Edwards Hits Obama And Hillary In New 10-Second South Carolina Ads

Comments (12)

Michael A wrote on January 15, 2008 11:53 AM:

Hi Eric, you have a typo. It's not tow, its two. You might want to fix it.

Greg DeLassus wrote on January 15, 2008 12:04 PM:

Was Sen Edwards in the senate at the time of NAFTA? I know that neither Sens Clinton nor Obama were, so I am not sure what it means to say that Edwards opposed NAFTA but they did not.

NYer wrote on January 15, 2008 12:06 PM:

Anybody seeing them for the second time, even if the opening message is a different one, will assume they have seen it before and tune out - not what the campaign would want - I think

Jeremy wrote on January 15, 2008 12:12 PM:

Obama has stood for including and enforcing labor and environmental standards in trade agreements. He opposed CAFTA but supported PFTA because the latter took steps to protect workers and the environment. I think Obama's right that you have to tread the line between protectionism and so-called "free" trade. I like his fair trade approach.

willyjsimmons wrote on January 15, 2008 12:20 PM:

'so I am not sure what it means to say that Edwards opposed NAFTA but they did not.'

Shhh...Greg.

Wouldn't wanna go and introduce 'logic' into a policy debate.

I view the whole 'I hate NAFTA' phenomenon as part of the larger 'I hate outsourcing' craze of late. (semi tied to immigration).

Not sure what Edwards has in mind policy wise to address any of it. Other than saying they're bad.

Clearly, the situation is more complicated than that.

Playing off people's fears is what Edwards is doing. IMO.

lombard wrote on January 15, 2008 12:40 PM:

Not very hard hitting I would say. Edwards needs a little more than this short spot if he wants his campaign to catch fire.

Asa wrote on January 15, 2008 12:47 PM:

Edwards ran against NAFTA when he ran for the Senate in 1998, so he has been against it as long as he's been in public life. He saw what it and other corporate-designed trade agreements have done to the textile industry in NC and elsewhere. And he really is the only one to oppose the Peru Free Trade Agreement, which the other two voter for.

Greg DeLassus wrote on January 15, 2008 12:55 PM:

Dear Asa,

That is fair and fine as far as it goes, but do you not think that it would have made more sense for Sen Edwards to mention PFTA either instead of or in addition to NAFTA in that ad. NAFTA went into effect in 1994, before Sen Obama was even in the IL Senate, let alone the U.S. Senate, so it makes no more sense to say that he "did not oppose" NAFTA than it makes to say that Abraham Lincoln did not oppose the invasion of Panama.

That said, I am still convinced that NAFTA was not good for this country, so if Sen Edwards campaigned against it that is at least a mark in his favor in my book.

anon wrote on January 15, 2008 2:04 PM:

They're good ads. May be too little too late, but two stand out. The one about no money from lobbyists is great and the one about Edwards being the only one to beat all the Republicans.

Many Democrats, lost in all the euphoria over a woman or a black man in the White House has been all consideration of the electoral consequences of either Clinton or Obama as the nominee. Clearly, both have the potential to win but in neither case is it certain that they would. Clinton is incredibly weak given that nearly half the electorate already says they won't vote for her. It amazes me that anyone thinks she can win the general with that level of negative opinion of her as a candidate! Obama is clearly vulnerable and presents a juicy target for every GOP smear they can cook up. All they have to do is scare a slice of the electorate, not the whole electorate and Obama loses. The Republicans know they're toast with Edwards leading the ticket, so they are praying fervently that they get to go up against Hillary or Obama.

In contrast, with Edwards we have a candidate who not only can beat them, but would deliver to the Democrats a victory on a scale unseen since 1964! Why would we not want that? When all those Democrats dizzy with "making history" come down and realize their candidates can win Democrats in primaries but the general population is a different story, we may see the trajectory of this race change considerably.

kjoe wrote on January 15, 2008 2:15 PM:

I really hope Edwards hangs in there for a while---past super Tuesday.

2000 delegates on superTuesday---would leave hillary in a hole if she won 40 percent of them. Give her those 800, give her 2 thirds of the superdelegates, but subtract Michigan and Florida, she still needs another 600 after Super Tuesday---at which point the 2 thirds of the superdelgates no longer look like a sure thing.

I support obama---but I hope Edwards stays in for a while.

Wordie wrote on January 15, 2008 2:51 PM:

Edwards seems to be finally getting some long overdue coverage. The dead heat in NV probably has helped. This new ad campaign in SC should help getting him a second look too.

David Bonior, Edwards' campaign manager, made an excellent point this morning on MSNBC. He said that Dems ought to pay much more attention to the head-to-head match ups, especially considering that McCain is rising in the polls. The polls show that Edwards is the only Dem candidate who can beat McCain in the general.

Thanks for posting this, Eric!

Its about the future stupid wrote on January 15, 2008 5:25 PM:

Jeremy wrote on January 15, 2008 12:12 PM:
Obama has stood for including and enforcing labor and environmental standards in trade agreements. He opposed CAFTA but supported PFTA because the latter took steps to protect workers and the environment. I think Obama's right that you have to tread the line between protectionism and so-called "free" trade. I like his fair trade approach.

There is no REAL protections in this or the next 3 FTA's, not 1 labor group, enviromental group or human rights org's have endorsed any of this because there is no enforcement of it. http://www.citizenstrade.org/pdf/PCPeruLetter_11052007.pdf http://www.citizenstrade.org/pdf/EdwardsCampaignPeruTradepaper_10272007.pdf There is much more at citizentrade. http://www.citizenstrade.org/peru.php Every single state in the nation has lost jobs due to nafta and other FTA's. http://www.epi.org/content.cfm/ib214

Post a comment

Name:
Email Address:
URL:
	Remember personal info?
Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)