NOTE: PLEASE SEE THE SECOND UPDATE BELOW. AND GO TO THIS DIARY:
http://www.dailykos.com/...
Yes, another diary about John Edwards. But why? Read on.
Edwards continues to show that he is the candidate who speaks most to issues that affect everyday Americans in terms of their welfare and the changes he will bring. However, the media ignores him and puts him in a light that does not conform to reality.
Edwards is ignored? I know, he was the VP candidate in 2004. Everyone must know that. But let's be honest, do Americans really care who runs for VP? Ask the average person who ran with Gore or Dukakis. Some may know VPs who served, not those who ran?
We Democrats are not so on top of things either. We just like to believe we are smarter and know more.
More after the jump.
On October 23rd, a study was released by the The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press. The Pew Center describes itself as independent opinion research group that studies attitudes toward the press, politics and public policy issues, a nonpartisan "fact tank" that provides information on the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world.
The Pew Center study, entitled, Modest Interest in 2008 Campaign News, stated the following:
Notably, substantially more Republicans named Clinton as a Democratic candidate than named Giuliani, the frontrunner for the GOP nomination, as a Republican candidate. Fully 79% of Republicans mentioned Clinton when asked to name a Democratic candidate, while only 57% named Giuliani when asked for a Republican. Obama matched Giuliani in familiarity among Republicans (60%).
. . .
Among Democrats, Clinton is almost universally recognized; 86% of Democrats named Clinton as a Democratic candidate. About two-thirds (68%) named Obama, while31% named Edwards. Just 10% of Democrats could not name any Democratic presidential candidate.
Tying in feelings about the press and campaign coverage, The Pew study added:
In rating the job the press has done in covering the 2008 presidential campaign, the balance of opinion is largely negative at this point in the race. More than half of Americans (53%) rate the coverage as only fair or poor. . . .
A substantial number of Americans (77%) continue to say that they would like to see more coverage of the candidates' positions on issues. That opinion is virtually unchanged since May (76%).
. . .
The public is decidedly unenthusiastic about one area of campaign coverage: just 42% say they would like to see more coverage of which candidate is leading in the polls, while 45% wants to see less coverage. That result, like others relating to campaign coverage, has changed very little since May.
So, not only is Edwards apparently overlooked by the media, but coverage of issues is neglected, too.
For example, Edwards says he will leave no residual combat troops inside Iraq, but look at what Democrats seem to believe, according to a poll just released by CBS News:
AS PRESIDENT, HOW WOULD THE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES HANDLE IRAQ?
(Among Democratic primary voters)
Remove Most Troops From Iraq:
Clinton.....65 percent
Obama.......54 percent
Edwards.....44 percent
Keep most troops in Iraq
Clinton.....27 percent
Obama.......28 percent
Edwards.....32 percent
No wonder the country was duped into believing that Saddam caused 9-11.
What makes all this worse, from a progressive standpoint, is that Edwards actually carries the message for change, coupled with the proposals to accomplish change, better than any other candidate. He has a definite strategy to take to the people to obtain the mandate that is necessary to transform things. It will not be done incrementally. There is no time to waste. Edwards's plan is to ask America for super majorities in the House and the Senate. He believes this message will make him the most electable. This is what he wants us to see. It is akin to the approach of FDR and the New Deal. It underlies his theme of electability.
Just look at what Edwards said to the California SEIU on October 19th. It provides context and a clear rationale as to why his decision to accept public funding was indeed principled. TO BRING REAL CHANGE REQUIRES ONE TO ACTUALLY CHANGE! Is that so hard to fathom?
Here are some excepts from his remarks:
"The press and the pundits love to chatter on about electability – what it is, what it means, who has it, who doesn't. They all think the most electable candidate is the one with the most money and the most ties to Washington. I think the most electable candidate is the one with the best ideas who can go to every corner of America and tell the truth about how badly Washington is broken.
"The problem is, the press and the pundits have confused the candidate who would win an election inside the Beltway with the candidate who can win an election in the rest of America.
. . .
"So yeah, anybody can say change – but the real question is what are you going to do about it? Are you going to pay lip service to our problems and just offer poll-tested solutions that don't rock the Washington boat? Or are you going to tell the truth about the real challenges we face, be honest about what it's going to take to meet them, and have the courage to put it all on the line and fight with everything you've got to take on the special interests and make it happen?
. . .
"If our nominee is just a little better than the Republicans, who knows what will happen? If the people want change and both parties offer slightly different versions of the status quo – a status quo that protects corporate profits and the wealthiest at the expense of everyone else – then all bets are off.
"But if our nominee offers a clear choice between a Republican party committed to corporate power and a Democratic party committed to reclaiming democracy for our people, then we're going to win this election going away.
"And if we have a nominee offering a bold vision of real change who can make the case for that vision in every corner of America, we will [win] Congressional races across America, in red states and blue states, on the coasts, in the South, the Southwest, the Northwest and the Midwest.
"And then imagine what we can do in the first 100 days – end the war, begin the hard work to restore America's moral leadership around the world, launch an all out-effort to enact true universal health care before the summer's over, put America on the road to energy independence ... and we'd just be getting started.
"I'm not running for president just to be president – I'm running for president because our democracy has lost touch with the people who are supposed to own it, and our government has broken faith with the values that are supposed to rule it. I'm running for president to change America and put our government back on the side of the working men and women who make this country great.
"And that's why the next three months are so critical. We are not just choosing a nominee. We are taking a stand as a party. We are saying to America – this is who we are as Democrats, this is what we believe, this is what we will do if you place your trust in us.
"I believe that if we offer real change, if we reject the broken system, say no the corporate interests and stand once and for all with the people, nothing can stop us. We will win the White House, but that's not all. We will elect super majorities in the House and the Senate – 280 Democrats in the House and 61 in the Senate.
To me, this IS a winning message, and it is backed with winning proposals. On substance and pushing the Democratic agenda, Edwards shines as well. But do the people even know? I am dubious when just 31% of Democrats know he is even running and because the CBS poll cited above indicates just how poorly informed too many Democrats actually are. That includes people here at DKos, where inaccuracies are disseminated to easily for purely partisan points, where out of context spin is spun without regard to its effect or the dumbing down of people who are unaware. Way too much of what is important and accurate gets lost in the shuffle.
Last Friday, Edwards outlined a proposal that complements his winning strategy, a plan to stand up for working families by restoring corporate responsibility and helping families achieve financial security in the new economy. He knows that America built the strongest middle class in history due to a basic bargain among government, businesses and families, yet today, big corporate interests and Washington insiders have put narrow interests ahead of the middle class.
Edwards's proposal has depth. Among other things, Edwards will:
Modernize the Social Contract:
- Edwards will create retirement benefits such as Universal Retirement Accounts where workers will be able to build up savings over the course of their careers, regardless of how many times they change jobs. Worker contributions will be matched up to dollar for dollar on the first $500 by a new Get Ahead tax credit, which will be far more valuable than the 10 percent or 15 percent tax deduction that many workers get on retirement savings today. Edwards will also create opportunities for workers to convert their savings into government-sponsored annuities, offering fixed monthly payments for the rest of their lives and ensuring that retirees do not outlive their savings.
- Edwards will Honor Pension Promises and prevent unfair special treatment for executives reforming bankruptcy laws to give pensions a higher priority when companies go under and give workers a claim for lost pensions, like lost wages. He will prevent corporations from stripping workers of accrued pension benefits through corporate reorganizations, like Halliburton did, and stop companies from misclassifying regular workers as contractors in order to shortchange them on pension benefits.
- Edwards will Create Universal and Affordable Health Insurance and guarantee coverage to every American and Reform Health Care to Get Better, More Affordable Care: Among other things, Edwards will reform insurance laws by banning discrimination against preexisting conditions and requiring at least 85 percent of premiums to go to patient care.
Demand Corporate Responsibility:
In 2005, the average CEO was paid more in one workday than the average worker earned all year. One analysis found that executives at the worst-performing large companies were paid the most. Corporate boards are often hand-picked by management. Businesses have also stepped up their campaign contributions and lobbying to persuade Washington to dismantle consumer and worker protections that conflicted with their bottom lines. Edwards believes that they also have responsibilities to shareholders, workers, and the public. In this regard, Edwards will:
1. Modernize Labor Laws to Give Workers a Voice: Private sector employers illegally fire workers in at least 25 percent of organizing drives. To help the 60 million workers who would join a union if they could, Edwards will pass the Employee Free Choice Act to let workers unionize when a majority of them sign cards, and make penalties for breaking labor laws tougher and faster. He will also ban the permanent replacement of strikers to give workers the leverage to demand their fair share of rewards for their work and protect the Davis-Bacon Act requiring prevailing wages on federal contracts.
2. Grant Shareholders New Rights:
o Strengthening shareholder rights: Edwards will give shareholders the right to render an advisory vote on executive compensation, call a shareholders' meeting, recall a limited number of directors at a time and have proxy access to the candidate slate for boards of directors. To ensure that these policies facilitate accountability, not hostile takeovers, Edwards will require the participation of long-term investors in these efforts.
o Enforcing fiduciary duties of institutional investors: Institutional investors like mutual funds and pension funds have a responsibility to act in the best interests of the families whose savings they manage. Edwards will require them to justify failures to take shareholder action on governance and executive pay issues. He will also increase the government's enforcement of conflict-of-interest and negligence charges against mutual funds and other institutional investors.
3. Cap Unfair Levels of Executive Pensions that, in effect, gives executives unlimited IRAs or 401(k)s, without the limits that apply to other workers. Edwards will limit the amount of money that can be put into these funds to $1 million a year.
4. Create Public Accountability through Transparency by enacting a new "Corporate Citizen" disclosure law requiring all businesses to disclose in annual reports to shareholders, their regulators, and the public:
o Their social impact, including lobbying, political contributions, taxes paid, government contracts and subsidies, and environmental impacts.
o Their business practices, including their governance structure, the pay and demographics of directors and top officers, conditions in foreign supply chain contractors, and foreign criminal investigations.
5. Protect Families from Abusive Financial Products: Edwards will create a tough new regulator, the Family Savings and Credit Commission, to protect consumers by reviewing all financial services products marketed to families, from six-figure exotic mortgages to $30 bank overdraft fees.
6. Ensure the Safety of Imported Food and Drugs: Edwards will restructure our food inspection responsibilities and increase Food and Drug Administration inspections, enforce mandatory country-of-origin labeling laws, and require the FDA to certify that a foreign nation's food safety systems are equivalent to our own before its producers can sell food to America.
7. Strengthen Toy and Other Product Safety: Nearly 80 percent of children's toys are made in China, and recently Fisher-Price recalled almost 1 million toys made with high amounts of lead. Edwards will raise penalties for safety violations, examine possible independent testing requirements, and ban government regulators from accepting travel paid for by the industry.
8. Protect Families from Toxic Substances: Americans have no information on the toxicity of at least 60 percent of the most common and pervasive chemicals, even those suspected to cause cancer or birth defects. Edwards will expand the right to know about toxic and potentially carcinogenic substances in communities and consumer products, reversing a Bush rule shielding polluters from increased disclosure. He will also strengthen the EPA and FDA's power to require testing and labeling of potentially toxic chemicals in foods and consumer products.
So there you have it from my perspective. Edwards's proposals and message offers a new way to change the direction we are headed. If people ever come to know, absent the manipulation which hides his message, then he can, as he says, create the mandate that is needed to transform this country before it is too late.
UPDATE: Another study, just released, confirms the information in this diary regarding the lack of coverage for Edwards and the overall ineptitude of coverage by the media. It is found at Journalism.org, and entitled, THE INVISIBLE PRIMARY—INVISIBLE NO LONGERA First Look at Coverage of the 2008 Presidential Campaign It is a joint report by the Project for Excellence in Journalism funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts and the Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.
It is worth reading in full. This study deserves a diary of it's own, as it contains important information beyond what is typical about campaigns. It provides some real perspective. Here's the link:
http://www.journalism.org/...
As to Edwards, here is a blurb:
Now in his second presidential campaign, John Edwards—the Democrats’ 2004 vice-presidential nominee—has had real trouble competing for media attention with the two celebrity candidates who have also been No. 1 and No. 2 in the polls, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. The two sitting Senators were presented as locked in a two-way race. In most stories the primary focus was either Clinton or Obama (234 and 240 stories) and the secondary focus was also evenly split between Clinton and Obama (148 to 147). Edwards was way behind with only 71 primary and 48 secondary mentions.
As the major figure in only 4% of the campaign stories in the first five months of the year, Edwards ended up in the middle tier of candidates in terms of coverage. But even that number is in some ways deceptive. Were it not for the month of March, when Edwards’ wife Elizabeth announced that her breast cancer had recurred, the former North Carolina Senator would have been in the third tier of candidate coverage in the outlets studied. That lack of media attention came despite the fact that Edwards had been leading, for much of this time, in the polls in Iowa, and that he has consistently polled in the double digits in the national Gallup surveys.
Thanks to B for the tip. If only I knew how to incorporate table.
2nd UPDATE: I just read Edwards's speech today. I am astonished. This is the only candidate that carries the message I believe in to my core. I hope anyone who sees this update will go and visist the diary and read the speech and help spread the word.
http://www.dailykos.com/...