Political Punch

Jean - The vote for Thompson or Guilliani

While it is certainly one's right to chose not to vote, you also have the right to write-in whomever you want. I, personally, would never not vote -- in any election. Especially when I think about all those who sacrificed their lives or lost limbs for our freedom and our right to vote.

If Edwards gets the nomination I guess I will have to stay home on Election day.I just can not see him as president.

Mr. Tapper, you're going to strain yourself with a reach like this. The population of Iowa is 95% white, so perhaps the ad is meant to reflect the audience to whom it's directed. If Edwards ran the same ad in my own more ethnically diverse state of California, I might consider your point. Until then, this election season is shaping up to be one where rather than shining a light on the candidates the media seems determined to jump up and down and block the view for the rest of us.

Again All the Republicans said they are against it! The issue on the Republican side is who will be tougher.

When the Democrats were asked who was AGAINST giving out Drivers Licenses to illegals, Edwards did not raise his hand. That means Edwards is for giving out Drivers Licenses to illegals. Only one democrat raised his hand in making a stand against giving Drivers Licenses to Illegals. How many of the Republican Candidates are willing to make the announcement that they are AGAINST giving Drivers Licenses to Illegals. Remember that a few others who were Republican did stuff in their states to help Illegals instead of against Illegals. I want to see more states taking the same stand as OKLAHOMA recently did.

Bob Smith, I can sympathize with your questioning whether voting for a person based solely on gender or race is wrong. But you say that in doing so they are "narrow-minded...not very intelligent or well informed...doing a disservice to yourselves, to our (Democratic) party, and to our nation." You are entitled to your opinion, but people have the right to vote for whomever they want AND based on whatever criteria they desire. That is what makes America so great. Now then there are some individuals who are very well informed and probably quite intelligent who feel it is about time that a woman become president. Likewise, that it is about time an African-American become president. And for those who feel that way, but do not like Sen. Clinton or Sen. Obama, there is another well qualified candidate -- Dr. Condoleezza Rice.

What has he done , other then make money off people in New Orleans by foreclosing on them? Yes really for the poor!

What a shallow take on a great man. Those people in the ad appear to be real people from Iowa. Would you rather John "faked" the ad and "planted" a couple of black people in it. Then you would say he's "pandering" for the black vote. Some of us don't see things through color. I saw working people. To be honest with you it didn't matter to me what color they were or weren't. My reaction and emotion was based on the fact that John cares about the "working" class. We finally have a candidate that really cares about us instead of some rich lobbyist and this is the best you can do! It is obvious that Washington D.C. is really worried about what John wants to do. They keep sending the dogs out to chew him up!

If it was not for lawyers like Edwards our healthcare costs would be lower

A George Soros puppet just like the rest!

"Anybody who's considering not voting for Sen. Obama because he's black or for Sen. Clinton because she's a woman, I don't want their vote." --- John Edwards

The status quo elites and the establishment media have started their analysis concerning the John Edwards campaign strategy of beginning to emphasize to primary voters in Iowa and elsewhere Edwards national electability. The establishment media and elites are trying to create controversy, where no controversy exists. And they are indicating there is a subliminal race and gender message concerning a Woman or Black candidates electability in the John Edwards message. The obvious retort to that is, -- hogwash. John Edwards has said publicly that he does not want the vote of anyone who would vote for him based simply on his race and gender or the race and gender of any other candidate. What’s important for voters to remember is that Clinton and Obama haven’t said that. In fact their campaigns have largely been built around race and gender group focused politics. Thank God we have an honest forthright candidate like John Edwards.

What swing voters need to think about is this. When elite pundits in the establishment indicate that the female vote will or should go to Sen. Clinton simply because she is a Woman, or that the Black vote will or should go to Sen. Obama simply because he is Black the establishment media applauds the political ramifications of such race and gender group focused politics. Voters then need to ask the obvious question. The question is, -- isn't it wrong for Clinton and Obama voters to vote for a candidate for no other reason than the person’s race or gender? And the follow-up question then becomes, why then the double standard establishment media analysis giving Clinton and Obama a free ride on race and gender politics while at the same time trying to create controversy by chiding John Edwards for talking about electability and for spending time spreading his economic Populist message to rural voters in Iowa, New Hampshire and other states. The obvious answer becomes Clinton and Obama are given plaudits for their group focused politics and Edwards is criticized for carrying his economic Populist message to all voters, because he is the true anti-establishment candidate.

Edwards supporters believe the objective in politics is to nominate the best candidate, without regard to race and or gender. However having said that there is little doubt that race and gender can garner a candidate a lot of attention (positive or negative) with the establishment media, and status quo elites. Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama have so far during the campaign garnered the Lion’s share of establishment media coverage. And it has nothing to do with their standing among Democratic voters. American politics is a blood sport and not for the faint of heart. And the establishment media can be brutal and unforgiving when it comes to what it perceives to be an issue where really no issue exists. There is no issue in John Edwards claim about electability other than the fact that it is the truth.

Simply stated, John Edwards is the most appealing national candidate on the Democratic side. He is the most appealing national candidate against the GOP candidates -- with all voters -- when national politics is considered across all demographics, and across all sections of the country. That is simply an established fact, and several polls support it. The establishment media in its typical sensationalized mode is trying to trump up a race and gender debate to make the Edwards campaign tread lightly on the very credible argument that he is the most electable Democratic candidate when matched against the GOP candidates, and the most able to help fellow Democrats in conservative states.

What the John Edwards campaign is saying is simply that Democrats need to make sure that when we make a selection, we must realize that the world is not perfect, we must not let the status quo elites and establishment media coronate our candidate. And we have to consider the long haul. Edwards supporters totally reject any suggestion that John Edwards electability claim is a special appeal to only White voters, or a statement that the nation would reject a Woman or Black man as president. Edwards supporters simply believe he is the best candidate with the best chance to win. And yes we believe that among swing voters in the Red states he is much less divisive than Sen. Clinton and we believe that he has more experience than Sen. Obama. In addition thanks to Edwards working-class roots he is more in tune with middle-class and working poor families both urban and rural.

Edwards relates better to the struggles of the middle-class and working poor. And people listen when he says to audiences that "You will never have a voice unless and until the Democrats have a candidate who understands your lives -- the Democrats have a candidate who will campaign everywhere in America, who won't give up on your part of America, and will not be limited to New York and Los Angeles and Chicago." Those sorts of comments send shivers up the spines of the establishment who find it difficult to look down their noses and see an entire South, Mid-west, and West part of the country that is Red or solidly pink (swing states).

Is race and gender a factor in selecting our Democratic nominee? It will be a factor only if Democratic voters are influenced by the status quo elites and the establishment and make it a factor. And to my fellow Democrats I will say this. If you vote for a candidate simply based on that candidate’s race and or gender you quite frankly are narrow-minded, you are not very intelligent or well informed, and you are doing a disservice to yourselves, to our party, and to our nation. The objective is to nominate the best candidate with the best ideas, with the most national appeal and the best change to win swing voters in the Red States and toss-up states.

It may not be palatable to the status quo elites and to the establishment media that a White Southerner Populist who actually talks to common folks of all races and genders has the most national appeal and when matched against the GOP candidates is the most electable Democratic candidate, but so what, who cares what those people say or think anyway. If grass-roots Democrats should have learned anything over the years it is that the establishment and status quo elites for years have used us as pawns and they have used their power and influence to control and drive much of Democratic politics. They have used their power and influence and establishment media bully pulpit to help select establishment status quo candidates. And they have shown how disconnected they are from main-street economic Populist issues, and how ignorant they are, by time and time again using their power and influence to coronate Democratic status quo candidates that while fine individuals and while appealing to many Democrats did not fair well in national elections across all sections of the country and across all segments of voters.

John Edwards supporters believe that the most-electable candidate is the one with the best ideas who can go to every corner of America and tell the middle-class and the working poor the truth about how badly the elite status quo establishment has broken Washington. And a candidate like that is a candidate worth voting for.

Starting in Iowa it’s time for the Democratic grass-roots to buck the status quo establishment, the status quo elites, and the establishment media and vote for a candidate that represents us – all of us without regard to race and gender. That candidate is John Edwards.

OK is not Edwards the one that made the rude comment about Gays, he is not the one that said he is the only one southerners will vote for?

He is a hypocrite and a racist period, not one person here said anything about what he did for Blacks, but speak about it.

But yet you condemn Pres Bush who actually has done things as stated before.

I just went and looked at Hillary Clinton's ad of Iowans and there was not one black person in the ad. Jake, where is your condemnation on Hillary's ad?? It looks like ABC has double standards for one candidate over another one.

Jake
While I don’t mind you sharing your observation that the Edwards commercial has a majority of white faces in it (it does) I think you owe it to your readers to then talk about Edwards policies and history with regard to race. For without that information your column is nothing more than a thinly disguised attack on Edwards that tries to imply that because his commercial does not include African-Americans that he therefore must be suspect with regard to race. Now I know the guy is a white southernor but as most of us should know not every white southernor is racist.
Perhaps you were in a hurry when you wrote this piece and didn’t have time to think about the fact that you owe your readers more than just a hit piece. As a journalist shouldn’t you be trying to enlighten your readers? Is is possible to enlighten readers when you only give part of the information they need to form an opinion about Edwards and his commercial?
I hope your next piece will be more balanced.

Stop, hold the presses. Heaven forbid! Someone has done something without doing it in accordance with the god of quotas. I am distraught. I don't think that my mind can handle this 50s kind of thinking. Everyone knows that in everything that we do we MUST ensure that every victim group has representation. We have ways of dealing with this.

John Edwards' work, especially over the past few years, and his platform speak volumes of his commitment to all people, including people of color. He does not need to "place" people of color in ads to prove his commitment to them. Look at his work on behalf of those suffering from Katrina. Actions speak louder than ads.

Oh please. What a nonstory.

I suppose if Edwards's first major TV ad had been shot in New Orleans, where Edwards has frequently volunteered for rebuilding efforts, someone would accuse him of pandering because he might be surrounded by black people.

It's one ad and it's the first, so perhaps it gets inordinate attention, but have we gotten to the point where every ad must be carefully cast and scripted to convey perfect diversity? Trust me, the Edwards ads will feature many different people of all races, ages, sizes, and orientations -- as would his Cabinet if he is elected.

Jake, this reads like a lazy shake-and-bake story that seeks to make something out of nothing. It seems beneath you.

I didn't check the "Remember me on personal info" box, because I will probably never be back here. I knew there had to be a reason why I don't watch ABC! First of all to insinuate that John Edwards is a racist is so below what your intellectual ability should be...he's all ready proven where he stands by his work in New Orleans. So any African Americans visiting here, don't let yourself be sucked into this crap...I am part African American, and that's what this is...crap! How about Hillary's $1500.00 makeover before she appeared on TV; How about all the illegalities that are coming out about her fundraising; what about the fact that the people contributing to her campaign are the same ones that backed GWB; What about the lies she's said about wanting health care for everyone, but she wants to take money out from Medicare to do it and won't take it on until her second term, so she won't have to risk being re-elected; Ther is little difference between Hillary and Bush and that means more of the mess we now have. As for Obama, he won't disassociate himself from a pastor that has made racist remarks; won't fire an entertainer on his tour that offended, via his ignorance, the gay community; and now someone just sent me a picture where he refused to recite the Pledge of Allegiance or to salute the flag! to whom has he given his loyalty? John Edwards must be a real threat to your candidate of choice, or you wouldn't even come up with this! May the candidate of your choice fall flat on her/his face!

When Osama gets a $400 haircut, that will be the real news.

And do you count all the white people in Obama's ads, and then the men in Hillary's. Come on, people are people and as long as we keep treating each other so politically correct that you're afraid to open your mouth we'll just end up with the status quo. Anyone can fake it that they are diverse, Edwards is genuine and just wants everyone to know that he is for the working poor. I don't think the color of the working poor matters, its the fact we exist.

When you put the ad in context with John Edwards' life and his entire campaign, this criticism is unfair. It is the first of many ads and, regardless of the fact that we are all seeing it, it is being aired in IA. It probably reflects the people he has met there.

The reality is that he fights for all working people, regardless their color. He recognizes them all has heroes.

He will no doubt have ads in other states made up of people in those states. The underlying charge here that Edwards is racist, or even that he is blind to people of color, is patently absurd.

Sansouci: I looked up the census data for the diversity by region:

Total Black White Other
Total 288,281 37,645 194,874 55,761
West 66,247 3,658 37,890 24,699
Midwest 64,784 6,921 52,116 5,747
Northeast53,704 6,920 39,434 7,350
South 103,545 20,147 65,434 17,965

So by your logic, the south is more representative of the nation as a whole and should therefore have inordinate influence in Presidential primaries. :)

If people of color are invisible to him now, I cant see him embrace them after getting elected. Bush, despite his failure of handling Katrina, had one of the most diverse cabinet.

One person of color cant even stand for his people, let alone other minorities. He prides in taking cheap shots at people of alternate sexual orientation, he prides himself of owning to statements of starting a nuclear war with pakistan.. what next? what was his position on illegal immigration again?

Clinton, despite all the negatives, atleast has centrist views. I am positive my taxes wont increase under her (if I ever get to $200K, I dont mind giving some donations for right causes).. my healthcare costs wont boom and I am positive getting a better handle at mid-east situation would help me pay less at the pump.. Besides her, i want to know more about Joe Biden. hello MSNBC are you listening?

Steve- Got it. You are right, thank.

Spock- Tell us one thing Obama has done for Illinois since he became Senator or even before that? and btw, Hillary was re-elected in NYC. She served all her first full term and we liked or not she is recognized like one of the best Senators in DC and has delivered to NY State. Since elected she has been working hard for the State unlike Giuliani who all he has done is using 9/11 to get himself rich.

who cares what color the people in his add are. color color race what is wrong with you people who cares what color. it only matters what he is saying. and there are white people in america to.

Good point, Peter. Part of my guess is that Obama will abandon the 'love-fest' tactics, and make it a real political fight in Iowa. But I called it a 'three-way CAGE fight'. Watch out, bud--if you call it a 'CAT fight', with that slang term's 'girl-on-girl' connotation, you may be accused of 'piling on'!!!

Peter - You attack Obama for becoming Senator to run for President, Well why do you think Hilary did, she has done NOTHING for NY either!

Jeremiah - You speak the truth about Pres. Bush (about time)"If only he were as clever as George W. Bush -- you know, the guy who had black people in his ads and has been such a great president for black people (and for the rest of us)."

President Bush has done the most for All Americans - More Black homeowners, more money for the Blacks, More Blacks in positions of power.

About time someone one spoke the truth!

3 way cat fight? Please,you mean 2 way cat fight Hillary and Edwards) and a bird on the side try to be tough (Obama)? Talking about being sincere, if wasn't because of Obama's love fest with the press, big money from the lobbyist here in Illinois and celebrities he wouldn't be in the fight at all. I am a Dem from Illinois and still wondering where is Obama, we elected him to be our senator and all he has done is running for President event to he pledged to serve the full term.
Are we Dems are ready to pick a "featherweight candidate" like Obama knowing the to please the GOP. I still waiting to see what he stands for here in Illinois and for our country. All I know is that he's getting rich and alot of money from the books.
The Dem need a real strong candidate that stands against the GOP misleading machine in general elections.

It would be interesting, politically, to see if this theme works for Edwards, but if the ad itself becomes an issue because of its racial makeup, then we really won't be able to tell. The caucuses are just two months away now, with Edwards polling in third. I thought that he and Obama would get a boost from Hillary's poor debate performance the other night. But again, Hillary-corp seems to be spinning legitimate questions about her evasiveness as the men 'piling on'. So far, I have seen at least some of the major media buying into her spin, so we won't really know how voters would have reacted to Hillary's debate flip-flops, if they were left to make their own decisions. My guess is that the ad is a good attempt to separate Edwards from the others in Iowa, without using a personal attack that Iowans seem to penalize candidates for. And I think the two-way love-fest in Iowa between Hillary and Obama just became a three-way cage fight.

As I've previously stated here, Sen. Edwards really, really wants to portray himself as a populist whose interests are the same as those of common man. Unfortunately, just like Granny donning a mini-skirt, a tie-died blouse, and Go-Go boots to pass herself off as a hot chick, he can't quite pull off the look as witnessed by this lily-white ad. I've traveled extensively in Iowa, and Sen. Edwards does a great disservice to Iowans by portraying their state unrealistically. Once again, his populist message doesn't quite mesh with his reality.

Seriously?

This is your hard-hitting scoop of the day?

John Edwards LAUNCHED his campaign in New Orleans with people of all races (but mostly black) trying to recover from Katrina. His best speech was on Martin Luther King day to a mostly black audience. He has a great record on racial issues.

But,I guess he doesn't ensure that there are black people in every ad he does. If only he were as clever as George W. Bush -- you know, the guy who had black people in his ads and has been such a great president for black people (and for the rest of us).

John Edwards ad reminds me of the movie "Deliverance". Yeah, he's campaigning on ONE AMERICA all right -- ONE WHITE AMERICA!

Raoul - oh please - He ignores his neighbors, he made his money from the companies now fore-closing on New Orleans residents.

He uses minorities to his advantage and thats all, but nothing new for a lib.

Oh and the hyphenated labels did not come from Conservatives, it came from the democrat party and libs.

Raoul - There is questions on that unions vote, it supposedly went to Obama and then new leaders came in and changed it.

Engawyer - The Dem party is a party that hold minorities down, and the Black Cauacus is all Dems because they will not let in non-Dems.

Greg - The Democrat agenda is clear to anybody that opens their eye - Socialism!

Steve Ivy - What has he done, oh thats right a poverty tour where he charged 1000$ to attend!

The sad part here is that libs are so blind, that the Dem/lib candidates can come out and say We want to make America a Socialist country and only certain White people can have money' and you libs of whatever persuasion will still defend them.

If you libs want to pay more taxes, please pay mine!

Jake you are on the right track. Don't let up on the real message of Edwards campaign. I hope George features you on This Week because you are filling a huge gap in the journalist community-Socratic questioning and critical thinking.

The house? Do you know Edwards has a pool AND a basketball court? Do you also know they are both ENCLOSED? That's why there are so many "square feet," because the guy wants his family to swim and play basketball all year round, winter too. Square feet add up fast when you enclose a BASKETBALL COURT! Let alone a basketball court AND a pool. That was in Esquire. How many times have you hear that repeated in the media?

FDR was from a well to do even aristocratic American family. He did a lot for the poor. The Kennedy's did their bit too and they had money. Why can't Edwards have a basketball court and care about working folk too?

With the Al Sharpton and types running the show, it takes an act of courage to even allude to a "white person". There's a lot of racism going around and there isn't one group with clean hands--especially those who scream "racism" at the drop of a hat..

The Edwards campaign is the ONLY ONE so far that has done anything at all to focus on poverty. He has proven that he wants to help poor people of all races. He took his campaign on a "poverty tour" to poor communities all across America just a few months ago to focus on a group that everyone else is totally ignoring. He has spoken often and eloquently about helping America's poorest families, families that the Bush and Clinton dynasties have completely ignored. Edwards was born and raised poor and unlike every other serious candidate in this race he still remembers his roots. The very idea of trying to label him as a racist is STUPID!!! He has tons of people of all races on his campaign staff.

As a former Iowan, and a black man, I can say that Iowans in general need a reality check. My grandfather (also black) was, in fact, a farmer. I am a software developer. To the average Iowan, we are aberrations. But we do exist. Their "reality" is WRONG, and desperately needs to be changed. Just because Iowans are ignorant about black folks doesn't mean people should kowtow to that ignorance. It only perpetuates stereotypes.

I suppose Edwards feels that there just aren't enough minorities in Iowa to make a difference one way or another. That's fine. But the argument that portraying blacks doing jobs that are typically attributed to whites is "PC" and somehow wrong is doing a disservice to those of us who actually do those jobs.

Ha, see...Jake is loving it I bet, brought the race card and have everyone fired up about it. Isn't that what the GOP and Rove like to do?
OK, lets focus on a $400 hair cut, in how "expensive is his house" instead of discussing the candidates agendas and ideas, let's turn a serious conversation of ideas to solve our huge problems into a conversation belongs to Entertainment Tonight! I love it!
Wondering who are more cynical, the politicians or the journalists. Don't the journalist supposed to be impartial, focused and reliable ones?

Now...I would love to have a 400$ haircut, live in the best house in the neighborhood if I can afford it after working hard coming from nothing, isn't that the American dream? So, lets' ask Obama about his mansion in Chicago, Hillary's mansions in NYC and DC, Romney's mansions, Giuliani's exploiting the 9/11 issues to become reach, and all the other candidates houses and fortunes. Lets be fair then!

Huffpo's slamming both Edwards and Clinton is so obvious. Ariana lied on Charlie Rose when he asked her who she is supporting.
Just looking at the bad photos of Edwards and Clinton and it is obvious.
PS Ariana, we need to get you a hairdresser before you go on tv.

We already know that ABC "NEWS" is part of the corporate-controlled mainstream media, determined to undermine Edwards at every turn. This dirty, and very obvious "hit job" on the most decent, honest, honorable man in the race, just underlines why John Edwards should be our next President. We need more ethics in government, and since MSM journalism has taken up residence in the gutter, America, after the likes of Bush/Cheney/Rove & Co, desperately needs a real leader of decency and honor.

So for you the fact that he supports "working people" is not important because you don't like the way the ad was crafted. What if the next ad in the series is ONLY black people. Will you complain abou that as well?

Go ahead. Keep changing the focus so nobody notices that you don't like Edwards.

Well, I am voting for Edwards, and you can't stop me.

WE get so hung up on being politically correct that we miss the message. I believe it is a fact that Iowa is the whitest state in US (highest % of white people), and the spot was showing in Iowa so why not use people like the people of Iowa? How about focusing on the message? He is correct in that! And sometimes it is OK to no be politically correct - even for politicians
Just a thought

That's right libs, time to take responsibility! You made Edwards' capmpaign ad.

Now that that's out of the way . . .

There is no such thing as race-neutral casting on the campaign trail; I know how amusing/pathetic it was to watch Bush accost every child of color while campaigning. In this case, the Edwards camp (assuming they made the ad) clearly knew what it was doing, as evidenced by the quick objection to your initial post ("there's a latina in the ad!"), the question is why they made the ad the way they did.

My guess is that they figure that they can take the votes from certain demographics as a given and are making a run at blue collar southern and midwestern white men, who are now waking up to the discovery that voting Republican has been a disaster for them and their families.

I've been a supporter of Edwards, gritting my teeth over the haircuts, wincing at the 11-bathroom house - this ad is a source of deep disappointment. We need a president of all the people, one who has the courage to represent all the people wherever and whoever we are - an be proud. A person of principle might be surprised to know there are many people of principle within the democratic electorate.

Dude put it to rest! What's the point in calling out someone like John Edwards for an add that happens to have all white people in it. I'm black and I'm not offended. Was he in charge of casting? Does he have a racist agenda? I could see if this was the "We share the same values" Rove-led GOP, but its John Edwards for crying out loud. He is a Democrat, who shares his party with the congressional black caucus (which happens to be entirely democratic). Move on, Mr. Tapper.

ONE INDEPENDENT AND PROUD AMERICAN

I understand your thoughts here, similar ones came to me watching the ad.

But then I thought, would putting a black farmer in front of a tractor in Iowa in an ad running only in Iowa seem dishonest to Iowans who haven't seen or heard of black farmers in Iowa? It would be a misrepresentation of their reality and would ring a false note of knee-jerk political correctness.

This is a candidate who has been to EVERY single county in Iowa. He takes the real lives of Iowans as Iowans really they live them very seriously, both by strategy and by principle. I also think he doesn't need to prove he's not a bigot. Just ask the members of the SEIU, a good many of whom are black and hispanic.

Let's pay some attention to something real -- like how Edwards's health, education and tax policies will benefit Americans, both the middle class and the poor. Those classes come in all colors and Senator Edwards wants to speak for them all.

The dude has my vote.

Raoul

Hey Libs because someone reports the Truth about you does not make them lousy reporters or Right wing conspirators.
Take Responsibilty will you all already!

Are we surprised Really, this is from the man who gets 1200$ haircuts, moves his campaign headquarters to an upscale neighborhood mainly white, out of DC where minority levels are high saying he wanted to be with the people. the man who made a living off the backs of hard working people with his frivolous lawsuits has his money in George Soros's Hedgfunds.

And then you got Hilary another hypocrite

Dem/Libs = Hypocrisy and Racism

Edwards is playing on the race issue and gender issue

Mr. Tapper: You say you are not one to count, but is that not exactly what you did? The problem with the media, like the government, is that it's broken. You do the exact thing you say you aren't doing. Edwards calls it DOUBLETALK!

Hmmm...

That add looks a lot like IOWA!!!

Just another MSM hit-piece masquerading as "news".

Your article is a perfect example of why Iowa and New Hampshire should not have inordinate influence in Presidential primaries. I think Edward's whitewash is problematic because of inaccurate portrayal of US labor but I think the ad is relevant as it is an ad in IOWA. I don't have the census numbers with me but being from the midwest myself and being African American, I am going out on a limb to say that the Black population in Iowa is statistically irrelevant, yet the state's causcuses give a boost to candidates that may not best reflect the more diverse regions of the country. Good call on your part but there is more to it than the racial iconography of Edward's ad, it's about the political influence of states unrepresentative of America as a whole.

Yeah, where are all the tokens? It's time that the "left" in the U.S. stopped trying to tokenize people of color, making it an issue of symbolic representation without touching on the institutional racism that exists.
And there IS a white working class no matter what liberals think, and if populists like Edwards don't reach out and articulate a vision to these people than the Right surely will.

Thank you for this piece, which I think makes a legitimate point about the messages such ads send, particularly to those of color. Iowa may be largely white, but it's not exclusively so and I suspect that Democratic primary voters of color noticed exactly the point Mr. Tapper made. As a black woman, while Mr. Edwards is higher on my list than some of the candidates he has not risen higher because of elements like this. I like his policies, but Americans of color have seen a lot of politicians that talk a good game while running, then not only fail to live up to the rhetoric once in office, but sometimes seem to completely forget it. One of the ways many of us have developed in our attempt to evaluate the chances of such reversals is to notice things like this.

Well, guess what? Duh, the press trying to screw another presidential candidate. What does Iowa and NH look like to you?

A professional writer should know that the possessive form of Edwards is "Edwards's."

William Strunk's Elements of Style recommends adding the 's. (In fact, oddly enough, it's Rule Number One in Strunk's "Elementary Rules of Usage.")

That aside, nice hit piece.

I worked the Iowa caucuses for a candidate in 2004, and sad to say, there were no people of color!

"Edwards' ad lacks diversity"; so do Iowa and New Hampshire...

...and ABC continues to fall further from respectability. This is truly sad.

I dunno, Jake, this feels like abject hackery to me. Big, big reach here.

everyone knows that "american" as used to descibe people in this country is code word for "white". everybody else is a hyphenated american.

"It was tough to find a campaign image of then-Gov. Bush back then where he wasn't surrounded with little black children"

Of course. The President is very popular in the African-American community.

So that's Very Very Very Believable.

C'mon Jake, when are you going to say something positive about Edwards? Now you are bringing the race card, again.

.

the Edwards ad is targeted to the audience in Iowa.. but you likely allready know that don't you Jake Tapper.. this would make this a hit job piece on Edwards by the media.. why.. maybe because you guys stopped doing a decent job reporting a long time ago.. all your anchors make big salaries don't they.. maybe they kinda like doing that so they slant the news.. i don't rely on you for the truth for that i diversify news programs and watch c-span and read alot..

.