You know, I might care more if Shrum had--oh, I don't know--a better track record as a consultant. 0-fer-8 doesn't give me much confidence that the guy knows what he's talking about.

And since Chuck Todd has had only good things to say about the GOP since he went to NBC, I'm not really sure his thoughts on John Edwards are to be taken with anything more than a grain of salt. Maybe Todd's part of the "clique of elites in DC"?

Unless things change quickly and dramatically, I think the DC Democratic establishment, and the Senators running for president in particular, are going to have a lot more trouble on their hands than hating John Edwards.

But Shrum earns even more blackmarks than he already has for spewing all this out during this (too long) primary season.

Werewolf eat DC elite!

Shrum? He hasn't backed a winners in decades.

Shrum? He hasn't backed a winners in decades.

Reminds me of the reflexive anti-Dean sentiment in DC from four years ago.

I'd venture a guess that it's for the same reason: here's a guy who's not running as a product of "the system" - by which I mean, his base is *not* the DC Democratic establishment, and therefore, it's a simple sense of antagonism. "You're not one of us? You got somewhere without us? You don't *need* us? Then screw you, too!"

That's probably not what they'd admit it is, nor is it the first thing they'd defend themselves again (*that* would be the "they care more about paychecks than performance" crack that's an obvious rejoinder to anything that emanates from the mouth of Bob Shrum, or anyone else whose professional experience includes a lot of losing and a lot of getting hired back for their "experience").

But I bet it's a part of the apparently visceral and inexplicable antagonism...

Impactful? Did I just read the word "impactful" in one of Ezra's entries.

Yikes.

Don't forget that he didn't want to quit in Ohio.

Badge of honor, no doubt.

Ezra, you are one of those wonky types who think Edwards walks on water.
My guess is that the reason DC doesn't like Edwards is that he can be very snotty and I am sure some of it has to do with something that went down with Kerry.
You see, Ezra, the reason I am not supporting Edwards is that there is a great deal of snottiness just under the surface if you took off the blinders and it makes people feel like he is not authentic and out for self.
I don't know. I am just saying that as hard as I try to like him, I cannot shake that feeling and when I see him he comes off as snotty to me. It is a problem for him.

"And since Chuck Todd has had only good things to say about the GOP since he went to NBC, I'm not really sure his thoughts on John Edwards are to be taken with anything more than a grain of salt. Maybe Todd's part of the "clique of elites in DC"?

Todd's comment is solid reporting. He's just explaining what the Glover Parks of the world think, not endorsing the sentiment.

More generally, Todd is as straight a shooter as they come.

Don't forget that he didn't want to quit in Ohio.

And that he wanted to hit back early against the Swift Boat Liars, but was muzzled by Kerry's advisors.

You see, Ezra, the reason I am not supporting Edwards is that there is a great deal of snottiness just under the surface

So your standards for which candidate you support are essentially identical to those of a thirteen year old girl deciding who she wants to invite to her slumber party.

My guess is DC elites hate John Edwards because he talks about the poor instead of pandering to the upper-middle class. That's an unforgiveable sin in a social clique where making $80,000 a year is considered struggling.

Didn't the DC elites hate Bill Clinton too?

Jason, its even worse than your post suggests--his standards are essentially identical to those of a thirteen year old girl being *rejected* from a slumber party--I wouldn't have wanted to go anyway because those other girls are snotty.

Jeebus on toast points, as athenae observed the other day, what will it take to get the american people to actually look at a policy paper and a position and a history and a person without askign themselves "how would X make me feel if I were having a beer with him?" And *getting that metric wrong too.*

aimai

Bill Clinton was indeed hated by the DC insiders. He also refused to have anything to do with Bob Shrum.

And he won. What does that tell you?

I think this is a false dichotomy. "Edwards v. the DC Elites". There are a lot of people outside of the political circle who dislike Edwards. They, however, don't care about policy positions and white papers. And they sure as hell don't post on political websites. They do know a political opportunist when they see one, though, and usually those people they don't like Edwards.

LMAO, people worry about a few DC elite defections if Edwards is the nominee. I never see stories about the 10% of the party that's going to stay home after they nominate Clinton though.

I would think that being hated by the inside the beltway people would be a plus. I actually like Edwards even more now knowing that Bob Shrum hates him. And since the Washington elite are WRONG about everything, chances are Edwards is a candidate we all should take a serious look at.

The 'snottiness' comment is more typical than one might think. Having supported Edwards since '03, I've heard comments like that constantly from people whose opinions I would normally care about (one blogger who I otherwise respect greatly said he couldnt support Edwards because he was 'too cheesy'.). I'm guessing it's due to Edwards' combination of personal reserve, cagey earnestness, doggedness and relative radicalism (in the stodgy DC context). Of course those are precisely qualities many of us voters like, qualities which could lead to actual change. Edwards is not a back-slapper or a wink-and-nodder. Imperial Washington (an unfortunately apt term which ought to be seen as an oxymoron) doesn't trust people like that. Not enough irony. Notice that the permanent denizens of DC took to the Current Occupant just fine.

They do know a political opportunist when they see one

Good politics *is* principled opportunisim. Losers like Shrum don't like skilled politicians like Edwards because they don't need him. Shrum likes pols like Gore, Dukakis, et. al.

On the other hand, unprincipled opportunists - like Romney and Bush himself - get (or will get) a basic respect in DC no matter how obviously false they are. My, my.

Two words: trial lawyer.

Two words: trial lawyer.

Two words: Abraham Lincoln.

(actually, establishment DC didn't much care for Lincoln either).

The DC elites don't like Edwards because he doesn't kow-tow to them, it is pretty much that simple. And it is a big fat badge of honor.

The reference to 'snootiness' is particularly telling, as the DC Dems are about as snooty as it comes. The first question out of anyone's mouth in this town when introduced is not, "how are you" but "who do you work for?", as in (what does acknowledging your existence get me).

So, can Edwards sometimes be impatient? probably. Does he sometimes wish he didn't have to shake another total stranger's hand and act like he's meeting his new best friend? absolutely, wouldn't you.

What I like about Edwards is that he's not running a beauty pagent campaign, but one focused on issues and solutions. Sure, I think he's a good person as well, but if I never get to share an orange soda with him in my life, that's fine. I'm not looking for a new friend; I'm voting for a new leader.

Shrum is worthless, and a five time loser. Why listen?

As for the "elites" in D.C., would these be the same "elites" who just took it, AGAIN, from the most unpopular President in history, just so he wouldn't call them bad names?

Pardon me if I say, on behalf of John Edwards:

BRING. IT. ON.

Of those running I am still undecided between Edwards and Obama, and holding out hope for Gore to run, and interested in hearing from Clark.

BUT... just because Shrum and some Washington elites allegedly don't like Edwards (do they prefer Obama?), is not necessarily decisively in his favor. After all if you just go by who has the best (worst) enemies, then the Clinitons would be the most progressive/lefties in the land... based on who hates them and how much.

It is not just who one's enemies are. It is also who are your real friends... who are your big campaign contributers (individuals and corporate) and who are your leading advisors. I think those two are better predictors of how candidate will govern. Better than who are their enemies or certainly more important predictively than what they say today

If Bob Shrum is out for Edwards, it's a good sign to be for him. Personally, I think that Shrum may be a double agent for the Republicans...

I support Edwards on the issue, but if I was going to pick a candidate based purely on political prospects I wouldn't be worrying about who Bob Shrum likes or dislike. I'd instead wonder why the Republicans and their surrogates in the media are trying so hard to trivialize and marginalize Edwards at this point in the campaign, when national polls show him in third place. I suspect it's because they realize that his stance on the issues would form a stark and damaging contrast to whomever is their own nominee. Whether it's Iraq, health care, or the increasing chasm between rich, his clear and progressive positions will make the failures of Bush and the Republicans stand out clearly. Furthermore, the fact that the Beltway elites don't like him can only be a plus for a majority of voters in the country.

Oops! Make that "the chasm between the rich and everyone else in this country,"

Ezra - Do you think the Democratic party has a chance to bring back southern voters with John Edwards?

Yesterday a friend dismissed Edwards for his pricey haircut and speaking fees, and I just said NO. I refuse to let that spin spin me. This guy is the only one giving substance and toughness to a platform that is pro American middle and working class. The others are crafting a leadership 'image' (the Obama health care plan is to barf about) and time after time, Edwards comes up with real policies to help real people. This is our LIVES not a high school popularity contest. Who gets homecoming king does not impact whether or not I go bankrupt from lack of health insurance. I am frankly incensed with this trivializing of politics, whether it comes from Maureen Dowd or my fellow citizens. Get Over It!!!!