Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
THE STATUS QUO.
One final thought on the debate: While it may have ended the "Clinton slipping" narrative, it won't have changed all that much on the ground in Iowa, the most-important narrative-shaping contest going forward. There, the race remains tied. The Des Moines Register's political columnist David Yepsen, under the banner "That's Why the Lady is a Champ," writes:
Give Thursday's debate to Hillary Clinton.After two bad weeks in the 2008 Democratic presidential campaign, she recovered her footing and pushed back sharply at her opponents in a debate Thursday night.
But he also had some sharp words for John Edwards, the candidate The Register endorsed last cycle, giving him a last-minute boost and helping to fuel his end-of-contest momentum. Wrote Yepsen:
John Edwards should have stayed home. Clinton took the wind out of his sails early in the evening by implying he was "throwing mud." He never seemed to bounce back from that slap, and he also got hooted when he talked about her as a corporate Democrat.Edwards also had a poor night because for the first time, the differences between his votes as a U.S. senator and his talk now came into clear focus. He voted for the Iraq war, the Patriot Act and using Yucca Mountain as a nuclear-waste disposal site. Those votes are at odds with the populist rhetoric he serves up today, and it will undermine the credibility of his message.
This passage raises the interesting question of whether Edwards can score The Register's endorsement again. Candidates endorsed by The Register don't tend to win Iowa, but they do much better than they would have done without it, since the paper has some real impact in Des Moines and its surrounding counties. An endorsement of Clinton or Barack Obama might not be enough to put them in first place or help them win Iowa, but it could be enough to help one of them into the second-place slot. And it will be a sign of a decelerating campaign if Edwards loses an endorsement he had the last time around.
--Garance Franke-Ruta
COMMENTS (10)
Still angling for a position in a Clinton administration, Garance?
Posted by: vorkosigan1 | November 16, 2007 12:15 PM
I don't get what Yepsen is saying.
Practically everyone made the mistake of being buffaloed into voting for the Patriot Act. And Edwards has addressed (in what seems to me like an honest manner) his change of heart on Iraq.
And what's populist or non-populist about supporting the Yucca Mountain site? I'm pretty damned populist, but shouldn't that be the sort of issue where populism yields to whatever the science really says about the safety of Yucca Mountain as a disposal site?
Posted by: low-tech cyclist | November 16, 2007 12:57 PM
You know, TAP could save an awful lot of money just by firing Garance and posting Clinton '08 press releases to the blog instead.
Posted by: Christmas | November 16, 2007 1:06 PM
I'd say it's a wash. Last debate, Yepsen declared Edwards the winner, entitling his post "Johnny Be Good."
The crucial debate for Iowans - and the DMR - will be, intuitively, the December debate in Iowa.
Posted by: Will | November 16, 2007 1:47 PM
The sun came up today. I'm assuming that bodes ill for the Edwards campaign.
Posted by: CJR | November 16, 2007 2:17 PM
>>>And it will be a sign of a decelerating campaign if Edwards loses an endorsement he had the last time around.
Yepsen is an acolyte of Lieberman-style politics. It's no surprise to anyone who's read a David Yepsen column before, say, this year. Further, it's no surprise that Yepsen doesn't like this incarnation of John Edwards. Edwards is the anti-Lieberman right now.
Anyway, Kerry won Iowa without the DMR endorsement. Al Gore (in 2000) won Iowa without the DMR endorsement. Gephardt won Iowa (in '88) without the DMR endorsement.
I think John Edwards need not slit his wrists if he doesn't win the DMR endorsement.
Posted by: dry_fish | November 16, 2007 4:00 PM
The sun came up today. I'm assuming that bodes ill for the Edwards campaign.
Garance is expressing her sincere concern that today's sunrise bodes doom for the flagging Edwards campaign.
I'm embarrassed that anyone would suggest that Garance's motives are horribly compromised when all she's doing is offering her honest take on why Senator Clinton is the best candidate for Beltway weasels.
Posted by: Petey | November 16, 2007 4:06 PM
GFR has obviously doubled down and has decided to make shilling for Hillary Clinton a full-time job.
When 2012 comes along and American troops are still dying daily in the Middle East, you can thank people like Ms. Franke-Ruta.
Posted by: Jason C. | November 16, 2007 4:17 PM
To all the Edwards-lovers on this thread: get over yourselves. Not everyone agrees with you, so get used to it. This from someone who has Hillary as his 4th choice, and Edwards at 1 or 2.
That said, the Des Moines Register's editors have a track record of getting their rocks off by endorsing a second-tier candidate, and then watching the impact of their endorsement. Endorsing Hillary or Obama wouldn't have the effect of getting themselves moist, which seems to be the main criteria for their decision at this stage. They want to see evidence that they have influence.
Expect Dodd, possibly Biden or Richardson to get the nod.
Posted by: Sabutai | November 17, 2007 12:21 PM
The Edwards supporters here remind me of the Romney supporters on conservative blogs.
He says what you want to hear, so you forget that he only became this way when it became advantageous to do so. If Edwards was running against a mostly populist field, he'd play the reasonable, bright southerner like he did in 2004.
Posted by: Adam Herman | November 17, 2007 2:30 PM