintons and I would hope my fellow voters feel the same way. “It is insane to vote for the same type candidates but expect a different political outcome.
THE ONE QUESTION I HAVE THAT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO ME IS HOW THEY WOULD ADDRESS THE PROBLEMS OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.

Report this

By Marjorie L. Swanson, January 25, 2008 at 11:35 am #

John Edwards has been dismissed by media from the beginning. Where’s the story in another white, male, candidate from the South? Now the first serious woman candidate that also happens to be married to Bill Clinton? Now that’s a story! That’s a headline.

Or better yet how about the first serious African-American candidate? That’s a story! That’s headlines without end.

Phenomena? I don’t think so. Neither the African American nor the Female candidate has that much to say. That they are phenomena is because media decided that they were. And has banged the drum for them ever since.

I support John Edwards and have from the gitgo. I have no hope that he will win. The “Celebrity” candidates, chosen for us by the media are the choices we have. And personally, I don’t see much difference in those two. Either one wins, I may just sit this one out.

After all, voting Democrat gets you things like Harry Reid, Diane Feinstein and Rahm Emmanuel. So why bother.

Report this

By Jaded Prole, January 25, 2008 at 9:47 am #

I still think he’s more image than reality but of the “front runners” he is the best choice.

Report this

Add Your Comment

Posts by unregistered readers are moderated. Posts by members
are published immediately. Why wait? Register today!







Number of characters remaining: 4000

Notify you when others comment on this article?


Are you a human?
Retype the word you see here.


Please read and abide by our comment policy.
By submitting this comment, you agree to this site's terms and conditions.

 
 

 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2009 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved.