Edwards, The Invisible Man - Democratic Underground

ProfessorPlum

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jan-08-08 03:33 PM
Original message

Edwards, The Invisible Man

John Edwards has been my chosen Democratic candidate since this summer, based upon his open recognition of the blatantly obvious fact that poorer people have the odds against them even in situations where money would (ideally) not matter (or matter as much): the law, representation, health, education, etc.

Since then, his awareness of the true scope of this country's problems either seems to have grown, or his willingness to talk openly and forcefully about solving them has grown. He has, rightly, to my ears, focused his attention on the stranglehold that entrenched multinational corporations have on our government. Even Kucinich has not spoken so bluntly about the need to take on that power structure, which is the elephant in the body politic that no one talks about. His rhetoric has been exceptional. Moreover, Edwards seems both sincere and mature enough to understand what he is up against and to realize what might actually be involved in the kind of fight he is proposing. So, my support for him has solidified over time.

A couple of weeks ago, before the first primary elections, a friend asked me who I thought would win the Democratic nomination. I replied that I didn't know, but that I hoped it would be John Edwards. "He's not going to win it", she said. "He's not even in the news. I haven't heard anything about him."

Indeed. Political lost causes seem to be my forte. In this case, the media companies, wholly-owned subsidiaries of the multinational corporations Edwards so accurately warns about, have chosen to smoother his campaign in its crib with a pillow of silence. Pick up any newspaper, turn to any news channel, and you will find that the Democratic race has been narrowed to just two choices. Unsurprisingly, they are the same two choices that have been touted by the same media for over a year.

In real life, nationwide support for Edwards has been surging over the last month. He was outspent more than 6 to 1 by the only real Democratic candidates in Iowa, but finished second in that state anyway. In mediaworld, he is politely but sneeringly ignored, like an embarrassing fart in an elevator. Bob Somersby at the Daily Howler has written the book on reprehensible media election behavior, and today the smartest writer on the intertubes, Glenn Greenwald, looks at this old phenomenon in the light of the current race (emphasis below is both mine and Glenn's):

As but one example, consider this new daily tracking poll today from Rasumussen Reports. At least according to this poll, it is true that there has been one candidate who has been genuinely surging in the last week or two among Democratic voters nationally -- John Edwards:

Edwards -- who, just one week ago, was 10 points behind Obama nationally among Democrats -- is now only two points behind him. Less than a month ago, he trailed Clinton by 29 points. Now it's 13 points. He is, by far, at his high point of support nationwide. Apparently, the more exposure Democratic voters get to Edwards and his campaign positions -- and that exposure has been at its high point during his surge -- the more they like him. By contrast, Obama is more or less at the same level of support nationally, even having decreased some since his Iowa win (for most of mid-Decemeber, he was at 27-28 points).

Yet to listen to media reports, Edwards doesn't even exist. His campaign is dead. He has no chance. They hate Edwards, hate his message, and thus rendered him invisible long ago, only now to declare him dead -- after he came in second place in the first caucus of the campaign.