Edwards' Memo Details Plans To Go Negative

[KittyWampus]

Edwards' memo details plans to criticize rivals
By John Mercurio
CNN Political Unit
Wednesday, January 21, 2004 Posted: 8:23 PM EST (0123 GMT)

Note, the information was signed by Edwards himself so don't buy the denial at the end. They
wouldn't put his signature there without the candidate's permission. That is why it was labeled
confidental and etc.




MANCHESTER, New Hampshire (CNN) -- Despite being credited with breathing life into his presidential bid by
pushing positive themes, Sen. John Edwards' campaign circulated a confidential memo earlier this month
that instructed supporters on how to attack his Democratic rivals during the Iowa caucuses.

The four-page document, obtained by CNN, instructs his campaign captains in Iowa precincts to describe
former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean as an "elitist from Park Avenue in New York City." And it says Sen. John
Kerry "can't claim to change America because he has been part of the failed Washington politics for too
long."

It also offers a particularly detailed critique of Rep. Dick Gephardt, the former House minority leader who
withdrew from the presidential race after his following a fourth-place finish in Iowa. Under his leadership, it
says, House Democrats "lost control of Congress in 1994, and lost four more times since then. ... We can't
afford another losing national campaign against George W. Bush and the Republicans." It adds, "Even if
Gephardt somehow wins in Iowa, his campaign is eventually dead, just as it was in 1988."

Edwards campaign spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri said the memo was written by his campaign in Iowa, and
that Edwards himself did not know about the document until CNN contacted his campaign about it. - snip-
Asked why Edwards' signature appears prominently at the top of the memo next to his type-written name,
Edwards campaign communications director David Ginsberg said the documents are part of a 50-page
training booklet, and that parts should not be taken out of context.


http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/21/elec04.prez.edwards/

Second link so we know CNN didn't make it up:

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/US/edwards_positive_040121.html

[deminflorida]

1. The media's binking em off like ducks in the shooting gallery....

Fox Alert - Mission Accomplished...

That should keep Edwards off message the next couple of days before the voting starts in N.H.

[David Zephyr]

2. Edwards is Getting Close to Being Deaned....

And Clintoned, and Gored, and....

[JI7]

9. how ?

?

[joefree1]

3. More smears on Dean

Here we go again, more smears on Dean ..., er, oh this is about Edwards. No sense hanging around. Deanie boppers, let's meet over in the lounge for a drink.

:evilgrin:

[IndianaGreen]

5. Yep, let's go to the lounge and watch the wrestling match

Let's see if Edwards can out-scream Dean.

:P

[kysrsoze]

6. I kind of always expected this from Mr. Edwards

Never trusted him. I still remember his reaction to Tweety grilling him about the war in front of a ton of college students. He not only got visibly upset and started to lose his composure - getting snippy. He's not exactly the voice of the young. The guy is 50, and I hate to think it, but if he were my neighbor I'd think he's a dick.

I have been for Dean for awhile. I got excited about Clark at first, but he worries me too. I like what Kerry has to say even though I dislike his record on the war. I'm glad Gephardt's gone and I want Lieberman to go next. Should be an interesting ending.

[Chomskyite]

4. The mistake was not in going negative . . .

. . . it was in saying over and over again in Iowa that you would not go negative.

If we're hoping to boot Bush out with a smiling pie-in-the-sky campaign, we're even more naive than Bush says we are in his idiotic speeches.

[KittyWampus]

13. Thank You

And I dislike people who put on sancitmonious airs.

[Voltaire99]

7. CNN: You are growing, sleepy. Ver-r-r-r-y sleepy...

"Despite being credited with breathing life into his presidential bid by pushing positive themes...."

Remember, Democrats, that's the way to win. Stress the positives! Like our great economic recovery! And the democracy blooming in Iraq! See to it you steer clear of "negatives," or we'll have to tell the sheeple that you're "angry" and "gaffe-prone."

[colonel odis]

8. this is earth shattering!

oh my god. a memo about going negative! this must be the end of the campaign. this is right up there with lying about wmds.

that's it. i just can't support edwards anymore, now that cnn's exposed him for being a mean-tail.


yep. the media's going after him. they went after dean. edwards comes out of iowa with a ton of momentum, so now they're going to take him down. wonder who rove will tell them to go after next? i guess we'll know because that's who they'll go after next.

yeah, that liberal media......

[lostnfound]

10. NONE of our candidates should be going negative. They have no reason to.

There's plenty of negative things to fill up airtime about the Republicans, and it's a waste of whatever space the media gives them to spend it attending to other candidates.

Our candidates should refuse 100% to attack each other, and if asked about one another, should simply respond with "(pick one) Dean/Lieberman/Clark/Sharpton/Kucinich/Kerry/Edwards is a fine man; now let me tell you about Mr. Bush's attack on (pick one) the environment/the world's future/civil rights/education/health/women's rights etc " or better yet "I don't know about that, but I do know that ANY ONE of us would make a better President than George W Bush".

Unite on this guys, and the public will mocking your attacks on each other. And we will beat George Bush.

[davsand]

11. Am I missing something here?

I honestly don't see the story in this. Yep, Edwards himself didn't smack anybody around in Iowa, and it is fairly common for any campaign of much size to send out talking points or magic bullet phrases for use by operatives. If the other campaigns WEREN'T doing it, then they probably lost for a reason...

I'm no political insider, but I've done this with campaigns at county level and lower. There are any number of times that the staffers can say stuff that the candidate can't or chooses not to. Strategically it makes good sense.

I have a phrase for stuff that makes big noise but amounts to very little--It is a fart in the bathtub. THIS is a fart in the bathtub. I can't see Edwards spending more than about 10 seconds on this one.

Laura

***Disclaimer*** I am not currently supporting Edwards in this primary.

[Warren Stuart]

12. What a sleazy hit piece.

It's OK for Bush to slander McCain with racist slime in the South Carolina primary, but for a Democrat to compare and contrast his position with those of his opponents is not OK?

The rules of this game are simple, you can only give as good as you get. Certain candidates have been generously dishing it out, Edwards stands out for his relative positive performance.

To state that he must never depict his opponents in a negative light is naive and foolish. I expect him to use whatever tools he has at his disposal in order to win.

Plus - Here is yet another confidential memo that somehow got leaked to the press. I think that Rove is behind this. Either Edwards needs to vet his supportes better, or he should change the password on his confidential account.