Jeff Zeleny of the Times picks up on something I noticed a while back--that John Edwards has all but erased the words Barack Obama from his campaign rhetoric. He speaks of this primary as if it's a race between him and Hillary Clinton alone.
Since "going negative" has regularly proven to be perhaps the most reliable political tool politicians have available to them, I wouldn't be surprised at all if a sustained attack on Hillary Clinton ultimately caused her to drop in the polls. Perhaps even significantly. But that's just the thing. In this race, a Hillary slide doesn't necessarily correspond to an increase in relative support for John Edwards. Because there's still that Barack Obama guy out there for people to throw their weight behind.
We'll just have to wait and see if and how this changes anything, but at the very least, there is a real possibility that this all could redound to the benefit of people who aren't John Edwards--even though I think the most important takeaway from the entire episode is that John Edwards comes across extremely well--much better than all the others--when he's on the attack. Which is extremely relevant in a two-person general election campaign.
Comments
Fantasies for a Tuesday morning: Obama and Edwards sweep the Iowa, NH and SC primaries (one/two), leaving Hillary as the 3rd place runner. Wouldn't that drive the media horse-race observers into a tizzy? That has to be what Edward's people are looking for, right?
But CA and NY will right the ship, and HMMS Clinton will sail into the rising sun after all - after some scares that it was sailing into the sunset.
Post A Comment