- Daily Photo: Obama Jokes Around at G-20
- Blackwater gets replaced in Iraq
- Daily Photo: U.S. Marines Look Out for Taliban in Afghanistan
- Hillary Clinton the Tomboy and Her "Ah-Ha" Moment
- Obama Administration Sudan Envoy Headed to Region
- Daily Photo: Potential Flashpoint in Iraq
- Clinton Says New Afghanistan-Pakistan Plan Depends on Diplomacy
- Exclusive: Three Israeli Airstrikes Against Sudan
- Additional 4,000 Troops to Be Ordered to Afghanistan
- Daily Photo: Navy Submarine Trains in the Arctic
- Alarm Over North Korea Missile Prep
- Anti-Terror Stimulus? US Offers Rewards for Top Terrorists
- Daily Photo: Pakistani Women in Refugee Camp
- Condoleezza Rice Appears on "The Tonight Show"
- Diplomat and Aid Group Sound the Alarm on Darfur Camp Situation
- auto industry rescue
- Ballotwatch
- Biden, Joe
- Bush, George W.
- Clinton, Bill
- Clinton, Hillary
- Dodd, Chris
- Edwards, John
- Giuliani, Rudy
- Gravel, Mike
- Huckabee, Mike
- Hunter, Duncan
- Inauguration
- Iraq
- Kucinich, Dennis
- McCain, John
- Obama, Barack
- Palin, Sarah
- Paul, Ron
- Romney, Mitt
- Tancredo, Tom
- Thompson, Fred
- Veepstakes
- Vote 2008: Democrats
- Vote 2008: Republicans
- Washington
- White House
« Previous | Main | Next »
Edwards on Debategate
Email
ShareJuly 16, 2007 11:46 AM
ABC News' Teddy Davis Reports: Former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., told ABC News' Diane Sawyer Monday that he would be "perfectly fine" with ending up in a slimmed down debate with long-shot candidates Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich.
"They have something important to say" said Edwards, "and I think their voice should be heard in this process."
Edwards sparked controversy last week when he was caught on tape telling Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., that the two of them should work together to limit future debates to a "more serious and a smaller group." Clinton seemed to agree, saying, "There was an effort by our campaigns to do that . . . it got somehow detoured. We’ve gotta get back to it . . . Our guys should talk."
After the secret Edwards-Clinton chat was made public, Kucinich reacted angrily, accusing his two rivals of acting like "imperial" candidates and saying that he felt "betrayed" by Edwards. On Friday, he sent letters to Edwards and Clinton challenging them to a series of in-depth one-on-one debates.
Kucinich's feeling of betrayal stems from a partnership he forged with Edwards on the eve of the 2004 Iowa caucuses. The two Democrats agreed during their first presidential runs to send their supporters each others' way if one of them was not getting the votes needed to remain "viable."
Asked if he would apologize to the Ohio congressman, Edwards said, "There is nothing to apologize for. What I said is that we have to get away” from “sound bite politics."
Edwards, who floated the possibility last week of randomly breaking up the eight-candidate field into smaller groups of four, did not insist on a four-person format during his appearance on "Good Morning America."
"However we can break up into smaller groups," said Edwards, "random is perfectly fine with me, and have a more substantive, more serious discussion, and get away from the sound-bite mentality. America deserves something more serious than that."
Earlier this year, Edwards declined an opportunity to participate in an Iraq war debate sponsored by Johns Hopkins University which was attended by Kucinich, Gravel, and Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del.
Beyond saying that he would be "perfectly fine" with debating Gravel and Kucinich, Edwards identified Gravel, who is a former senator from Alaska, as the Democratic candidate he would take with him if he were "stranded on a desert island."
"They don’t even know who he is," said Edwards motioning to people in attendance at his town hall. "He's fascinating and he thinks in a very different way in these debates."
When Clinton was asked by the Associated Press on Friday about the conversation with Edwards, she seemed to lay responsibility on Edwards. "I think he has some ideas about what he’d like to do," she said, despite seeming to agree with Edwards' complaints on the tape.
Edwards made his comments to ABC News' "Good Morning America" during a nationally televised "town hall" meeting in New Orleans. He revealed during the town-hall meeting that he and his wife Elizabeth, who has cancer, plan to renew their vows to one another later this year when they celebrate their 30th wedding anniversary.
July 16, 2007 in Tancredo, Tom | Permalink | User Comments (12)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
That happens when you are caught with your hand in the cookie jar.
Posted by: Rick McDaniel | Jul 16, 2007 12:57:35 PM
This looks bad for Hillary. Obviously, she wants Gravel and Kucinch out of the debates because they are leveling some serious and powerful criticisms of her and of her husband's administration, mainly on trade (NAPTA) and on the war. She apparently has no valid reply, so she instead tries to kick them out of the debates so they can't be heard. Weak, very weak.
Posted by: Jake Long | Jul 16, 2007 2:49:41 PM
Agree with Jake (above). It seems like the "top tier" candidates are too afraid to rock the boat, that they end up with no great / revolutionizing ideas, and instead of facing the ideas, they silence the opposition... exactly why NONE of the top tier candidates SHOULD be elected... we are in a cycle of "lesser of two evils"... It makes me sick!
Posted by: Steven Nielson | Jul 16, 2007 3:26:19 PM
This clearly shows Hillary's non-existent leadership skills.
Posted by: The Indy Voice | Jul 16, 2007 4:43:40 PM
People are saying that Gravel is a "breath of fresh air" because he has the passion and the plan to take back our government from the "politics as usual crowd." Edwards thinks Gravel is "fascinating". That must be the explanation for what the NYT has called it when they react to the power of Gravel's honesty. Me thinks that the "top tier" is getting wicked nervous -- or they're getting a conscience -- recognizing that they can't hold a candle to the Gravel who is rocking the boat for genuine change.
Posted by: Mainer | Jul 16, 2007 9:19:18 PM
Since Hillary Clinton's poll numbers just keep going up after the debates-why would she want to change the format? Hillary bashers can't accept the fact that she and Edwards might really be frustrated by the inability to have real issues discussed in any meaningful way when the stage is filled-
Posted by: veritas | Jul 16, 2007 11:20:19 PM
I don't like structured debates. They are not debates at all. Instead, choose a topic and let two people go at it with each other. On meet the press Sunday, Webb and Graham came about the closest thing to a debate that we have seen in a while. I thought one of them could swing a punch.
Posted by: cliff jones | Jul 17, 2007 3:42:14 AM
Although fabricated, these numbers do raise some legitimate issues. Even more obvious, however, is that the issues raised don't create the visceral reaction in most Americans that they do in hard core consevatives. Ditto the issue of abortion. The far left gets similarly exercised over issues relating to poverty and the environment, and yet have learned to sit back, take a deep breath and accept the fact that most people are fairly ambivilent about matters they feel so passionately about. I know it's hard to accept, but many people have different opinions and priorities than you do, and not necessesarily because they're less intelligent than you. I'll try to teach you something that apparently your mother didn't: Things are not always going to go your way. I'd recommend that most of you folks on the right just sit back and try to enjoy the remainder of Bush's term, as difficult as that may be. The next year and a half may be your last grasp on power for a long, long time.
Posted by: sps91158 | Jul 17, 2007 10:38:38 AM
Gravel 2008, baby! Gravel and Kucinich are the only ones qualified to become president.
Gravel's truth, intellect, humor, and legacy (ending the draft, releasing the pentagon papers, etc.) speaks for itself. Gravel is the full deal.
You've got this amazing candidate right under your nose and you don't notice him because he's not rich.
Wake up to Gravel, America... before it's too late.
Posted by: Zm | Jul 17, 2007 1:00:04 PM
Doesn't matter if you're a Republican or Democrat, you can tell a politician is lying when their lips move. Why do we even give support to pols tied to past administrations with the same lame ideas and following the status quo? Dump Hillary, dump Edwards and get someone else with a different perspective. The Republicans sure don't have anyone worth a flip.
Posted by: JP | Jul 17, 2007 1:08:56 PM
JP you've almost got it. Take the next step. LET'S SUPPORT A NON INCUMBENT PLATFORM. lets GET US AN ENTIRELY NEW BAND OF THIEVES IN CONGRESS AND THE WHITE HOUSE. Ole Sam Clemens had the Idea. Select our Leaders like a Jury, Everyone has to serve and when they're done, turn them out and get a whole new group. Since that won't happen the next best thing would be to reject all incumbents. wadaya think.?
Posted by: cuznmikie | Jul 18, 2007 12:14:41 AM
Mike Gravel is the guy I would want with me if I were stranded in present day America. He has actually learned from our country's past mistakes, instead of trying to repeat them.
It's time to pull Don Quixote out of Iraq.
Posted by: Random | Jul 20, 2007 8:19:43 PM
Post a comment
