Elizabeth Edwards on Obama, Hillary, and the Media
Elizabeth Edwards, wife of Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, is becoming increasingly outspoken in advocating for her husband, and she's starting to raise some eyebrows with her comments. Today, CNN reported:
“We can’t make John black, we can’t make him a woman,” said Edwards, referring to Illinois Sen. Barack Obama and New York Sen. Hillary Clinton during an interview with Ziff Davis Media about the Internet’s role in the 2008 presidential election. “Those things get you a certain amount of fundraising dollars....Eric Schultz, a spokesman for Edwards’ campaign, told CNN Tuesday that Elizabeth Edwards was “noting what countless reporters and pundits have said for months, that Senators Clinton and Obama get a lot of media attention, and deservedly so, because of the potential ‘firsts’ of their candidacies.”
I don't think Al Sharpton, Elizabeth Dole, or Carol Mosley-Brown, prior presidential candidates whose nomination bids floundered, would agree with Elizabeth's theory as to why John Edwards is not receiving the same amount of media attention as the two Democratic front-runners. And I'm thinking that her comments would be getting a lot more scrutiny if she were, let's say, the wife of a Republican candidate.
First, I personally think Edwards gets plenty of coverage. But there's another, less provocative explanation as to why he is lagging in coverage, polling, and fundraising. He's a retread candidate--he's seen as one-half of the Dem's 2004 losing ticket yet he's running on the same themes in 2008. He's become a bit boring. Sure, the "firstness" of Obama and Hillary is noteworthy. But the news media has 24 hours to fill every day, and, if Edwards was bringing something fresh or bold or provocative to this campaign, it probably would make the news. It's not rocket science.
posted by Michael R. Kramer @ 10:38 PM
2 comments
<> Comments:
I think it’s great that being a woman or a black is no longer a drag on fundraising, but Mrs. Edwards is stretching things a little in suggesting that the reason they are getting so much money and support is because of the fact. Not only is that a stretch, but it is insulting to their donors (as well as donors to Bill Richardson, a Hispanic whose name Mrs. Edwards is ironically careful never to mention as Richardson has pulled up to the point where he is threatening to pass her husband and move into third place.) People donate to a political candidate because of what that candidate says and stands for, not what their gender or color is.
Media attention certainly does matter– exhibit A is Obama, who even before he announced was getting wall to wall media coverage that pushed candidates who had been working on building campaigns for months to the sidelines, but it’s not like Democratic primary voters don’t know who John Edwards is. If the 2004 runner up and Vice Presidential nominee is not connecting then maybe he needs to look at why people who already know him and have heard his message are supporting other candidates.
All good points. I think Edwards realizes he's in trouble and he and Elizabeth are getting a little jumpy. With Hillary's alleged electability problems, I'm sure he saw himself as the front-runner going into 2008, but that scenario obviously has gone awry. And remember Obama didn't materialize out of nowhere--he gave one of the best political speeches of the last 20 years at the 2004 convention. So he put himself on the radar.
Who knows? Maybe Edwards will pull a Kerry and make a comeback. Frankly, I would love to see Richardson in the mix with Hillary and Obama--he's a good candidate.
Post a Comment
<< Home