Danny Glover was on Democracy Now! last Friday discussing his support for John Edwards and the mandate for change.
Harry Belafonte has also endorsed John Edwards. These two gentlemen have impeccible credentials as progressives.
So far, the only down side to electing Edwards is that he is a European ancestry male.
The Clinton campaign is attacking Edwards specifically and saying it is a two-way race between Clinton and Obama. That seems sure to backfire to me, because everyone they convince not to vote for Edwards will more likely vote for Obama. Glover says if it is a two-person race the two people are Obama and Edwards.
Comparing Huckabee's and Obama's Iowa speeches on change centered on hope, Glover also said, "I had problems distinguishing between Huckabee’s idea of this new America and Obama’s."
I really hope that Edwards can continue through to the convention and gather enough delegates to prevent both Clinton and Obama from getting the 2025 needed for the nomination. I think the best thing the Democratic Party could do is to have a contested convention with Richardson and Kucinich having some delegates also to work with in brokering a compromise platform and consensus candidate.
Link to DN! with Glover and text below.
After Iowa: A Roundtable Discussion on the Democratic Race with Danny Glover, Wayne Ford and Ellen Chesler
AMY GOODMAN: Let’s bring Danny Glover into the conversation.
DANNY GLOVER: Thank you very much.
AMY GOODMAN: He has long been, over the last months, stumping for John Edwards, just came back from going through the state of Iowa and Las Vegas, as well. Danny Glover, talk about your support for John Edwards. He has basically been campaigning in Iowa now for four years.
DANNY GLOVER: Well, I’ve supported John Edwards from the time of the—in May at the Black Mayors Conference in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. And clearly, I have gone with John Edwards, as we were involved in a campaign around Hotel Workers Rising. He’s talking about the issues of poverty and working peoples. He’s supporting unions, which I’m a big supporter of. And this is what has drawn me to John Edwards.
Certainly, clearly, what we have in this election, that there’s a mandate for change. There’s no doubt about that, when you see that 230,000 people, the highest-ever turnout—130,000 was the highest previous to that.
And also the fact that here’s John Edwards—for so long, almost the entire year, we have talked about whether we’re going to have a black president or a woman as the president, you know? On the cover of the major magazine outlets, you’ve had the picture of Hillary Clinton and, you know, Obama. You know, so now you’re clearly—there is another force within this.
And as you hear in John Edwards’s speech, hammering the same issues around poverty, healthcare, around the same issues that he has hammered all along, domestic policy. When we look at domestic policy, we look at the issue of New Orleans. We look at the issue out in New Orleans as a template or symptomatic of what is happening in this country in most urban areas. You know, not only do we have that, we have the gentrification of these areas. So there’s major issues that are going to be dealt with.
The question, of course, is now: what does Iowa mean? Most people say it means that it’s a sliver. Does it mean that we know now that the assumption that a black man can be elected may be more viable than the idea that a woman can be elected? I don’t know. I don’t think we know, have enough information at this particular point in time. But we cannot belittle the system itself.
John Edwards was outspent three-to-one by all the other candidates. As Juan mentioned before, that Obama spent $9 million in television ads alone. So there’s a lot to be—a lot of work to do.
And I think it becomes very interesting, because now you have young people coming in, you have people expanding the body politics, which is what this is all about anyway. How do we expand the body politics? How do we get people reengaged in change, really reengaged in change? The question is, what kind of change do we want? What kind of change do we want? Do we have the rhetorical change that we’re always faced with, or do we have perhaps the possibility of substantive change?
JUAN GONZALEZ: Danny, I’d like to ask you, Ellen Chesler just said that she believes now it’s a two-person race in the Democratic primary and that Edwards is not likely to have much support, or she questions whether he’ll have support in other places. And David Brooks, the conservative columnist in the New York Times, wrote today of the result that Obama has "made Hillary Clinton, with her wonkish, pragmatic approach to politics, seem uninspired. He’s made John Edwards, with his angry cries that ‘corporate greed is killing your children’s future,’ seem old-fashioned. Edwards’s political career is probably over." Your response to this issue of an anti-corporate position being old-fashioned?
DANNY GLOVER: Well, I certainly, when we look at what has happened over the last few years—and certainly the present administration is indicative of what has happened over the last few years in terms of just corporate greed—certainly I don’t believe that. I think that when people begin to address the issues of globalization, they look at corporate greed. When they begin to identify what is happening in the community, they look at greed, whether it’s corporate greed, whether it’s the greed that gentrifies the community or the greed that gentrifies a whole nation of people.
I think that it’s important that we look at the real issue, the real issues around poverty in this country. And [inaudible] poverty, those numbers are thirty-seven million, are indicative of the level of poverty and what people face. We look at the issue around the middle class. We look at the issue around the disparity in wages and the increasing gap between wealth in this country. And those are real issues here, you know? I mean, at some point in time, we’re going to have to address that.
And I don’t think—I think that John Edwards says he spent less than anyone else. He’s been—and I believe if it’s a two-person race, then that "two-person" is between Obama and Edwards.
Ellen Chesler in defense of Hillary continues to say that Hillary is the front runner and will win New Hampshire and that there is no difference between Obama and Clintion on the issues but that Hillary is more experienced and able to make the changes that everyone wants. She praised Hillary for moving across party lines
DANNY GLOVER: But I think I want to get back to the point of this whole idea of the expanded body politics. I don’t think that’s attributed to any one individual. I don’t think it’s attributed more to Obama than it is to Hillary or it is to Edwards. The people out here are looking for change. The question is, what kind of change are we talking about? You know, check into the question of, how was that change defined? How was that change clarified? And that is what is important. Is it a change that is both based upon—centered around this idea of hope, which I had—basically, I had problems distinguishing between Huckabee’s idea of this new America and Obama’s. Are they talking about the real issues that face this country? So that’s the question that—
They all brought people to the table and brought people out. There was more money spent in Iowa than ever. There was more money spent in advertising than ever. There were more people have come out. If we have those kind of results around the country, then we’ll talk about the participatory democracy that I think that this is—that we should be talking about. Whether they—who brings it to the table, the question becomes now—we begin to look at the individuals in reference to the issue and how they frame the issue and how they talk about the issue and what their record stands on the issue.
Glover also raised the concern that Obama is an African-American man who is not talking about the issues of African-Americans as an important part of his campaign and the need for real systemic change and not just cosmetic change.
I'm still a Kucinich supporter but I'm leaning more toward Edwards than to Obama, and the endorsements of Glover and Belafonte are weighing strongly in that lean.