« FEC Report Highlights: John McCain's Campaign Is Virtually Bankrupt | Main | Romney's Latest Ad In New Hampshire »

Again, Obama Borrows Angle From Edwards

16 Oct 2007 09:20 am

It's another step in the slow assumption by Barack Obama of John Edwards's campaign message. But hey -- it night work for Obama where it might not work for Edwards, although the receptiveness of rank-and-file Democrats to a process message is not yet known.

(There's certainly no copyright on these words.)

In June, Edwards said this to the Take Back America conference:

"For me it's simple: No more pontificating. No more vacillating. No more triangulating. No more broken promises. No more pats on the head. No more we'll-get-around-to-it-next-time. No more taking half a loaf."

And yesterday, Barack Obama used the T-word for the first time in memory:

MADISON, Wis. (AP) -- Barack Obama said Monday the nation has had enough of ''triangulation and poll-driven politics,'' a reference to the presidency of Bill Clinton, the husband of his chief Democratic rival. Addressing a convention center rally dominated by students, Obama said that he had spoken out against going to war in Iraq in 2002, even as advisers told him it would be a mistake to challenge a popular president, George W. Bush. Then an Illinois state lawmaker, Obama said he did so because he did not want to ''enter the United States Senate already having compromised on core principles.''

''We've had enough of ... triangulation and poll-driven politics,'' he said. ''That's not what we need right now.''

Also, check out this fundraising appeal from Obama...

Dear XX,

Last night each of the presidential campaigns reported their third-quarter fundraising numbers.

The results are clear. We continue to build the largest grassroots movement in history, but Washington lobbyists and special interests rallied to help Hillary Clinton out-raise us for the first time.

If we want real change in this country, then we need to prove that together we are stronger than the lobbyist-driven money machine that has dominated Washington for too long.

The situation here is simple. We are $2.1 million behind. We must close that gap right now. I need you to make a donation:

https://donate.barackobama.com/gap

Hillary Clinton aggressively seeks money from Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs. She's even said that these lobbyists represent real Americans.

She's wrong.

I think it's time to turn the page on that kind of politics, and that's why I have not accepted a dime from Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs in this race. We rely on a network of more than 350,000 ordinary people to make us competitive -- more supporters than all the other Democratic candidates combined.

Washington lobbyists have chosen their candidate and are determined to provide her with an overwhelming advantage. But you can even up this contest.

In the face of the most entrenched political machine in Democratic politics, I believe a movement of ordinary Americans can change our country. And you can prove that right now.

I need you to make a donation to close the gap:

https://donate.barackobama.com/gap


Share This

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/17020

Comments (14)

Seems to me Obama's on thin ice with the lobbyist taunt when stuff like this (just from a quick scan, not comprehensive) is in his numbers:

GREENBERG TRAURIG 24,200.00
GREENBERG TRAURIG LLP 10,550.00
GREENBERG TRAURIG P.A. 4,087.75
GREENBERG TRAURIG PA 3,750.00

PATTON BOGGS 1,000.00
PATTON BOGGS LLP 6,400.00

Or maybe he didn't go after this money "aggressively."

Why am I not surprised? Obama has been piggybacking Edwards' message for the last two quarters.

I find it curios that when everyone jumps on the Obama fund raising approach of 'meals with Obama", or "Change" nothing is said but the minute he uses a phrase you treat the phrase and or the idea as though they had a "copyright' on them.

I agree. How is "triangluation" the exclusive property of Edwards? If you are going after Clinton, you have to bring this up because this is the stuff that drives progressive democrats crazy. He has got to play up her flip-flopping and inability to take a stand on much of anything. Aren't democrats sick of candidates not making waves? It only leads to more Republicans in the White House.

Edwards owns "triangulation"? A word made popular over a decade ago by Bill Clinton? Psssh. The Edwards campaign is so desperate its pathetic. They accuse Clinton and Obama for copying, they raise money (or at least try to) off of obscure quotes from Fox News crazies and worst yet, they prop Elizabeth up and use her to attack everyone because no one is going to go after a woman who (supposedly) has terminal cancer...

Yeah, triangulation is that Bad Thing That Clinton Does - it practically has no other meaning. You guys whine that he's not going after her, then say he's not supposed to use that word because Edwards used it first? It's like saying he's not supposed to say "Clinton". How can he not say it?

you treat the phrase and or the idea as though they had a "copyright' on them.
How is "triangluation" the exclusive property of Edwards?
Edwards owns "triangulation"? A word made popular over a decade ago by Bill Clinton?

Easy now. I didn't say that Edwards "owned" triangulation - either the concept or the word. That would be silly. Rather, I said that Obama is again parroting an attack on Hillary first made by Edwards, albeit weeks later and less forcefully. We've seen the same pattern several times in the last few months - most recently with Hillary's Kyl-Lieberman vote, and initially with the questions about lobbyist money. That's worthy of comment.

Anyways, looks like Obama supporters are getting frustrated: e.g., no one is going to go after a woman who (supposedly) has terminal cancer...

"Supposedly"? Are you serious?

Upon re-reading the comments above, it is not entirely clear that Trudy is an Obama supporter at all. While I still find her comment completely objectionable, imputing it to an Obama supporter was a mistake. My apologies.

Just an FYI: Tex MacRae is trying to pull a fast one everyone. He did a search of individual contributors and determined that if a person who works for Greenberg/Patton gave money to Barack, then that's lobbyist money. And he aggregated the numbers as well, since no individual can give more than $4600. Just thought everyone would like to know BEFORE unwittingly spreading misinformation.

Keith,,,,


thanks for the info. Everyone, pay attention please to the distractors!

I assure you all that by tomorrow end of business day Barack would even up the money difference.

Cheers

Papa

Yes, Barak will even the $$ gap...he has the people on his side....let's make it happen for the man who will be the most beloved President in our generation! He will restore America's standing in the world and bring our lopsided Bush Regime-created executive branch back into check.

I donated $500 today.
If you can, do the same.

http://www.hillcap.org/default.php?page_id=2

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/gop-targeting-clinton-on-phone-call-snooping-2007-10-16.html

Why not more reporting on the substance of what they are saying. Hillary is a government gangster, the press is afraid to get specific. It is pathetic. Check out those links. Sorry if they aren't direct links. My secretarial skills leave a bit to be desired. If you look them up though they are quite revealing on just how Clinton works.

It worked. Check out that first link, a video on Hillary. Its a trip.

Post a comment

By using this service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although The Atlantic does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.


Copyright © 2007 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.