This first essay was posted on the front page of MyDD as part of a series of essays written by supporters of different presidential candidates. I think that "desmoinesdem" did an outstanding job. I consider this a must read.
http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/8/14/141110/755
Why I Support John Edwards by "desmoinesdem"
Tuesday Aug 14, 2007
Listening to John Edwards speak outside his Des Moines campaign headquarters yesterday, I was as proud as ever to support his candidacy. My reasons for supporting Edwards are too numerous to discuss in one diary, but I want to introduce myself and tell part of that story.I am a 38-year-old mother of two young boys, living in an older suburb of Des Moines. I grew up here, left Iowa for college, grad school and work, and returned in 2002 when my husband and I were ready to start a family. I've been a Democrat my whole life and been interested in politics since I was a kid. I was proud to fly back to Iowa my freshman year of college to caucus for Paul Simon.
Deciding which candidate to support in a Democratic primary is rarely simple for me. I am not looking for one overriding quality (best policy plans, most reliably progressive, most experienced, best temperament for the job, best ability to communicate, most electable), but for the candidate who has the best combination of these qualities.I saw most of the Democratic field speak in Iowa more than once in 2002 and 2003. My initial leanings were toward Florida Senator Bob Graham. What he lacked in the charisma/communication department I thought he made up for in other areas. I still think he would have been a good general-election candidate and president. When he failed to catch fire and dropped out of the race early, it took a while for me to decide. I had ruled out Dean earlier in the year. John Edwards was the best speaker in the field and connected well with audiences. However, I ended up in the John Kerry camp in large part because of his lengthy background (outstanding record on environmental and other progressive issues, Senate Foreign Affairs Committee service).
The Edwards campaign of 2003 was touching on a lot of important themes, but I didn't see enough specific proposals about how to address the big problems facing the country.As I witnessed the tidal wave of momentum toward Edwards in the final weeks before the Iowa caucuses, I noticed a few things. First, when people saw Edwards in person, he was often able to seal the deal, even if people had been leaning toward a different candidate earlier. Second, he seemed to do especially well with suburbanites in their 30s and 40s (a critical swing group). Third, my friends in the sustainable agriculture community told me that he was making the best connection by far with people in the smaller towns and rural areas.Kerry held on to win Iowa and the nomination. I don't think he ran as bad a campaign as people say he did (and I still think he won Ohio), but no one can deny that his communication problems, and his identity as a northeast liberal, hurt us badly, especially in down-ticket races in much of the country.Going into this election cycle, I had no idea who I would support for president. I went to hear a lot of the candidates when they came to central Iowa in 2006. When I saw Edwards a couple of times, the way he talked about economic and labor issues caught my attention.
I wrote diaries about those speeches here and here.
This diary by RDemocrat lays out a strong case for why Edwards is the best candidate to strengthen organized labor in this country.
Academics who study voting behavior have repeatedly shown that belonging to a labor union both makes people more likely to vote and more likely to vote for Democrats.But those weren't the only things that impressed me when Edwards talked about the disparity between how we tax work and wealth, and the need to strengthen labor unions in this country. He used simple but powerful language. In a different context, I thought jsamuel did a great job articulating Edwards' ability to talk about issues in accessible language:John Edwards is capable of not only turning progressive ideals into wonderful realistic plans, but he is also capable of advocating for them so that they become mainstream.Since I decided to support Edwards late last year, he has shown repeatedly that he has outstanding ideas to offer voters, such as: A detailed, universal health care plan, which has been praised by many who follow this issueclosely (including Ezra Klein and Paul Krugman).An ambitious energy plan, analyzed well here by BruceMcF.
He has not just committed to decrease CO2 emissions, he has committed to concrete proposals and is not afraid to say no more subsidies for coal, and no new coal-fired power plants (even when speaking in Marshalltown, Iowa, the site of a proposed new coal-fired power plant).
A detailed proposal to reform the tax system, which would have particular benefits for working people, as RDemocrat has shown.
A commitment to take on abusive lenders, a growing problem.
And of course, a 30-year plan for ending poverty.Several of Edwards' proposals address issues that particularly important for Democrats as we try to win over swing demographics:
His rural recovery plan addresses the biggest problems affecting those who live in rural or small-town America. In this context, I recommend ManfromMiddletown's excellent diary on electability, complete with lots of maps that show how a candidate who connects well in rural areas puts many more states into play for Democrats.
Edwards' balanced approach to trade is good policy and good politics, which will help in the midwestern swing states.
He has taken a strong stand on food safety and country-of-origin labeling, one of those no-brainers that Congress can't manage to get done because of the undue influence of certain industries. I believe this issue will become more salient, especially with parents of young children.
I have confidence in Edwards' ability to make the case for these policies with the general public as well as with Democrats.I will write more about Edwards' campaign in Iowa in future posts. For now, I'll just say that as a volunteer precinct captain, I am happy with the resources Edwards has invested in building up an organization here. His focus on substantive, progressive policies is well-suited to the Iowa caucus-goer. His campaign events have been balanced geographically, hitting counties where he did very well in 2004 as well as counties where he will need to improve his showing considerably.
The events have been managed well; yesterday, as I waited with many others in the 90-degree heat to kick off Edwards' bus tour of Iowa, campaign staff repeatedly wandered through the crowd offering cool, bottled water. Those details matter. For more on the first day of the bus tour, see diaries by cosbo and by NCDemAmy (both with video).
Thanks to all who are reading, to Jerome for the invitation to advocate on Edwards' behalf. I look forward to everyone's diaries in this series.
_______________________________________________
The following is an essay I wrote a few months ago. Though it is slightly outdated I think it makes some important points.
Here is the link to view the essay on MyDD http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/6/10/165415/060
Note: The group mentioned in the essay, "Team Edwards" is now a part of Edwards Supporter Central. To recieve updates from Edwards Supporter Central just e-mail us at EdwardsSupporterCentral@gmail.com
Why John Edwards (Part 1)
My name is Michael Conrad. I am a General Director with Team Edwards, a coalition of supporters working together to nominate and elect John Edwards. I am writing this for two reasons. One is to introduce Team Edwards to other supporters of John Edwards. The second, and far more important reason, is to lay out a few reasons for supporting John Edwards that I feel have been overlooked. There many reasons to support John Edwards. Instead of listing all of them here I think it would be best if I did this in a series. Consider this the first part.
For the first time in a long time the Democrat who best represents our values is also the most electable. That is just one of the reasons why I feel it is so important for the progressive movement to come together and support John Edwards' campaign. This diary would be far too long if I went into detail about all the reasons to support John Edwards, but after the jump I'll list some of the things he has done that make it clear that he is the bold progressive leader that both our party and our country desperately needs. If you dispute the point that John Edwards is the most electable Democrat I would like for you to check out the latest post on our blog. If you are already a John Edwards supporter you will be able to find information that will help you when engaging fellow Democrats about supporting John Edwards.
So why John Edwards?
Like I said before, he is the Democrat who best represents our values and is also the most electable Democrat in the race. For far too long we have had to weigh our desire to see our convictions represented in our candidate against our need to win. Finally we can throw that scale away.
John Edwards is the best communicator of progressive values. He does not need to tear down the party in a pathetic attempt to build himself up. Whether by enforcing myths about fighting terrorism, taxes, or trade, every other major Democratic candidate (Senator Clinton, Senator Obama, and Governor Richardson) have at one time in this campaign thrown the party under a bus when it suited the image that they wanted to project. When John Edwards criticizes our party he focuses on the need for our party to have more backbone and political courage. And he often does it to the face of Democratic leaders. The moment I knew that this was the campaign that I and many other progressive populists had been waiting for was when John Edwards told the DNC that now is the time to stop trying to reinvent the Democratic Party, now is the time to reclaim the Democratic Party.
At both of the recent debates it was clear to me that John Edwards is the best communicator in our party. I am obviously biased, but I am confident that if you watch the recent debate when it is replayed tonight on CNN you will see exactly what I am talking about.
We need to remember that the ability to communicate effectively is what gets people elected. I am clearly not a Ronald Reagan fan. He did terrible things to this country as well as others and shrugged it all of by stuffing his face with jelly beans. But he was able to communicate. And that is why, not some conservative fantasy that the country loved his policies, he won two elections by wide margins. Bill Clinton is a very effective communicator. While I am glad that President Clinton was in the oval office instead of a Republican I think that he squandered an opportunity to be a truly great president instead of just a good president. NAFTA, Ricky Ray Rector, his support for the huge amounts of money wasted on "Missile Defense", and his failure to act with regards to Rwanda are my reasons for not being the biggest fan on President Clinton. But, he was a very effective communicator and for this reason was, and still is, a very popular president.
Immediately after he learned that President Bush had won re-election Clinton was quoted as saying that Democrats need to remember to speak to people who are concerned about social issues. Personally, I believe that national security concerns (another issue that John Edwards has recently showed bold leadership on) was the main reason why Bush was re-elected. But Clinton is right about the need to speak to people who are concerned about these issues. Clinton also was right to point out that we should not change our positions on these issues, but we do need to address them. And no one speaks with more candor about social issues than John Edwards.
I would like to wrap up this diary by pointing out the need for a nominee who puts political courage ahead of political calculation. John Edwards has also run a very bold campaign and displayed the type of political courage that will be needed when a Democratic president attempts to make the end of the War in Iraq, Universal Health Care, Energy Independence, or any of the other things that are being focused on in the primaries a reality.
John Edwards' recent confrontation of the Bush doctrine of a "War on Terror" is a great example of this. Confronting one of the most widely used and effective political frames in recent memory was not an easy task but it was something that someone, for the long-term well being of both our party and our country, needed to do. What makes this decision even more important is how it was made. Edwards had a few seconds at the most to decide whether to raise his hand when the question about a "war on terror" was asked. Not only was he the only major candidate not to raise his hand, he did not stop there.
He showed progressive Democrats why engaging conservative myths is important, that it is possible, and how it can be done. Every counter-terrorism/national security expert that I have seen speak (usually on C-Span's "Book TV") has made it clear that the Bush administration has made us less safe, increased the number of terrorists, and fueled their hatred for us. As Edwards himself pointed out, we need to give those on the fence (and there are many) a hand to our side, not a shove to the other. Edwards confronted this conservative myth publicly and vigorously and he offered a substantive alternative to the Bush doctrine.
