Edwards Attacks Front-Runner Kerry

Fighting against time and his inability to move to the top of polls in Super Tuesday states, John Edwards sharply attacked front-runner John Kerry as a Washington practitioner of politics as usual.

The North Carolina senator abandoned his mostly congenial style in a Democratic debate Sunday in New York - a mostly two-way faceoff that had contenders Dennis Kucinich and Al Sharpton grousing about too little airtime.

Of 10 contests scheduled on Tuesday, Edwards already has virtually ceded the four New England states to Kerry and stands little chance of victory in the biggest battlegrounds, New York and California, or in Maryland. That leaves Georgia, Ohio, Minnesota as his targets - and polls show him trailing in those states.

<snip>

In his harshest criticism yet of the front-runner, Edwards charged that Kerry had voted for bad trade agreements and that his proposals on a range of issues, including health care, would "drive us deeper and deeper into deficit."

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040301/D811KF8G0.html

comment : if edwards has virtually no chance why resort to mud slinging?

the "eternal optimist"?

:eyes:

its time to throw that left jab at the anointed one.

2nd) Kerry has been playing calculated politics, just the same.

In Los Angeles, he referred to HIS plan providing "real solutions".......hmmmmmmm??......

That sounds SO much like John Edwards published campaign platform. What was that called? Oh yeah..."REAL SOLUTIONS"

http://www.JohnEdwards2004.com/issues.asp

And when Edwards came in 2nd in wisconsin, Kerry just happened to choose the exact minute Edwards went into his stump-speach to begin his vistory speach.

What in the heck do you expect Edwards to do. He's trying to win the nomination.

I'm gald his gloves came off. In fact a strategist from CBS2-NY said he wished Edwards had delivered an even STRONGER blow than he had!

If you can't take the heat, get another hobby.

If you think this is bad, wait until Kerry is the clear front runner, then you will see some real mud slingling.

Keeping this race close is the best thing that can happen for Kerry, this helps Kerry. I know it sounds stupid, but it is true. Right now the Republican Slime Bastards, can't start in on Kerry, because it will benefit Edwards, and vice versa.

They got all that organization, all that money, and they can't do a thing. I'm voting for Kerry in November, but tomorrow I'm voting for Edwards.

Didn't Bush make that lame attack on Kerry during some Republican Governors Association meeting a week ago, accusing "one senator from Massachutes" of flip-flopping?

That was meant to be a humorous jab, it was no Willie Horton attack.

It will be interesting to see if Bush intends to analyze everything Kerry said or did when he was in his twenties, when we can't get a full accounting of what Bush said or did in his youth.

has been very nimble, quick and effective in their response... suddenly.... (beyond rushetal but those folks aren't going to vote for Kerry under any conditions)... the smear gets dropped.

The mud will be worse than anything seen before - count on it. However, I don't think teamrove is prepared for multiple contingencies when each of their smear tactics gets neutralized within 36 hours.

Can't say that I am overly enthusiastic of all things about the Kerry campaign/candidacy (but I tend to be that way towards all candidates...) - but I have been very impressed with the discipline and rapid response of the campaign. In the fall - the Dean campaign appeared to have a rapid response mechanism - but just crumbled when the pressure increased too much. The reorganized Kerry team appears to be up for the main event.

feasible of all the healthcare plans by a nonpartisan group last summer.

Kerry's plan was crafted and vetted by many of the stars of Clinton's economic team. I think this is the wrong tack for Edwards to take.

I doubt Edwards would prefer that Kerry was NOT in Washington to investigate and expose the government corruption of the Reagan and Bush administrations in BCCI, IranContra and CIA drugrunning?

Would he prefer that Kerry didn't help craft the Kyoto Protocol? Would it have made Kerry a better president if he had NOT been in the Senate to face down Reagan and Bush1 and help Clinton achieve a more successful presidency?

I really like JE, but, I don't understand this line of reasoning. There's no substance to the charge and only plays into the anti-government bias of the far right.

If Kerry hadn't done those things, then their argument would be "not enough experience".

The polls over the weekend show Edwards actuallt falling behind, dropping in polls relative to Kerry. Georgia is a must win for Edwards. If he cannot take Georgia, his whole campaign falls apart, as it is based on an "I can beat Bush in my own back yard strategy" which doesnt hold water if he cant beat Kerry himsellf in the south.