Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« The Morning News | Obama on Playing the Gender Ca... »

Friday, November 2, 2007

Edwards, RNC Attack Clintons’ Debate Performance

posted by on November 2 at 9:06 AM

The Politics of Pile On? Edwards calls it the Politics of Parsing:

And the RNC has a few things to say about it, too:

RSS icon Comments


Like Kyle's mom, she's a bitch. Better get used to her.

Posted by Cartman | November 2, 2007 9:37 AM

If Clinton gets the democratic nomination, I will emphatically support her. If Obama gets the nomination, I will do the same. If Edwards gets the nomination, I will vote for Steven Colbert...

Posted by Buddy | November 2, 2007 9:47 AM

This is pretty early on. I imagine her PR machine will be able to fix these wobbles before it really matters.

And I will take her wobbly answers over Obama's foriegn policy answers ANYDAY

and I will take her wobbly answers over Edwards, as I think he is the slime-est piece of shit running (so many people seem to have forgotten when he left Kerry high and dry the month before 2004 election)

So yeah, uh, she still sounds better than any other candidates running right now.

Posted by Original Monique | November 2, 2007 10:20 AM

Nice job of turning the Slog into Republican multimedia distribution system. Well done, Eli.

COMTE mentioned it elsewhere (I'm paraphrasing)- "it takes six of you to equal one of me" != "I'm a widdle gwirl! Waaaa!" I believe she is arguing the former; her opponents, Republicants, and progressive slog posters are arguing the latter.

Posted by Big Sven | November 2, 2007 10:27 AM

Yes, Big Sven, what with links to the Politico, the Page, and the RNC, this has become another part of the right-wing echo chamber.

See (also for the link to the debate transcript)

Posted by chicagogaydude | November 2, 2007 11:15 AM

@2 said it best.

Posted by Will in Seattle | November 2, 2007 11:25 AM

I'm with @2.

I think Hillary's answers were actually well stated, and I think it is only by playing to ignorance and politics that you can say otherwise.

Edwards shames himself in this instance, in my opinion.

Posted by Timothy | November 2, 2007 11:31 AM

@7: Where can I get some of that Clinton Cool-Aid you're drinking? I'm pretty parched.

Posted by hrc? | November 2, 2007 12:23 PM

Sorry...I don't like kool aid. I'm not even a decided supporter of HRC, yet.

These are complicated issues, and the more we required sound-bite answers to complicated issues, the worse our politics become. Edwards knows these are complicated issues, and he was seeking to box HRC in, not because he necessarily disagrees with the position of HRC, but because he needed the controversy in order to get a toe-hold in the race for the White House.

If you're parched, @8, I urge you to seek something more nourishing than kool-aid.

Posted by Timothy | November 2, 2007 12:59 PM

Gosh! Who needs Rebublican Party Ads when the Edwards Campaign makes them for you, and better!

What an ass. Why is he attacking another Dem instead of talking about his strengths... oh, yeah... that's right... because he doesn't really have any strengths.

Posted by Dee in SF | November 2, 2007 2:16 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).