Why Edwards II? - Because They Are on TV - You Dummy

 When last we met I argued that Edwards was the only logical candidate because 2008 is a year in which the economy goes sour.  The gist of the argument was that the last 7 years have been a paen to the three great Repbulican virtues:  negligence, incompetence and cronyism.  Because those are the very things a trial lawyer fights every day,  Edwards is uniquely well-suited to rescue our economy.

 http://www.dailykos.com/...

This post wants to strke a completely different theme.  Namely, the dynamic of the race is changing and there are some indications that it could boil down to a two person - Obama v. Edwards - contest.  Just take a moment and think what that means.  Join me below if that thought intrigues you.

  First, let's look at the Republicans.  Their contest is "wide open" "anybody's guess" - use whatever cliche you like.  But, I think it within the realm of possiblity that they will have a contest that survives Towering Tuesday.  The remaining candidates will debate, interview, run ads and generally be all over tv.   If the Dems have already decided - then the saturation media - obsessed as they are with running with the kool kids-  will leave the Dem nominee basically alone.  The Republicans will have cornered the market - and their message will get beamed via the kool kids over and over.

 Think, on the other hand, of an Obama v. Edwards contest.  Debates, interviews, ads, etc. all basically allowing these two powerful orators and advocates for the return of Democratic greatness to be on the tv.  My mind, for one, goes giddy at that prospect.  While there are differences between the two candidates -  the evidence to date suggests that they can debate in such a way as to draw differences - but with respect and intelligence.  

 While I acknowledge that our culture is changing - tv is still the most powerful central cultural device for dissemenation of ideas and images.  If we wrap up February 5 - we unilaterally disarm.  If we have Edwards v. Obama - we have the chance of a lifetime.  

 Don't blow it.

•  That would be great

  If I am being realistic I don't think there is a chance Edwards can get the nomination (I do allow myself to occasionally dream that somehow he can get it).  But it would be so great to see the two of them battle it out for a few months.  It would only help our party and help Obama.  

  by IowaEdwardsSupporter on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 11:40:13 AM PDT

  •  Of course I have an ulterior motive - sssshhhh

      If the battle could get down to Obama v. Edwards - and that debate got out on a fair footing to the electorate I have a sneaking suspicion - given the deep anger in the electorate what would happen.

    by Boxer7 on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 11:46:45 AM PDT

    •  heh

      ssshhhh

      I feel someone wouldn't like the outcome of that contest.

      by LaEscapee on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 11:59:47 AM PDT

  •  Don't forget that the next war is never the ...

    ... last war. This is not 2004.

    What is the difference? In 2004, after NH there was a steady progression of states, which Kerry knocked off one after another with only the rare exception, and by Super Tuesday he was the dominant front runner and rode free media to a resounding victory.

    However ... this time we have NH, and then a few more early states, then Super Duper Tuesday on Feb 5. And the candidate who lost Iowa and is going to lose her firewall state in NH, has more than enough money and a substantial core base of support to make a Feb 5 stand.

    And Senator Clinton spending big on a Feb. 5 stand, while it won't reverse her slide, will help ensure that Feb. 5 will not hand a majority of delegates to any of the three. The race will go on past Feb 5. It will go to states like here in Ohio, where Senators Obama and Clinton's support for extending the NAFTA model to Peru is going to bite very, very hard.

    And the mass of states on Feb. 5 means that even very big of states ... California, New York ... do not get sole possession of the spotlight. Instead, there is going to be a mini-General Election map, and results are going to go up on the board as they come in. So winning states that cover a lot of terrain will light up the map in a candidate's color, even if they do not have massive delegations.

    by BruceMcF on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 12:02:36 PM PDT

    •  You may be right -

       that would be fascinating to watch.  I was kind of reacting to the new "conventional wisdom" that Obama would now be the coronee (that probably is not the right word for a person being coronated) - and that after Towering Tuesday - things would go dark if one race was not competitive.

       My point is that the notion of Edwards and Obama getting repeated media exposure is nothing but good - all up - no downside.

      by Boxer7 on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 12:06:35 PM PDT

      •  The thing is, with two campaigns with $100m ...

        ... each, there is no way that the Edwards campaign ever expected to clinch the nomination by Feb. 5. Sure, they wanted to be the front-runner, but they knew that even if they were successful, they would at best have narrowed the race down to a two-person contest by Feb. 6th.

        And its money that forces a campaign to turn out the lights and go home. Since, as has been covered ad nauseum by Adam B, the Edwards campaign is built on a structure that it can sustain straight through to the convention (though of course he spins it as hard as he can in a different direction), there's nothing that can force the Edwards campaign out of the race. And since he's not going to stop until he's forced to stop, the campaign goes on until one candidate has a majority of the delegates.

        And with Senator Clinton still in the race, even if her campaign is mortally wounded, that sure as hell is not going to be Feb. 6th.

        by BruceMcF on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 12:14:35 PM PDT

•  thanks

  for this diary, boxer7.

  JRE will be the next POTUS.

  by hedgey on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 12:12:55 PM PDT

  •  Agree

    It's Edwards' time.  He's got the plan and the committment to see it through.

    There are some things that you just don't compromise on. We can count on Edwards to fight for us and not give in when the chips are down.

    by bear83 on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 12:30:24 PM PDT

•  Inland

  is about to turn up and tellyou you are a warmonger.

  by Salo on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 12:51:01 PM PDT

  •  Oh, hush, you spoiled the surprise. nt.

    by BruceMcF on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 01:03:33 PM PDT