More on Dem debate comments
As a follow up to yesterday's post, a couple more comments:
---Edward's undifferentiated negative comments on large U.S. companies would not likely work in any national sense, but in Iowa he may be playing the cards that he has well. He did well there in '04, he has campaigned extensively this year, and his poll numbers are not far from Clinton and Obama. In a race in which 28% could possibly be a winner, he is differentiating himself as a choice. Others talk about hope and optimism and focus their negatives on the Bush administration, while Edwards attacks corporate power and wealth, and seems to offer no hope without a fight. This style of resentment based populism combined with his efforts at a Bobby Kennedy style identification with the less fortunate has the chance, possibly, to be a lure to the undecideds at caucus time. If the media's focus on short term economic news continues to be alarmist, Edward's support could grow. That must be the bet.
---Clinton showed some backbone on a couple of issues that deserves mention. In the discussion of trade, she made a clear point that even in Iowa there have been beneficiaries as well as negatively impacted folks. On this charged issue, she did not need to tell the truth so clearly but she did. On Iraq, by omission she did not give a one year timetable for withdrawal, which is also the likely truth for any new President that is left with 100,000 or more troops there in January '09.(Obama did the same in a less direct way by saying that all "combat troops" will be out in one year)
Now I am really tired of writing about politics. Back to the markets or a break to books or music.
---Edward's undifferentiated negative comments on large U.S. companies would not likely work in any national sense, but in Iowa he may be playing the cards that he has well. He did well there in '04, he has campaigned extensively this year, and his poll numbers are not far from Clinton and Obama. In a race in which 28% could possibly be a winner, he is differentiating himself as a choice. Others talk about hope and optimism and focus their negatives on the Bush administration, while Edwards attacks corporate power and wealth, and seems to offer no hope without a fight. This style of resentment based populism combined with his efforts at a Bobby Kennedy style identification with the less fortunate has the chance, possibly, to be a lure to the undecideds at caucus time. If the media's focus on short term economic news continues to be alarmist, Edward's support could grow. That must be the bet.
---Clinton showed some backbone on a couple of issues that deserves mention. In the discussion of trade, she made a clear point that even in Iowa there have been beneficiaries as well as negatively impacted folks. On this charged issue, she did not need to tell the truth so clearly but she did. On Iraq, by omission she did not give a one year timetable for withdrawal, which is also the likely truth for any new President that is left with 100,000 or more troops there in January '09.(Obama did the same in a less direct way by saying that all "combat troops" will be out in one year)
Now I am really tired of writing about politics. Back to the markets or a break to books or music.
posted by John Borden at 12:07 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home