Up until now, I vowed to post no 'bashing' diaries. For the sake of my own dignity, I don't even consider this to be a bashing diary. In fact, the only thing I'll post is exactly what I've read in several other articles. I am a scientist, I know how to gather information while not letting it effect my emotions, and that's what I aim to do when picking a candidate. Before I even begin, I apologize unreservedly if I offend anyone.
I want to outline why I think it's a bad idea to consider throwing support John Edwards' way. Primarily, it is well known that John Edwards spent the last 4 to 4.5 years campaigning in Iowa, yet he finished far behind Obama and just barely better than Hillary. I have tried pointing that out to Edwards supporters, and frankly, some of them even go as far as denying he even campaigned that long. Second, it is also well known that Edwards heavily invested in early states, hoping to rely on momentum from early wins to propel him into later states' primaries. Finally, while they differ in their styles and campaign promises, we all know a vote for Obama is similar to a vote for Edwards in that we're voting for change. They both differ in their approach, and one of the two approaches has proven more desirable. They both, however, offer change.
I plan to show articles that prove my first point, that Edwards has been campaigning 4 years in Iowa prior to seeing that effort go unrewarded. I will also show that Edwards relied heavily on wins in early states, without building much of an organization in other states. The last point I'll concede that you can disagree as you like (and probably will), that in their own ways, Edwards and Obama are both agents of change.
Edwards' 4 year campaign
I tried, unsuccessfully, to point out that an unrewarded (with a win) 4-year campaign makes it very difficult to support a candidate. I want a winning candidate, we all do, so let's not even pretend that voting on principle is all that matters. If it were, a whole hell of a lot of people (including myself) would be voting Kucinich.
I was particularly annoyed that some Edwards supporters refused to even acknowledge this campaign, saying that Edwards didn't even make this campaign. (Hopefully I won't be asked to show who made these claims, as the point of this diary is to enlighten, not to point out someone else's follies.)
Edwards' Iowa Express Bus Breaks Down
To cap off his four-year campaign to win Iowa's Democratic caucus Thursday night, John Edwards planned a 36-hour marathon bus tour through 15 of the crucial state's 99 counties with a whole series of policy announcements to garner publicity and caucus votes.
Ok, so that was LA Times, maybe that's not reputable enough for some of the more discerning detractors. We'll try a quote from Newsweek, by Peg Dunbar, Edwards' county chair in Waverly, Iowa:
Lost in the Cornfields
"John Edwards has been in Iowa for four and a half years and he's in third place," she says. "He should be in first place. Granted, it's very, very close. But I don't see him going anywhere and I don't go with a loser."
That last sentence, by the way, is my sentiments exactly. It's also the second reason I'm making this diary: I don't see Edwards going anywhere. But maybe that's still not good enough. Why not Google Edwards' site itself, maybe that'll be illuminating:
Edwards has a clear vision for America
Edwards’ powerful message continues to resonate with voters all across America – particularly in Iowa where he has spent the past four years crisscrossing the state to bring his message to each of our 99 counties.
Hopefully that's the final nail in that tedious coffin. John Edwards has been campaigning in Iowa for 4 years, and still he didn't win! That's absurd! No matter how much you might actually believe in vast, media conspiracies that are "blacking out" Edwards... you have to admit, that loss is bad. Most of the grassroots activists vote in primary campaigns, among them were probably campaign workers that Edwards employed on his epic campaign. Yet still, it was not enough.
Edwards really needed to win Iowa
Edwards has very limited fundraising ability, which is why he raises less money than Obama and Hillary. Because of that limited money, he didn't build much of a network outside of the early states. In November, he pulled out staffers in Nevada in order to help with the campaign in Iowa, and that's a terrible sign too! Without the Culinary Workers union support (which may or may not go to Obama), he has just about no chance in Nevada. The other early state, South Carolina, seems like it's leaning heavily toward Obama. Sure, voters there may swing Hillary's way, but it really doesn't look like Edwards stands a shot there.
I think Salon summed it up well:
But if Edwards falls short here in his second bid for the White House, all the dreams, all the fundraising, all the speeches, all the bravery in the face of his wife's incurable cancer will have been for naught.
I am certainly not rejoicing in his loses. I am, however, very glad that his brand of politics did not win. Edwards' candidacy caused more nastiness on DKos than I have ever seen. His supporters are sometimes nearly rabid, even to the point of getting me riled up (and I'm normally very even-tempered!). There are many reasons other than this one that Edwards lost Iowa, and with that said, I'll let Iowans finish this up:
Iowa "voters are very sophisticated," said Rep. Bruce Braley (D-Iowa), who has not decided whom he plans to endorse. Speaking at his "Bruce, Blues and Barbecue" fundraiser in Dubuque after Edwards spoke, he said, "They are looking for a candidate who's going to inspire and motivate them, not win by taking down another candidate."
Steve Larson, an assistant precinct captain in Polk County and an Edwards supporter, said he was growing increasingly frustrated by the rising negativity among the Democratic candidates.
"It turns neighbor against neighbor (Kossack against Kossack)," said the 51-year-old Des Moines resident. "I don't like to see it."
(the addition in parenthesis was mine)
We want inspiration; we don't want an attack dog! We can talk about politics without being rude about it, hell, we can even be inclusive! But I think we already have a candidate out there who's saying that, right?