December 24th, 2007
03:00 PM ET
7 years ago

Obama and Edwards battle for populist mantle

Sen. Obama is running a new ad in Iowa.

(CNN) – Democrats Barack Obama and John Edwards are both making populist pitches in Iowa, with just over a week to go until the state’s presidential caucuses.

In ‘Enough’, a 30-second spot that debuted in the Hawkeye State this weekend, Barack Obama tells an Iowa crowd that “We gotta stop giving tax breaks to companies that are moving overseas and give those tax breaks to companies that are investing right here in Iowa…Enough is enough.

“If the plant moves to China, and you’ve been working there for 20, 30 years and suddenly you have the rug pulled out from under ya…and you don’t have health care, and you don’t have a pension, you’re on your own,” says the Illinois senator.

The ad was unveiled the same weekend as John Edwards’ $25 billion job creation plan. It calls for increasing federal aid to help “hard-working families across America [who] are already struggling to make ends meet,” the former North Carolina senator said in a statement.

Obama and Edwards have sparred in recent weeks over who is best-equipped to take on corporate interests and fight for economic reform.

– CNN’s Emily Sherman


Filed under: Candidate Barack Obama • Iowa • John Edwards • Political ads
soundoff (61 Responses)
  1. Dan Campbell Cincinnati, Ohio

    Edwards and Obama are and have been promoting these ideas for a long time. I believe both these men are good candidates for President and would do much to improve the social and economic conditions facing this country now and in the future. As a country we need leaders who care about citizens of this country and their ability to have hope and faith in the future. Both democrats and republicans need to think and act in the best interests of the country and less about the selfish interests of party politics.

    December 25, 2007 09:06 pm at 9:06 pm |
  2. J. McKinney SW MO

    >>Posted By Mike, Westport CT : December 25, 2007 9:20 am >>

    Mike says:
    A few of the reasons why I'm on track with Barack:

    He has only had one wife, and his wife has only had one wife.>>>>>

    His wife has only had one wife??? What the heck do you mean by that, for Pete's sake???

    By the way, I'm for Hillary. She hasn't had any wife. LOL

    December 25, 2007 10:37 pm at 10:37 pm |
  3. mike, westport ct

    Poor proofreading on my part.
    Obama has had only one wife, and his wife has only had one husband, as opposed to Giuliani.

    December 26, 2007 02:34 am at 2:34 am |
  4. William Courtland, Waterford, Ontario

    The idea of an agenda, is not an idea for a President... But, it could be a great thing for the corporation to gain assistance in organization promoted from a unified Congress.

    As a populist President, you would expect the Congressional majority to progress such ideals? The policies and mandates set with the help of the Senate; what would those people represented by Members of Congress want government to board and quarter? assistance.

    Uphold and defend the constitution, and with that requirement put first allow Congress to lead, as the Senate guides with well marked pathways.

    Populist... I would want every positive 'ist' embraced. Technology and science, morality and valor can set the pace and need.

    December 26, 2007 05:39 am at 5:39 am |
  5. xtina chicago IL

    We do need good leaders, but like good parents, good leaders encourage those they lead, but don't give them rewards without effort.

    A good leader wouldn't say 'well, these people over here are successful and have worked hard, so we're going to punish them for the benefit of those who have sold out or not worked hard to be successful.'

    I noticed that the harder I work and the higher my gross amt. is, the more punished with taxes that amt. becomes. That isn't right, it's not fair and it's not American to tax you the more you make. A consumption tax makes more sense. Instead of watching videos and planning their next vacation, I'd say some Americans would benefit from reading about the Fair Tax.

    December 26, 2007 09:37 am at 9:37 am |
  6. AJ, IL

    Mainstream is always out to sensationalize political differences in the candidates. Either candidates are 'sparring' or ' battling' among other candidates. Obama and Edwards (as well as the other candidates) are vying to get support for their candidancies, plain and simple. Personal attacks should not be tolerated. Obama is correct in accessing US companies responsiblity to the American public and economy. In terms of this blog, Edwards strikes too much of an anti-corporate tone for my liking. Hillary on the other hand strikes too much of a pro-corporate tone for my liking. Obama gives just the right tone towards dealing with corporations and unions.

    Edwards needs to be spending time with his family. His wealthy (~50 millio net worth) so can afford to do it. With his wife having cancer and both of them have small children you would think Edwards priority would be to spend as much time as he could with his family. I mean come on, Edwards unsuccessfully ran for president in 2004.

    December 26, 2007 09:37 am at 9:37 am |
  7. RD

    I'd have to vote for Edwards over Obama. He is one of our best hopes in beating the Republican nominee and winning the White house. Obama does not stand a chance in the General Election. A vote for Hillary or a vote for Obama is 4 more years of a Republican White house. You either love or hate the two. They can not even unite the Democratic party. Biden, Richardson, or Edwards is our only Choice. Biden would even win some of the Republican votes in the general election. A vote For Hillary or Obama is voting the democrats out of the white house.

    December 26, 2007 10:44 am at 10:44 am |
  8. Jamie, Houston, TX

    We need experience in leadership on Day One in January 2009. This country can't survive on hopes and dreams alone. When you take away all the hype and brilliant imagery from Obama, there's nothing left. Democrats can't afford to lose this election. And people are fooling themselves if they think that Republicans are just gonna bend over backwards to hold hands and sing songs with Obama. It's not gonna happen. We need a leader that can go in there and get the job done.

    Hillary Clinton '08

    December 27, 2007 11:56 am at 11:56 am |
  9. Larry, Poquoson VA

    This choice is easy and it doesn't take a college degree. All the Clinton supporters will get is more rubbish, Obama gets the black vote and Edwards is the only candidate speaking from the heart. Why jump on board a band wagon when you can drive the vehicle. If women vote for Hillary, Blacks for Obama, then as a white male – I vote for Edwards – simple

    December 27, 2007 02:33 pm at 2:33 pm |
  10. David Johnson

    Americans are far too reactionary and backward to elect a non white male as president. The hateful fire aimed at whitebread Mormon Romney is proof that the GOP is run by Christian fundamentalists whose goal is a one party theocracy. Saudi Arabia with a Cross so to speak.
    7 years of rightwing rule with evangelicals steering our domestic & foreign policy has divided this country so deeply it will take decades or more to heal.

    December 27, 2007 07:37 pm at 7:37 pm |
  11. 24hrlib in Iowa

    Obama 38%, Edwards 30% and Clinton 29%...lol, the MSM has already begun to pit the populist Obama and Edwards against each other...but, it ain't over 'til the fat lady sings!

    January 4, 2008 12:25 am at 12:25 am |
1 2 3