singrdave singrdave

John Edwards: Populist

John Edwards: Populist

Not the candidate, but still shaping the Dem debate

http://www.economist.com/world/na/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9514336
John Edwards: 2004 Presidential primary candidate, then Vice Presidential candidate with John Kerry. He's campaigning again. This time he's positioning himself as a populist, appealing to middle-class and lower-class voters with his progressive policy stances on Iraq, health care, poverty, and the hue and cry of global warming.

His policy stances:
Iraq: American troops out of Iraq immediately. Overnight reduction of 40,000-50,000... followed by an "orderly and complete" withdrawal of combat forces within a year. The overall war on terror is a "bumper sticker, not a plan" according to Edwards.

Foreign policy: In a larger scheme, he wants to re-engage the nations of the world using America's innate moral leadership. This implies that he would sign onto Kyoto or a similar global warming regime, more to solidify America's participation in international agreements than to make major economic and social decisions. He's announced his intention to enact a cap-and-trade emissions scheme that would reduce America's greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2050. In foreign development, he wants to recruit a "Marshall Corps" of 10,000 bankers, political scientists, and other experts to help failing states. Presumably this "Delta Force" of economists would try to keep failed states like Zimbabwe and Sudan from falling over the edge into chaos.

Domestic policy: This is where he really appeals to a lot of people. According to The Economist,
He offers plenty of standard populist cant: lots of talk about “fairness”; rants against oil firms for price gouging and drug companies for rocketing health costs; and—this year's favourite villain—anger at mortgage lenders for ripping off poor home-owners. (He calls it the “wild west of the credit industry, where...abusive and predatory lenders are robbing families blind.”) A recent speech decried an economy that rewarded “wealth not work”, a tax system that favoured the rich and a government that served only special interests. Yet for all that Mr Edwards is less a redistributionist firebrand than a big-government do-gooder. He is intent on helping the poor more than soaking the rich; his inspiration is Robert Kennedy, not Huey Long.

He has cohesive programs for helping the poor (remember, he's the one who came up with the "Two Americas" concept in 2004) and for federally-managed universal health care based on Mitt Romney's Massachusetts model. He wants to eliminate poverty by 1/3 within a decade by increasing the Earned Income Tax Credit, topping up the working poor's earnings, effectively eliminating taxes for lower incomes. He also wants to give poor people "work bonds" to boost their savings and housing vouchers to help poor families live in better neighborhoods.

Edwards has his faults, too... his gigantic house and $1,400 haircuts have reminded people that there are actually Two Americas, and John's in the upper half. And his trial lawyer experience makes him another Slick Willie... but this time without the McDonald's fixation.

His ideas may or may not have merit, but they are certainly livening up the Democratic debate. The concepts Edwards addresses are probably going to find their way onto the ticket, whether he's the candidate or not. He may appeal to Dems, but he's not raising the kind of money that the Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton machines are.

So I would pay attention to the John Edwards campaign. Be prepared to see his policy ideas come November 2008, even if you don't see John Edwards.
12,268 views 31 replies
Reply #26 Top
Then why does he not? He is using OUR money for his salvation. Hardly a noble endeavor.


Is it better to use OUR money to help rich corporations through corporate welfare and incentive programs or to help individuals? I know what I think is the more noble of the two.
Reply #27 Top
He is using OUR money for his salvation. Hardly a noble endeavor.


True, but would you have John Edwards donating his personal fortunes for the cause? No one person (or single group of people) can fund the social programs the Left espouses. And everything the government does uses "OUR money".
Reply #28 Top
Is it better to use OUR money to help rich corporations through corporate welfare and incentive programs or to help individuals? I


It is not OUR money. It is their money. Reducing taxes is not GIVING money, it is taking less.

You still have not answered the question. How does giving OUR money make him noble? I want to give $10,000 to Easter Seals. Please send the check.

Does that make me noble? Because they got $10,000 from you?
Reply #29 Top
True, but would you have John Edwards donating his personal fortunes for the cause? No one person (or single group of people) can fund the social programs the Left espouses. And everything the government does uses "OUR money".


No one ever said that one person can. But giving what is not yours hardly makes YOU noble. And if we all gave, then they would have enough. Based upon his taxes, Edwards hardly even breaks a sweat. And if he is going to tell us how bad we are and how good we should be, should he not at least put his money where his mouth is?

If we are to judge the candidates based upon how they want to spend our money, then Edwards is your man. If we are to judge candidates based upon their deeds, and not words, then edwards is just another robber baron keeping his hoard while spending our money for things that he wants since he does not have the character to spend his own.
Reply #30 Top
Edwards is going to tax the rich. who will pass the tax down to their costumers. so Edwards will be taxing the poor indirectly to pay the poor.


and no geme this is not a made up fantasies if you had half a brain you would know this

Reply #31 Top
so Edwards will be taxing the poor indirectly to pay the poor.

Raising prices for all Americans to fund social programs? Sounds like fun.