Hey, if it doesn't exist, then how would you explain this Larry Kudlow column about John Edwards?
So, John Edwards has thrown his hat into the presidential ring. Unfortunately, he has a losing message.
And if anybody knows how to win an election, it's a guy who hosts a financial show on CNBC.
[Edwards'] ultra-liberal approach will elicit only a small niche of support among the ultra lefties in the Democratic Party.
Granted, if you asked Kudlow, he'd call Edwards ultra-liberal, Obama ultra-liberal, and say that Hillary is hiding her ultra-liberalishness. And that Evan Bayh is close to ultra-liberal too.
More under the fold
But yeah, he seriously said that.
Democrats know (or at least, I think they know) that their success in the 2006 midterm election was largely a function of their best efforts to imitate Republicans.
We've covered that lie enough, right?
Ya know, about how Americans were so mad at Republicans that they supposedly voted for guys acting Republicans.
Kudlow is probably providing info for the 2007 book titled Americans Are so Guillible about how the "really stupid" people are to blame for the 2006 election results.
That said, if John Edwards somehow managed to reverse this tide and win his party's nomination, he would lead his party to a crushing defeat in 2008.
Larry's recycling paragraphs from those anti-Howard Dean editorials written in 2004.
Larry Kudlow goes on to say that Edwards is DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMED since he's not in line with Bush on Iraq, and because he opposes poverty, and because he wants to tax rich people.
John Edwards is revealing which pundits live in bubbles and which live in alternate universes.
I'm putting Kudlow down as "living in a bizarroworld", but clearly it's a world that is reachable, or else he wouldn't be contributing columns about how John Edwards is an ultraliberal who'll tax all the really popular rich people.
It seems that John Edwards scares the right-wing punditosphere, doesn't it?