Edwards Adviser Trippi Points a Finger at the Press
By Peter Whorisky
NEW ORLEANS -- Standing outside in a New Orleans neighborhood awaiting John Edwards's speech here today, one of his senior advisers said that the central challenge of the campaign -- and a cause of its eventual failure -- revolved around efforts to "break through" in the media when so much was focused on the duel between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.
"When the press wants to cover a two person race, its very tough for the third candidate," Joe Trippi said. "To break through in that situation you have to get edgy, get harsher, be more strident - and we did and it would work for a few days and then the media would turn their heads the other way.
"What were we supposed to do, set ourselves on fire?"
"I keep wondering if there is something I could have done."
The decision to quit was "sort of floating around" for a few weeks, but "not in earnest until Monday or Tuesday."
The campaign agonized over the decision as many had come to think of it as a moral crusade as much as a presidential campaign, Trippi said. Normal political calculations did not apply.
"This really was about fighting for the voiceless," Trippi said. "It wasn't about him."
Posted at 4:19 PM ET on Jan 30, 2008
Share This: 
Technorati
| Tag in Del.icio.us | Digg This
Normally I do not tell political operatives how to do their job but Mr. Trippi seems to be crying out for help so I will offer some advice for a future Edwards run. I understand that I do have the advantage of hindsight.
First he should have expanded beyond the themes that he put forth in 2004. I felt like the 2008 campaign was just a rerun of the 2004 campaign.
For example, it might have shaken up the political world if Edwards had advocated eliminated all loopholes for the wealthy and corporations in exchange for a maximum tax rate of thirty percent on income. It would fit with his "two America's" because there are two tax systems--one for those who know the ins and outs of the tax code and one for the rest of us.
But Edwards never took any policy risks and tried to run his campaign as if he was the frontrunner on the same themes that he voiced in 2004. When that failed, he went back to the same old populist rhetoric.
They briefly tried to market Edwards as the candidate of specifics but it never got beyond the see my website for my detailed plan of (fill in the blank) I watched most of the debates and Edwards never publicy put forth any big plans.
Also, was it wise to repeat the bet the farm on Iowa strategy particular when faced with two well funded challengers. Even if Edwards would have won Iowa, he would have been playing short stacked against Clinton and Obama.
Maybe he should have skipped Iowa and New Hampshire and concentrated on South Carolina in an effort to build momentum for Super Tuesday. Mitt Romney could afford to contest those states and lose but Edwards could not.
It might have played out as Clinton and Obama roughing eachother up in Iowa and New Hampshire. Then Edwards could show up in South Carolina as a fresh face.
Edwards had enough money to run a more credible race had he used it more wisely.
Posted by: danielhancock | January 30, 2008 04:46 PM
I like John and appreciated his campaign, but let's face it - after he lost as a VP candidate in 2004, he had an uphill battle in convincing the voters that he wasn't damaged goods.
Posted by: BABucher | January 30, 2008 04:55 PM
His "two America" campaign theme and populist approach did not resonate well with democratic voters. After seven years of gross mismanagement and disastrous neo-con policies, democrats hunger for change, competency and unity.
Posted by: diplomat111 | January 30, 2008 05:35 PM
I am very sorry to see Edwards leave. He was my choice for candidate. I think the media has a h**d-on for Obama right now and that's all we are hearing about. The media made it all about Hillary and Obama....I would like to see more in depth reporting of the news instead of the media trying to make the news. My vote will now go to Hillary. I hope Edwards backs her.
Posted by: kittenunleashed | January 30, 2008 06:19 PM
Too bad that John Edwards dropped out. It is always good to have more than just 2 voices in the debate. While I appreciated very much the words that John had to say, I somehow found something missing - authenticity perhaps ? I feel the same way about Sen.Clinton. I am not sure that his dropping out will have a tangible impact on the competition between the remaining two. Chances are that Sen. Clinton will have a marginal edge in picking up Edwards' supporters, but only a marginal edge.
Posted by: balakrishnan3 | January 30, 2008 06:26 PM
We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.
User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.