October 28th, 2007
06:12 PM ET
7 years ago

Clinton booed at Edwards rally

Edwards, seen here speaking in Des Moines Saturday night, criticized Clinton once again.

DES MOINES, Iowa (CNN) - At a rally Saturday night touting the fact that he's been to every Iowa county, Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards once again criticized Democratic opponent Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-New York, on Iran. At issue: Clinton's vote in support of a recent Senate amendment. And this time Edwards' criticism stirred some clear anti-Clinton sentiment.

The amendment–sponsored by Sens. Joe Lieberman, I-Connecticut, and Jon Kyl, R-Arizona–calls for labeling the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization.

The former North Carolina senator first commended senators Joe Biden, D-Delaware, and Chris Dodd, D-Connecticut, for voting against it, but he then added, "Sen. Clinton voted 'yes.'"

That statement was followed by an immediate round of booing.

"She's entitled to her opinion," Edwards said over the noise. "But I share your opinion."

Edwards claims the amendment would "pave the way for Bush to continue to march forward on Iran."

"I didn't understand it," Edwards said. "And then I saw a story in the New York Times [that] quoted some of her supporters explaining why she did it, and the explanation was–I want to get this right–that she was moving from primary mode to general election mode."

A New York Times article from October 14 claimed Clinton's backers have said privately that she is now switching to general election mode, which would imply she's running as the presumptive nominee.

That prompted one supporter to shout, "Like hell!"

"Yea. Thank you," Edwards said in response.

"Was I asleep in North Carolina when you had the Iowa Caucus? I don't think
so."

"I think we're going to have a real election and a real campaign here in Iowa. I can tell you one thing, I will never take a single Iowa caucusgoer for granted."

-CNN Iowa Producer Chris Welch


Filed under: Hillary Clinton • Iowa • John Edwards • Race to '08
soundoff (139 Responses)
  1. RuthieM

    Wow, I think John Edwards is gonna bite Hillary's head off at the next debate. He sure doesn't appreciate her going general election mode. And any red blooded voting American shouldn't appreciate it either because what it says is that Hillary's really thumbing her nose AT THE VOTES AND THE VOTERS, just like George Bush did in 2000 when he refused to count the votes of the American people and the Supreme Court landed him in the white house. Frankly, I wouldn't even think about voting for any candidate who appeared so sure-fire cocky as to want to snub the primary voters in her own mind and has already sailed an entire year ahead to general election when not one primary has occurred yet. She does not deserve to be president carrying on this way.

    October 28, 2007 01:14 pm at 1:14 pm |
  2. Fair,Washington, DC

    "All this should prompt Iowa and New Hampshire to Vote for a Candidate that does NOT take their votes for granted. Obama is the better choice as he has the Primary money to continue defeating HILLARY AFTER Iowa and New Hampshire hands Hillary a decisive DEFEAT. There by showing Hillary and any future Candidates NOT to take Iowa and New Hampshire votes for granted."

    And then what? I'll give you that...Obama can win the Democratic primary..anything can happen as we've seen in the last two elections...but after he beats Hillary in the Primary he's still got to win the general election ...which lets not forget is the ultimate goal..you are sadly mistaken if you think Obama is gonna stand up with his eperience or lack thereof issue once the Republicns get a hold of him. Stop livig in the fairytale world of the Obama campaign and join us serious folk that bottom line want a Dem in the WH and want the best candidate that has the best chance of accomplishing that.... Hillary Rodham Clinton.

    October 28, 2007 01:14 pm at 1:14 pm |
  3. David, Dallas Tx

    I agree with Lance in Monrovia CA. I started out as a Hillary supporter. I was and am a fan of her husband's presidency, was pumped about the idea of a woman president, agree with her stance on health care, etc. etc.

    But bottom line, she's too much like George W Bush when it comes to foreign policy. Perpetuating the existing foreign policy will not recapture the greatness our nation lost under Bush, and it makes no sense to vote for anyone who wants to do that.

    Failed policies need to be changed, not repeated.

    October 28, 2007 01:18 pm at 1:18 pm |
  4. Judith Raddue, Chicago, IL

    If Hillary Clinton is to be considered for the Presidency, she should IMMEDIATELY demand that her husband open up her archives in the Clinton library. Why the secrecy? What is she trying to hide? While standing on the stage next to men whose experience dwarfs hers (namely, Sens. Biden and Dodd and Gov. Richardson), she contends that she is the most prepared to serve on Day One. This must be predicated on her experience as First Lady.

    If this is true, then she should prove it by the immediate release of her archives. Otherwise we need to ask her: If Sen. Clinton cannot trust the American public with knowledge of her work as First Lady, why should we trust her with the Presidency???

    October 28, 2007 01:42 pm at 1:42 pm |
  5. Diplomacy Not Cowboy Rhetoric

    The UN inspectors, who were right about not invading Iraq as there was no concrete evidence of WMD, are also saying there is no concrete evidence in Iran nor have they been given evidence of any reason for bombing Syria.

    The American citizens are potentially going to be duped again and once again they will go it alone and make the mess in the Middle East even worse. The rhetoric is pushing Iran into a corner and will alienate Iranians who are pushing for freedoms.

    Clinton and every Republican running for president are not equipped with the diplomatic agenda this world needs so badly.

    October 28, 2007 01:47 pm at 1:47 pm |
  6. SB

    Good job John Edwards. I am an Obama supporter, but if you were to get the nomination, I would vote for you.

    If Hillary gets the nomination, I will vote against her.

    October 28, 2007 01:57 pm at 1:57 pm |
  7. Beckster

    Man I love it when liberals attack each other.

    October 28, 2007 02:01 pm at 2:01 pm |
  8. Earl, Ohio

    I'm an independent. I plan to vote for the Democrat for President this time, unless it is Hillary. If it is Hillary, I will vote for either the Republican (depending on who it is) or a third-party.

    I have had enough of the Bushes and Clintons. Time to end this dynasty!

    October 28, 2007 02:06 pm at 2:06 pm |
  9. Charles Wright, Richmond, BC

    America has never been referred to as "Homeland" in its 230-year long history as a Republic, err, 223-years, until Bush Sr Gangster's took over, creating a stealth Neo-Socialist Gov-Corp Soviet Politburo of Endless-Deficit-and-Spend.

    Look at our soaring national deficits! Your grandchildren will!! Now DoD/DHS says $196B more for "Iraq, Afghanistan AND OTHER UNDISCLOSED NATIONAL SECURITY PURPOSES". Say wha!? 200% of 2007's war budget!? We're pulled back to Baghdad, Basra's radio-silent, and Kirkuk is doing independent oil deals for Hunt!

    What's the additional $100B going for?
    Where is our surge dividend?! Where is their war audit?! Where are our taxes going?! Down the rat hole of Homeland Security / Private Defense Contracts!

    DHS / TSA is metastasizing like a foul plague across America, tapping into the Neo-Con deficit-fund pool, and waging domestic Cold War upon all of US. We must act to stop it while we still can!

    Vote all the incumbents out in 2008, (except for Charlie Wrangell)! Wow!!

    October 28, 2007 02:18 pm at 2:18 pm |
  10. Bea, Hoboken, NJ

    Who is John Edwards?

    – He couldn't win reelection to the senate.

    – He couldn't carry his own state in 2004.

    John Edwards: LOSER!!!

    October 28, 2007 02:36 pm at 2:36 pm |
  11. M. Meyer, LaCrosse, WI

    I, for one, am fed up by the consistent use of such childish campaign tactics and practices – by both the Democrats and Republicans.

    I had really expected that we’d see more emotional integrity and maturity from our political candidates this time around.

    Especially from the Democrats. Especially by those candidates who repeatedly ‘demand’ political change, integrity and equality for all. When are any of these folks going to put their money where their mouths are, and start backing up their words by their actions? The world is waiting...

    All I've seen and heard so far is just more of the same old adolescent campaign tactics; name calling, finger pointing and use of fear. Can someone please explain to me how this behavior is any different than that of the Bush administration? Of elementary school children for that matter? How can anyone be expected to take these folks seriously?

    Although I haven’t made up my mind who I am going to vote for, I have noted that so far, Hillary Clinton seems to be the only candidate who hasn’t relied on mudslinging in order to get her point across.

    Interesting behavior by someone who is repeatedly and consistently accused of being too ‘emotional’ to lead this nation.

    October 28, 2007 02:38 pm at 2:38 pm |
  12. Craigs MN

    Craig A. Carroll Hastings, MN: Craig are blind or delusional or on drugs or Senator Craig's close follower? Which potential presidential candidate told you they will pull out of Iraq now? Obama and Edwards both said they will stay in Iraq till 2013 along with Hillary. What's the difference? Nothing like you jumped up and down to reach the conclusion. Nah, it's called "Kind of hard since it doesn't exist".

    Well all you Hillary shills. Would you care to tell me the difference between HRC and GWB. Kind of hard since it doesn't exist. No MORE dynasties folks. I will not support the Bushes and the Clintons using the White House as a time share mansion. You want four more years of Iraq and heaven knows how much more of our precious blood spilled you support HRC. Count me OUT.

    Posted By Craig A. Carroll Hastings, MN : October 28, 2007 11:57 am

    October 28, 2007 02:46 pm at 2:46 pm |
  13. Wyatt Medford,Oregon

    What this country needs is a candidate with a vast knowledge of foreign affairs and a plan to get us out of this war. We also need a candidate that has a track record of bringing both partys together to get a bill thru. We need a candidate who can talk straight with us. We need a candidate who can bring in the Independent voter and the moderate Republican voter. Hillary has to much baggage ..Republicans use her for fundraising. Do you really think they will work with her ? There is too much bitterness. I also think Obama and Edwards are decent men but there lack of experience isn't what this country need at this time in history. Joe Biden is the best candidate by far. He has the leadership,experience and values that this country needs.

    October 28, 2007 02:47 pm at 2:47 pm |
  14. Timothy, Greensboro, NC

    Good! Hillary Clinton should have been booed because of that! If all the Edwards haters here cannot handle this, wait until it's just her versus the Republicans! They are going to have a field day (they already are- did you catch their last debate?)-
    WHY CAN'T DEMOCRATES NOMINATE THE BEST CHOICE? THAT WOULD BE JOHN EDWARDS! BUT NO, WE WILL ALL BE CRYING WHEN, ONCE AGAIN, WE LOSE AND WE JUST CAN'T BELIEVE IT...AGAIN.......
    Believe it, Democrats, Vote for Edwards or we will lose....again.
    You've been warned. Do not cry when she loses!!!!!!!

    October 28, 2007 02:55 pm at 2:55 pm |
  15. kim portland or

    edwards would be a phenomenal leader for this country–and the world!

    BOO hillary! although if it unfortunately comes down to her and the vile rudy, she gets MY vote!

    edwards has got to somehow get lots more money to beat the clinton machine.

    October 28, 2007 03:21 pm at 3:21 pm |
  16. A VIEWER

    THAT WAS A TEST..SORRY

    October 28, 2007 03:23 pm at 3:23 pm |
  17. Charles in Orem, Utah

    If Hillary Clinton becomes the Democratic nominee, the Republicans won't have to run a negative campaign against her. They can just hire disenchanted Democrats to continue doing it for them.

    Hillary is a divider, not a healer.

    October 28, 2007 03:36 pm at 3:36 pm |
  18. Colleen,ny

    BUGGIE IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.

    October 28, 2007 03:48 pm at 3:48 pm |
  19. Mike, Orlando FL

    I think the Libs need a rally to beg for more Welfare and other handouts.....what a pathetic bunch.

    October 28, 2007 03:49 pm at 3:49 pm |
  20. emelvin

    JohN Edwards is the obvious Democratic Candidate, he can win!

    Hillary is a machine!

    John, please put it in fast forward so you can win!

    October 28, 2007 03:52 pm at 3:52 pm |
  21. Mark R. Fort Lauderdale FL

    I'm sorry to have to be the one to break it to you, John, but you're not going to be president. Not now, not ever. Find some other way to serve the public good, and stop bashing members of your own party.

    October 28, 2007 03:52 pm at 3:52 pm |
  22. Colleen,ny

    RODNEY KNOWS WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT.

    October 28, 2007 03:52 pm at 3:52 pm |
  23. Joeley Reno, Nevada

    John Edwards is demonstrating that the politics of negativity really is destructive...TO HIS OWN CAMPAIGN.

    The problem is, I don't believe it's the Dems that are going the way of trash and bash Hillary, it's the Repub bloggers.

    I'm no blogger but I might become one if that's what is required to mitigate the right wing 'wingnuts' that spew their hate crap in venues such as this.

    Anyone who takes the time and energy to look at Hillary's career, will see someone who should be viewed as a hero, not a villan.

    I recently argued a position with a Repub friend who had a fortified position on the issue being discussed. It became obvious very quickly, their fortification was a deaf ear to any contrary dialogue. Through my frustration I commented "A closed mind gathers no knowledge".

    My Repub friend told me to perform a specific act upon myself and walked out the door.

    My point is, many, (like my Repub friend) who write this trash Hillary crap, are probably umbilicallly connected to the Fox (Nonsencical)News Network, and listen no further than propagandized talking points vetted by the extreme right wing of the Republican party, and regurgitaded by the Fox Network, and that's too bad.

    Hillary Clinton will approach the potentially catastrophic situation(s) we face nationally, and that face us globally, with ability, diplomacy, strength and courage.

    If we Democrats buy into this trash and burn manner of politics, we all loose.

    Let's kick some Repub booty...VOTE HILLARY 2008!

    October 28, 2007 03:53 pm at 3:53 pm |
  24. Sam, Lutz, FL

    It really doesn't matter.

    Hillary will be the next President of the United States.

    Why?

    The media.

    There is no democracy in this country. There is only the illusion of democracy. As long as corporations dictate the politics in this country, the people will continue to be dragged along by whomever the corporations choose to be the next president.

    October 28, 2007 04:14 pm at 4:14 pm |
  25. Jean Douglas, Cochise, Arizona

    Edwards has been campaigning in Iowa for 2 years and all he has to show for his efforts there is a virtual dead heat with Clinton and Obama. His advisors/handlers think that if he wins in Iowa he will be catapulted into front runner status. I hope not.

    I have nothing against Iowa or New Hampshire for that matter but really don't like the idea that one or two States can/might be in a position to pick a President for the rest of us.

    October 28, 2007 04:34 pm at 4:34 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6

Post a comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.