While Barack Obama was the clear winner and should receive all plaudits for getting out the vote in Iowa the way he did, Edwards’ showing, despite being outspent six to one, is nothing to sneeze at and at least does signal that Edwards’ populist rhetoric isn’t as off-putting as the punditocracy would have you believe.
The one thing that’s clear from the results in Iowa tonight is that the status quo lost and change won. [..]
Download | Play 
Download | Play (h/t BillW)
Because what we’ve seen here in Iowa is we’ve seen two candidates who thought their money would make them inevitable. But what the Iowa caucus goers have shown is if you’re willing to have a little backbone, to have a little courage, to speak for the middle class, to speak for those who have no voice, if you’re willing… you’re willing to stand up to corporate greed, that message and the American people are unstoppable. No matter how much money is spent, no matter how much …
No Trackbacks To “Edwards’ Post-Caucus Speech from Iowa“
Still hope for JE! He’s on the roll!
Edwards speech was good. He actually mentions the people that vote, unlike Hillary and Obama. Too bad he won’t get elected as Corporate America will now put him on virtual “ignore”. They don’t like his message. Caught his speech on Faux of all networks, and he got done speaking, all they did was basically ignore him. Well, first they ridiculed how he sounded like Howard Dean. Then they went back to the Clinton Saga-Episode 2.
Edwards rocked. He understands the need to end this second gilded age
This is all good fun, but the question is, who does Diebold support?
The candidate that wins the election machine manufacturers will be President.
Before anyone start going around “analyzing” what all this stuff means. Read this article…it might put some things in perspective.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....s_politics
You will know that change has arrived not when a woman or an African-American are elected, but when Bush/Cheney are standing before the Hague.
If the Democrats voting in these early primaries do not vote for John Edwards, then its your own fricking fault that you all get pro-corporate, pro-war, brought/bought to you by big lobbyist Democratic candidates like Barack “Fraud” Obama and/or Hillary “Sellout” Clinton.
The Democrats and their minion voters have been bitching about the pro-corporate and pro-war policies of the Bush-Cheney administration for the last 7-plus years yet vote for the same type of candidate that Bush-Cheney are in Barack Obama. Obama is backed by big business and big corporate lobbyists, yet people of the Democratic party stripe and other gullible types, think he is some kind of “change candidate.”
Barack Obama is not Antiwar and would bomb Iran without much problem. Obama is also a corporate candidate as well.
At this point, John Edwards is the ONLY CHOICE for the antiwar, anti-corporate, liberal/progressive base of the Democratic party.
Thought his speech was stirring. Very umm Presidential? Yeah, that’s it. Keep going John. You were my guy in 04 and you still are.
Go Edwards!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If Edwards had won, Chris Matthews would have immediately anointed JE as the new FDR.
If you look at the delegates each candidate got, the top three was a hell of a lot closer of a race than pretty much everyone is talking about.
Am I wrong in this?
1. Obama - 16 delegates
2. Clinton - 15 delegates
3. Edwards - 14 delegates
So what if the “pundits” and mainstream media whores ignore Edwards.
The people, the VOTERS will not.
Edwards is definitely in the race and I am liking him more and more. Although very happy with Obama’s win, I still have a problem with him receiving so much $$ support from the health care industry.
As I’ve already explained, we don’t do things that directly here. We elected precinct delegates last night. They will elect county delegates in about two months. Then those people will elect the state’s delegates.
But, if everyone does as they originally intended, your breakdown could well be right.
Liked Edwards’ speech last night more than Obama’s - was less of a “concert,” but had far more substance. Obama is good, Edwards would be a better President.
Anyone catch Lithpin’ Rudy making the rounds on all of the cable news networks last night?? He and his whitened overbite were all smiles when he kept telling the anchors how he was looking forward to destroying the other candidates in states like New York and Florida.
Ummm Rudy? I don’t think so! Funny, too…your campaign manager expected at least a third place showing in Iowa, even ridiculing the likes of Ron Paul who would “come in at a pathetic fifth or sixth place”. WAY TO GO, RUDY!!!
If the Democratic Party does not pick John Edwards but, instead, chooses Barack “Fraud” Obama or Hillary “Sellout” Clinton, then I will be sitting this election out. Oh, I will vote for other races, etc., but will not cast any vote for pro-corporate, pro-war candidates.
Edwards has put forth a solid platform. Barack “Fraud” Obama has not. At least in comparison to Barack “Fraud” Obama, Hillary “Sellout” Clinton, has a much better healthcare plan for Americans.
I cannot believe the stupidity of the Democratic Party voters who after 7-plus years of Bush and Cheney thinks Obama and Clinton are much different.
Stop your phony outrage at Bush and Cheney, if you continue to support Barack “Fraud” Obama and/or Hillary “Sellout” Clinton, rather than John Edwards.
Also, just to freak you out. Of the 56 state delegates, the caucus process only concerns 45 of them. The other 11 are named by the state party.
So, if you’re really counting national delegates already, which seems a bit creepy, then there are 11 of 56 votes that are not very likely to be for Edwards, no matter what.
Edwards ran a good campaign also and should be congratulated. However it is a bit misleading for him to claim that he was outspent, when outside groups ran 527 advertisments that attacked Obama. They were everywhere here. We do not know exactly how much was spent, but it was in the millions. (I’m not just saying this, I’m in Iowa right now and those 527 ads were everywhere. You couldn’t tell that they were not Edwards ads unless you looked very closely at the text at the end.)
http://www.concordmonitor.com/.....043/NEWS01
The problem with the media ignoring Edwards (and Dodd and Kucinich) is that most people get their info from the media. Yes, even Democrats. Having the MSM shun you as a candidate is really a tough spot to be in because you have to buy ALL of your air time in the form of commercials (and make sure they are run at prime time and not at 3 in the morning). Candidates like HRC and Obama get hours and hours and hours of FREE air time, whether we like it or not, because of media coverage.
I respect Edwards’ shunning of big business, but I think a small purchase from ChapStick would be beneficial.
Yeah, Edwards came in SECOND and the MSM is trying to turn this into a 2 person race between Obama and Clinton?
What’s up with that?
I smell a rat, don’t you?
On the other side of the fence, Michelle Malkin barely acknowledges Huckabee on her splash page, his victory over Romney is buried half way down the page, buried in one of her interminable updates.
heheheh. :P :P :P
Love to see these whack-jobs hoisted by their own petards.
~Nyc
Edwards is a joke, Mr Hedge Fund! He’s not going to win and he’s not going to be the VP because he sucked at that job in 2004.
Edwards is saying whatever he has to to get into office, blaming big business! who do you think employee’s people in the country or pays most of the taxes. PRIVATIZE PRIVATIZE PRIVATIZE!!!!
sunshinematty @ 19:
I think his lips are sore from NOT kissing Mr. Corporation’s butts. Ick…I still have that image of Hillary onstage surrounded by old political hacks from years gone by…ya…change Hillary…that means….no more of OLD politics….either you and your campaign gurus are not very smart, or you already know it doesn’t really matter what happens, as you will be sworn in the next Prez of Corporate America.
Ron Paul 4 Life @ 21:
Ron Paul did well…….hahahaha
If we ‘liberals’, or ‘progressives’, or whatever-you-want-to-call-us, (I prefer ’sane, responsible citizens for a fair and just society’) want to win in November, as well as this first fluke in January, we better get on the Edwards bandwagon, and soon.
I mean, it’s nice that Obama notched a win, but can you imagine what would happen to him in a national election? There are not enough ‘college kids for change’ in the friggin’ universe, let alone the USA, to overcome the anti-campaign the republicans would run against this guy, on legitimate issues, especially lack of experience, let alone the ‘hidden’ agenda. McCain, for example, would end up spitting him out in little pieces, and McCain is a lousy candidate.
Hillary would get the same treatment. I mean, is tracking your husband’s countless affairs relevant ‘experience’ to be president?
It’s ‘nice’ to be ‘nice’, but not to be president. Let’s at least try to win in November, and Obama won’t get it done.
Why hasn’t anyone mentioned that Edwards never congratulated Obama for his win? His speech sounded like he (Edwards) was the winner. He was not.
I like John Edwards just fine, but his “concession” speech, while I understand the need to seem/stay confident, was rude and off-putting.
An AP report on the election coverage was the lead story on my Yahoo News this morning. After devoting the first 5 paragraphs to Obama, Huckabee, and the Repub results, they mentioned Hillary’s finish behind Obama in paragraph 6. John Edwards is not mentioned until paragraph 16, where his 2nd place finish is couched as disappointing.
Unreal.
I’m sorry,
My one, and only, problem with Edwards is that i also feel like he’s trying to pull emotions from me by coming up with Hallmark moment after Hallmark moment. I like what he stands for, don’t get me wrong, but I don’t trust him. I couldn’t swallow when he offered to give me the recipe of his mom’s pecan pie if I donated to his campaign…..it was simply to hokie, and made me feel like a child being enticed with a piece of candy to follow the strange man.
The story of poor Mr. X and widow Y, is definitely a tragedy for our country and does highlight a system which needs to be changed…but after so many stories they again make me feel like he’s trying to pull some kind of heart strings and gie the warm and fuzzies if I vote for him…….but it just doesn’t seem sincere.
Ron Paul 4 Life @ 21:
ron paul for life? you mean you support having paul in office permanently? like a dictator?
yikes….
that is even more scary than your shortsighted and confused neoliberal cheerleading. i can’t wait until the market fundamentalist crazies call for the privatization of air.
John “breck girl” edwards is not the man for the top job.
Edwards has indeed put forth a solid platform. But its not the best among the candidates.
I am surprised that after 8 years of bush cheney, so many edward supporters think the answer is another rich white guy who promises to break the system by which he enriched himself.
Stop your phony outrage at Bush and Cheney, if you continue to support John “breck girl” edwards. He’s a washington insider.
Knowing what you know about the 2000 & 2004 presidential elections plus the “didn’t change a thing” 2006 election fraud, why do you guys still believe that the election process is real? I mean, how many f’n years of the great pumpkin not showing up does it take before you stop believing in it?
The Democratic Party is in just as much in disarray and identity crisis as the Republican Party is.
The Democratic Party can hardly be considered to be “liberal” or “progressive” at this time. The Democratic Party is much closer and defined as a pro-corporate, neoliberal economic policy party as anything else. I hope that nobody thinks the Democratic Party is actually “liberal or progressive.” The election last night should have told you this little factoid.
Liberal and progressive activists who are antiwar and skeptical of big media should not be too happy about last night whatsoever. If you are, then you are a corporatist Democrat, who cannot be serious about ending America’s expansionist wars abroad.
Again, John Edwards may not be perfect, but he is much, much, better than Barack “Fraud” Obama or Hillary “Sellout” Clinton.
If you are antiwar, anti-corporation, and out for the real welfare of people here in America and in the world, then vote as if your life depends on it, or, else face the unhappy consequences!!!
Preacher Boob @ 24:
Yes, you are so 100% correct about your remark regarding the fact that: “There are not enough ‘college kids for change’ in the friggin’ universe, let alone the USA, to overcome the anti-campaign the republicans would run against this guy, on legitimate issues, especially lack of experience, let alone the ‘hidden’ agenda.”
I am glad someone else gets it here.
Oh you Paulites are so weird. Saying whatever it takes to get elected in American politics mostly consists of giving a reach around to big business, not slamming them in every speech. Corporate taxes have declined substantially from the 1950s (27.5%) to around 10% of total federal tax receipts. Give it a rest skippy.
Ron Paul 4 Life @ 21:
When Ed Schultz asked Ron Paul about media consolidation, Ron Paul said , So What? That’s the “free” market. When Shultz queried “What about the poor who can’t afford to buy TV stations”, Paul said “Let them go on the internet.” Was the French Revolution privatized?
Ron Paul 4 Life @ 21:
The day Ron Paul gets elected president will be the same day yodelling monkeys will fly out of your asshole.
Go privatize that you putz !
john “iraq war” edwards is the corporatists candidate. He’s a dc insider who was there once and did nothing. He’ll get back there and do nothing again.
obama, though the most authentic candidate, certainly is not perfect, and neither is clinton. But john “love child” edwards is the least likely to affect change in DC, given his record the first time around.
If you are anti-war, anti corporation and out for the welfare of people here and around the world, then vote democrat, whichever one of the imperfect candidate wins the nom….even if its john “iraq war co-sponsor” edwards
WhyNoConcessionSpeach @ 25:
Why should he congratulate his opponent? If he believes that he’s the best candidate (meaning Edwards believes that of himself) then some sort of fake congratulations would be dishonest.
Dustin de Wynde @ 20:
UPDATE: Coulter is even better.
After using her vile column for the last few weeks as a vehicle for non-stop assault on Huckabee, today she really out-did herself…
Not only did she not even mention the Iowa Caucuses, but today’s piece of steaming spew is a freaking re-run of her old War On Kwaanza piece.
Too funny.
First she loses all her advertisers on her site for taking the John Edwards = Breck Girl insult to a whole new level, then her new “book” totally tanks in less than one month, and now this.
Poor woman, I guess it just hasn’t been her year.
Couldn’t happen to a better person, and I mean that in the nicest way.
~Nyc
lopaloo102 @ 29:
Obama or Hillary would get their butts kicked in, by the Republicans in a general election, lest your thinking is that gullible.
The name “John “Breck Girl” Edwards” is a Rush Limbaugh/right-wing talking point as well. I reject such a Limbaugh-talking point and frame. Its such a pity that you have stolen a right-wing talking point on Edwards.
Edwards may well be an insider, but, be so that as it may, he is the only one talking to regular folks and not in the least, taking the bulk of his money from big corporations and big lobbyists.
Edwards has a better chance of beating the GOP in a general election than either Barack “Fraud” Obama or Hillary “Sellout” Clinton.
Again, stop your phony outrage at Bush and Cheney, if you continue to support either Barack “Fraud” Obama or Hillary “Sellout” Clinton.
Preacher BooB and Mr XXX sound like Republican lamers…
So, all of a sudden the citizenry of Iowa are too stupid to know what’s good for them?
Sure Obama got the kids out to vote but he also got the indies, WOMEN, and Repubs to side with him but strangely, somehow, you too geniuses fail to mention that.. I wonder why?
Could it be sour grapes? I bethcha it is.. Too bad for the old fogies.. The past is the past OBAMA is the future and the future looks bright.
Barack had to out-spend him considering John Edwards has been in Iowa since 2004 and had a far greater ground operation and presence than Obama before Obama announced his intention to run. I love how people bring up the money, but don’t recognize how far out in front Edwards was as far as his presence in the state since late 2004, early 2005.
wow there’s so much hate for edwards out there that he has to be the man for the job.
The message from Iowa is a total rejection of villagers. The exit polls showed it to be the runaway issue: a politician that can most effect change.
The good news/bad news is: the goopers are doomed/ anybody perceived as part of the establishment is hurting.
I’ve been a Edwards guy forever, but watching things unfurl last night, and seeing the energy of the Obama group it is clear that it is a matter of time before I’ll be supporting him. HRC is going to feel like a sinner in a “Left Behind” novel.
Mr XXX
I was trying to find a tag to match the adolescent emptiness of your equally pointless and unfounded barack “fraud” obama and hillary “sellout” clinton
john “Breck girl” edwards
john “iraq war co-sponsor” edwards
john “love child” edwards
john “smoke and mirrors” edwards
those are about as fair, appropriate and meaningful (though I admit, none have quite the zest that yours do…they are a bit more awkward from a wording standpoint)
I would bet that another rich white guy from deep inside the poisoned well of washington will not have much of a chance for quite some time….unless, of course, he’s a repub
Anti-Baby Boomer @ 40: