Now *this* is the campaign story of April.
And we can all breathe a sigh of relief over it, too.
By Moe Lane Posted in 2008 — Comments (14) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Joe Trippi has signed on with the Edwards campaign (Via Glenn).
For those of you coming in late, Trippi is pretty much the reason why Howard Dean got to be DNC Chair, being the man who created the Internet money machine that got Dean national attention, an ocean of good ink and, of course, great big honking gobs of money for the 2004 primary campaign. For those of us watching closely back then - you didn't talk about Howard; you talked about Joe. Joe was the guy who was getting the money out of the stone.
Read on for what this means.
What does this mean?
Good things for the GOP, actually. You see, John Edwards is not going to be the Democratic Party nominee in 2008, let alone the next President of the United States. The man's percentages are consistently awful - he's fighting Al Gore in the rankings, and Gore isn't even running - and is faced with a field where Barack Obama is getting all the good press while Hillary Clinton is getting all the fearful respect. I also needn't mention that we've had this guy sighted in since 2004, I trust? We knew that he was running again, and trust us: we've been keeping notes. I reveal no secrets when I say that.
Joe Trippi is not enough of a financial wizard to overcome this handicap, thankfully. What Trippi can do - and probably will do - is get Edwards great big honking gobs of money, from people who normally don't contribute to primary campaigns. I applaud this: every dime that gets spent on a campaign that won't succeed is a dime that can't be used against my guy in the real election, and there's a upper limit to how many dimes these people can spare. I'm not speaking in terms of campaign contribution laws; I mean in a practical sense. Edwards will end up with enough money to transmit the message, but that won't actually ensure that he'll win.
So all in all, we're fortunate. Trippi working for Barack Obama would be a problem (Trippi working for Hillary Clinton would be overkill). Trippi working for John Edwards just assures that Edwards will go down swinging... and there's nothing like a nasty primary campaign to show your true opponent which are the useful barbs to fling.
Moe
PS: Full disclosure; I got the last three Congressional election results in a row pretty badly wrong, although I always knew that Bush was going to get re-elected. So you want to take all of this with a grain or two of salt.
PPS: Mind you, Edwards may be equally aware of his lack of chance at success, and is simply interested in trying to determine the tone of the primaries. This is something that big honking gobs of money can help with. Oh, my, yes.
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | Fred Thompson must enter the race by... when? — Comments (51) »
Now *this* is the campaign story of April. 14 Comments (0 topical, 14 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Support the Mission - Honor the troops
Exsolvo Orbis Terrarum
John Edwards' five thousand dollar haircuts? And is this the guy who crooned so soulfully to America's masses about the two Americas, the haves and the have nots, during the last election. Where are the NYT and the WaPo on this very apparent hypocrisy? Ah, that's right, they're following the three monkey's cue, "See No Evil; Hear No Evil; Do No evil."
out of the deep pockets of the anti American crowd and pours it all down the rathole of a wasted campaign.
Moe, you claim that his percentages are awful, but you make a few mistakes with this claim:
First, you say that he is even being outpolled by Gore, which in some polls is true, but if Gore doesn't run who do you think most of those liberal votes will go to? To a centrist Clinton or Obama? No, Edwards would pick up the lion's share, especially if he is now dubbing himself the liberal reformer with the addition of Trippi.
Second, you only point to the overall national picture. Well, as you well know we have a step by step process in the primary, even though the states are moving their primaries up and attempting to make a national primary day, there are steps in the primary still. First, there is Iowa where Edwards has a strong lead. We all know how primary elections work, win a state and carry that momentum to the next primary. Edwards has a strong lead in Iowa and is, according to the poll, either tied for second in New Hampshire or in second all by himself. Think about it, a win in Iowa carries momentum to New Hampshire and with him in a strong second there already he could easily win that primary as well. In other polls throughout the states he is consistently running either second or a strong third.
And, third, it is still early and much can happen b/w here and there, there was a certain grubby governor from the state of Arkansas that was not polling well in 1991 and we see how that turned out.
"The interval between the decay of the old and the formation and establishment of the new constitutes a period of transition which must always necessarily be one of uncertainty, confusion, error, and wild and fierce fanaticism. ." --John C. Calhoun
John Edwards couldn't even beat John Kerry, who was and is notably lacking in both.
Moe
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.
you do know that this isn't 2004, right? And, it isn't like President Bush walloped Kerry, if I remember everything hinged on a single state which means it was pretty darn close.
"The interval between the decay of the old and the formation and establishment of the new constitutes a period of transition which must always necessarily be one of uncertainty, confusion, error, and wild and fierce fanaticism. ." --John C. Calhoun
Edwards has had three more years to generate oppo research fodder.
As for Kerry: (shrug) Bush increased his vote margins in something like 47 of 50 states, compared to 2000 - despite everything that the Democrats could throw at him. Either one of the two parties can guarantee something like 40-45% of the vote: the devil is in the margins, and Edwards was devilishly marginal in that particular contest.
Moe
PS: I've noticed that Ohio looms large in many Democratic eyes because Kerry lost it - and I've noticed that few of them seem to want to focus on the significance of Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin's electoral results.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.
I find another silver lining in Trippi's hire. The man is talented, as you mentioned, and the money will continue to flow to Johnny. This almost assures Edwards, while a semi-also-ran, will be in the hunt throughout the primaries. He could siphon off just enough votes to assure Hillary and Obama have to stay at each other's throats to the bitter end.
at the 1988 Democrat convention which was widely regarded as the most boring and ponderous blather ever, but I guess it upped his name recognition. I think he lucked out in 1992 with a generational "changing of the guard" in the presidency, with Boomers ascendant.
Edwards has only the bad speechifying, crass fundraising efforts which abuse sympathy, and the backing of the TyrannoSoros. The last helps explain much about the Marcotte fiasco, and means he may end up being Lamonted.
Unless Edward becomes a Lieberman. Joe Trippi appears to be a fan of--or at least has some respect for--Unity 08, which is supposedly a bipartisan platform for a potential centrist third party candidacy. Could Trippi tend to be a moderating influence on Edwards, with an eye towards a possible third party run as a Unity 08 candidate?
A "centrist" Clinton? I doubt all of Al Gore's supporters are single-issue voters like that, PARTICULARLY given the Clinton/Gore rhetoric and track record in Iraq.
Run like Reagan!
Quasi-socialist, pandering, whiny little loser who couldn't even win re-election as Senator in his home state. As Rush says, he's the first "woman candidate". Although he may be the darling of the nutroots and he may do some good fundraising, this ambulance chasing trial lawyer won't be able to surge past Obama or Hillary.
Now he'll get trial lawyer money and 'nutroots' money? He's got that Southern populist streak going, and I fear that will garner more votes than people realize. I mean, Romney isn't doing well in the polls now, either, but everyone still thinks he's a front runner.
I sure hope I'm wrong about Edwards, because I don't think there's another Democratic candidate that I despise more.
---
The truth is, the more you tax profits, the more you undermine the American work ethic and the incentive structure that goes along with it. In fact, you demoralize the very system that has made this country great.
Sucks up a whole ton of money, looks real good in April, and is invisible in October.
It's war -- so when can we start shooting back at the enemy Democrats?
That's job #1, #2, and #3.