Previous Next Latest

UPDATE: Trippi Defends Edwards’ Funding Decision

10/1/07, 7:38 pm EST

Edwards adviser Joe Trippi pooh-poohs any rumors of infighting and says he’s totally on board with the public financing decision.

Perhaps there’s a greater logic to the Edwards public financing decision than there appeared at first blush.

From The Fix:

As they mulled the idea [of public financing], Trippi said he became convinced it was the best way to draw a bright contrast between Edwards and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.).”He who defines the race usually wins,” said Trippi. “This race is becoming defined by money. Hillary Clinton does not want this race to become about money.”

For Trippi, Edwards’s decision to opt in to the public financing system is a chance to reinforce the idea that Clinton is the candidate of the status quo while Edwards is the candidate of real change.

“We think it makes a very clear choice between Clinton and John Edwards,” said Trippi. “He is going to take on the special interests and not owe them a damn thing.”

So what about Trippi’s admonition to former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean in 2003/2004 that opting for public financing was political suicide?

Trippi said that his advice to Dean came in response to the prospect of a well-funded incumbent president waiting in the wings for the eventual Democratic nominee. This time around, Republicans face the prospect of a “protracted” primary fight and, even after the nominee is chosen, they won’t have the luxury that Democrats enjoy of “millions of people ready to go to the Internet” to donate. “They have to go out and ‘Pioneer’ and ‘Ranger’ it.”


Previous Next Latest

Comments

Diane | 10/1/2007, 10:45 pm EST

Right.

We don’t need our candidates handicapped in any way, thank you very much Mr. Trippi.

I’m not willing to take his word on the millions of internet donations. We can’t afford to lose again.

bardonaut | 10/2/2007, 12:43 am EST

Ah, the anti-Edwards telepathic cynics are out tonight, i see.

Thank goodness Mr Edwards isn’t handicapped by association to big $$$. It is interesting that Hillary and Obama are chomping at the bit cripple progessive causes by giving scads of money to the mainstream media that works so diligently to defeat Democrats.

Gus | 10/2/2007, 3:34 am EST

Diane, if we nominate a candidate who is in the back pocket of the DC lobbyists and big-money donors, we’ve already lost. Even if we win with such a candidate, there’ld be no chance to enact fundamental reform. It would just be corporate Democrats replacing corporate Republicans.

We the people need a President who serves us, not big-money lobbyists.

Let Them Eat Cake | 10/3/2007, 12:34 am EST

Edwards and Obama are both viable great candidates and it is Disgusting that the $$$$$$$$$$$$$ are the biggest Must for a “Winner”. It makes for lousy candidates.

The best and most qualified of candidates get brushed aside for the candidates who have done the most Corporate Smoozing and Sucking-Up to “establish a Lead”.

Too bad the Repubes Diluted the real legislation that would have started tackling “Finance Reform”.
Now Clinton and the Repubes are part of Problem.

We all Lose-Enormously!

Post A Comment

Caution: Off-topic comments will be deleted

Name:

Comments:



Advertisement

Advertisement