January 5th, 2008
09:31 AM ET
13 years ago

Clinton out of it, Edwards suggests


John Edwards is hoping to transfer his Iowa momentum to New Hampshire. (Photo Credit: AP)

(CNN) - Democrat John Edwards seemed to suggest Friday Hillary Clinton's third place finish in Iowa may have rendered the New York senator effectively out of the presidential race.

Speaking at an early-morning campaign rally in Manchester, New Hampshire, Edwards pointed to entrance polls indicating Iowa voters overwhelmingly listed "change" as the most important attribute they are looking for in a candidate. That means, he added, there are now only "two choices."

"What is clear is that [voters] are not interested in status quo," Edwards said. "They're interested in change. They want to see a candidate of change, and so they now have two choices in making that decision, and this choice is somebody who will fight for the change that makes America what it's capable of being.

Edwards also continued with his campaign’s standard populist pitch in the Granite State, telling Manchester voters, "I am not the candidate of glitz. I am not the candidate of glamor; nor do I claim to be. But what I am - I am the candidate for president of the United States that is the peoples' candidate."

The former senator struck a similar chord at a Nashua event later Friday. And in an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer, Edwards sought to distinguish himself as a fighter for change while rival Barack Obama's approach is more "philosophical" and "academic."

Most current New Hampshire polls were taken before the Iowa caucuses, and show Edwards a distant third behind Clinton and Obama in the state. It remains unclear what effect his second-place showing on Thursday might have among Granite State primary voters.

Meanwhile, Clinton downplayed Friday her third-place showing in Iowa, saying the Hawkeye State was always a difficult one for her to win. She also dismissed Iowa's ultimate effect on determining the party's eventual nominee.

"Iowa does not have best track record in determining who the parties nominate, everybody knows that," she said at an event in Manchester. "You know, New Hampshire is famously independent, it is a place where people want to make up their own minds - they're not interested in what anybody else has decided.

"They want to look us up and down, make that judgment, and I welcome that," She added. "I think that's exactly what the New Hampshire process should be about."

- CNN Ticker Producer Alexander Mooney

Filed under: Hillary Clinton • John Edwards
soundoff (528 Responses)
  1. Davey near Buffalo NY

    A comment by Barrister4Hillary is a great example of the close-minded Neanderthal thinking that exists in this state I live in: New York. Someone who thinks she is entitled to be President moves to New York, confident that there enough brainless liberals (mind you, there are a lot of intelligient, thoughtful ones, but not in this state) who would elect her and would ignore the fact that she's done nothing except talk for the vast majority of her time here and then, as Barrister4Hillary notes, push for her to become President.

    I almost always vote Republican, but am willing to give any Democrat a fair shake. Al Gore would have and still could be a great President and so could Joe Biden and Dodd, for examples. Obama seems quite impressive and it does seem he's far more capable of accomplishing what Clinton only talks about and he's definitely more honest than her; I suppose only a barrister could accept and ignore her shameless attempt to buy and lie her way to votes; the people's money should not be used in any way to buy votes and her unwillingness to answer simple questions is, or should be, an insult to all of intelligience. In fact, Obama's honesty is perhaps his greatest asset, I think, something Clinton may be unable to overcome and if she tries her dirty tricks on him, it will sink whatever chances she feels she still has or is entitled to. I think her free ride has nearly reached the end of the track. I'm not entirely comfortable with Obama's opinions, but I am impressed wih him and hope that he sticks to a clean campaign as the similarly straight-talking Huckabee and McCain have indicated they will, as well.

    January 5, 2008 05:46 pm at 5:46 pm |
  2. messagero

    Wait, let me get this. If you have 6 or 7 more vote out of thousands, that puts you in the class with Obama who received hundreds of votes more than either Clinton or Edwards.

    BTW Senator Clinton was not denigrating Iowa, just referring to history.

    I really want a grownup for President.
    Go Hillary!


    January 5, 2008 05:57 pm at 5:57 pm |
  3. justin bailey

    If Bill Clinton was the Elvis of polititians, Obama is the Hendrix. The enthusiasm he generates is unprecedented. His magic is alchemical, his talent monumental. He is the man who can set this country back on course. Edwards should just hand over what little cash he has to Obama, along with an endorsement. So should Hillary, who is in an impossible position. She is pitted against the good guy, which automatically makes her the bad guy.

    January 5, 2008 06:17 pm at 6:17 pm |
  4. Nick in Atlanta

    wil – Clinton didn't want gays to serve openly in the military any more than Bush does. He signed "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" into policy! I STILL don't get why America will stand by as these Presidents write policies discriminating against our own people! America stood by for decades as blacks and women were discriminated against. NOW America is standing by as gays are being discriminated against. Why are even the democrats who "stand for liberal rights" standing by as gay people's rights are being stripped away from them?!? Would you have stood by as they added to the Constitution that blacks were not allowed to get married? Would you have stood by as they added to policy that you can't be black and be in the military? How about women? What if they said women were not allowed to serve in the military? Or they wanted to add to the Constitution that women were not allowed to work? Or that women were only allowed to give birth to ONE child and no more! How about we ammend the Constitution to state that two people should only have sex to have children?! Ya know, the Bible states that sex is not for enjoyment but to bring new life. If we can use the Bible's 'policies' on marriage, how about on sex, or women's rights?!

    People, we are humans! We're your sons, daughters, mothers & fathers, uncles, aunts, cousins. We are your doctors, lawyers, politicians (Sen Craig...), preachers, teachers, servers, and garbagemen. We cross racial divides! We cross sexual divides! We have proudly and quietly served in our military for hundreds of years! We DON'T want special rights! We DON'T want additional rights! ALL WE ARE ASKING IS EQUAL RIGHTS! How is my choosing to be with my partner for the rest of my life any different than you being with yours for the rest of your life? Why should he & I build a life together, that at death is taken away by the state?! Can you imagine being told, as your loved one lays dieing on a hospital bed, that you can't go in and see them? Can you imagine the 401K plan that your loved one has poured his/her money into for decades being taken away? How about not being able to roll their 401K plan (which hetero couples are allowed to do upon the death of their loved ones) into yours? How about hearing you can't adopt a child because you're not a real couple? God, what would happen if couples who mixed race (1 white and 1 black for example) were told they couldn't adopt a child because their race is not the same?!

    STOP voting for discrimination! Think about how your candidate effects America as a whole! A President who supports discrimination being added to our Constitution can only bring more shame to America as a whole! Canadians wrote songs about us "Proud To Be An American"...now our musicians are saying "Yeah I'm embarrassed that he's from Texas too!!" to foreigners. My how times have changed!! Vote NO to discrimination! Vote YES to change!!

    January 5, 2008 06:28 pm at 6:28 pm |
  5. D D

    WE need Hillary-You go girl show us the way....

    January 5, 2008 06:32 pm at 6:32 pm |
  6. Nick in Atlanta

    Troy S – Hillary definitely doesn't have all of "our" votes. Some of us gays have worked with Hildabeast...I didn't like working for her...I sure don't want her working for me!

    January 5, 2008 06:37 pm at 6:37 pm |
  7. Fred, Southampton, NY

    As a New Yorker I am quite glad to see that Hillary has lost in Iowa. Having met and spoken with her for about ten minutes face to face, I can say that she is a well oiled political machine who does not mean what she says. She does not represent change, she represents more of the same. Hillary represents another four to eight years of fear and war.

    My vote is for Obama. The young, baggageless candidate who represents true change in Washington, the United States, and our influence throughout the world.

    January 5, 2008 06:46 pm at 6:46 pm |
  8. Nancy Wilson

    John Edwards needs to worry about himself and his campaign instead of trying to put down Hillary. What is he hoping this for ? Do you guess he thinks if Obama wins he will be his running mate?

    January 5, 2008 06:48 pm at 6:48 pm |
  9. David Gonzalez

    Bimmer, you make excellent points. Why isn't the Clinton campaign not highlighting these issues? Obama is all talk and no substance.

    January 5, 2008 07:22 pm at 7:22 pm |
  10. Tim

    Hillary is not out of it. She has only just began. How can Edwards say that Hillary is out of it when he barely edged out over her in Iowa. Hillary Clinton will win it over all.

    January 5, 2008 08:13 pm at 8:13 pm |
  11. Jen Cedar Falls, IA

    Hillary's attitude toward Iowa now is just like Bush's attitude toward the world in his :"You're either with us or against us".
    This is exactly how Hillary runs things, please do NOT let her run this country.

    January 5, 2008 08:22 pm at 8:22 pm |
  12. jeannette


    It's obvious John Edwards is being slighted by CNN news coverage. Is this a deliberate attempt to promote Obama's agenda??? All candidates and supporters should be treated equally. After all that's how most of us decide who we're going to vote for – by listening to news reports. You must get it right and be fair.

    January 5, 2008 08:39 pm at 8:39 pm |
  13. Leslie Anne Geddes

    Where is the Media coverage for John Edwards?
    There is virtually no coverage of John Edwards, despite his credible stature as a viable candidate. Even after his showing in the Iowa Caucus, garnering almost 1 of 3 Democratic votes, your media and political analysts consistently eliminate him as a contender.
    When there is a rare mention of John Edwards, his candidacy is further undermined by inaccurate reporting.
    Edwards did not "count Clinton out" as your headline states. In fact his words were "I would never count Hilary Clinton out".
    Why is the United States media removing the opportunity for your citizens to consider a viable leader of your great nation? Surely this "land of opportunity for all" would not discount John Edwards because his financial resources are equal to those of the two Democratic candidates constantly in your news.
    Please restore a measure of integrity and equality to media presentation of the Presidential race, and give America and the world then opportunity to hear from, and about John Edwards!
    Leslie Geddes from Canada

    January 5, 2008 08:44 pm at 8:44 pm |
  14. Right Democrat

    The media needs to give Edwards his fair share of coverage. The big news is that Clinton ran third. Rather than the Clinton-Obama race that the media wanted, we are going to have a contest between Edwards and Obama.

    January 5, 2008 09:16 pm at 9:16 pm |
  15. Gavin, Merrillville, Indiana

    OverTheRainbow, KS – GET OFF THE ATTACK MODE ALREADY – geez, your baseless rebukes of others comments just go to show how "haters" litany is pure redundancy of synicism and doom. You're comments are partially responsible for the irresponsible and unfounded "hating" of Hillary and other candidates for that matter.

    Go over a rainbow or something and let people have thier say.

    January 5, 2008 10:30 pm at 10:30 pm |
  16. From The North

    I'm with you Georgina, Canada.

    It is sad to read the comments on these blogs or should I say criticisms of Candidates. And I have to wonder after two terms with Bush as a leader how Americans can vocalize so much criticism for Democratic Candidates! And especially Hillary Clinton! What is it about Hillary that turns some Americans into
    raving maniacs? Given the choices among Republican Candidates I would think she would be a breath of fresh air!

    I hope you can all put your pettiness to bed and focus on the good of your Nation.
    And I hope all will be wise enough to bypass the Republican Contenders ie: Bush Clones and go for the Gusto this time around. Gusto ie: Intelligence, Capability, Leadership Ability, Experience in International Diplomacy and a command of the English Language.

    When I see some chanting Ron Paul, Edwards, Huckabee, Guiliani, Thompson and Romney it gives me Shivers! Get a Grip! And Obama might be intelligent, bright, and talk a good talk but he certainly hasn't got the political experience and hasn't been around long enough to lead a Nation. Maybe next time around after an experienced leader cleans up the Huge Mess George is leaving behind.
    I wonder if Americans fully realize the damage Bush has done and just how large a task it is going to be for the next President to put all in order again?

    No I won't be voting as I'm Canadian. But I will be suffering the affects like the rest of the world if Americans make another serious blunder like they did when they elected Bush TWICE! I couldn't fathom how he got elected once! It still boggles my mind! Please do the research and give serious thought to your decision.

    January 5, 2008 10:34 pm at 10:34 pm |
  17. Mike in Kentucky

    Indy in Tampa says:

    "I have heard enough of this "Iowa is not the United States" garbage from condescending urbanites who somehow believe they are more sophisticated and enlightened. "

    Youe quote above was directly lifted from one of my previous posts

    It is interesting to me that you could derive , from my remarks, that I am a condescending urbanite who believes I am sophisticated and enlightened!

    Although I do live in the largest city in Kentucky (Louisville) I was born in the state of West Virginia and was educated formally, for the most part in that state.

    I come from a military family, my Father was a 20 year retiree fron the United States Navy, so I grew up on military bases around the United States for the first 14 years of my life.

    January 5, 2008 11:33 pm at 11:33 pm |
  18. Mike in Kentucky

    indy in Tampa says:

    "I have heard enough of this "Iowa is not the United States" garbage from condescending urbanites who somehow believe they are more sophisticated and enlightened."

    Gosh indy, thanks for recognizing the sophistication and urbanity that was obvious in the post you quoted from above.

    Although i do live in Kentucky's largest city, I was born in West Virginia and educated during the early years of my life all around this country,. (My Father was a 20 year retiree from the United States Navy) so I have seen a large part of the Nation at an early age. In fact, I lived in southern West Virginia during the formative years of my life, I went to high school and college in that state. As an adult, I began a career in the food srevice business, which required frequent moves to advance, so I saw even more of it as an adult.

    My remarks were not condescending in any way (as far as intent is concerned) I merely made the case that a mostly white, rural population is not representative of this country as a whole.

    January 6, 2008 12:04 am at 12:04 am |
  19. Mike in Kentucky

    Please pardon the double post, I had a software glitch.

    January 6, 2008 12:09 am at 12:09 am |
  20. Jason

    What is the type of person in Washington right now? It's the type of person who thinks getting mad and yelling at their car makes it drive better.

    That's what I saw from Hillary tonight. A few times, she got mad and and was visibly agitated, and she thinks that being the loudest voice at times will jump start her stalled campaign.

    If you want change, there are two men left. Barack Obama and John Edwards.

    January 6, 2008 12:18 am at 12:18 am |
  21. Bob NH

    To night I will sleep just fine. I am proud to be a Democrat after listening to our four candidates. God Bless

    January 6, 2008 12:28 am at 12:28 am |
  22. Bill W - PA

    "When you choose CEO of the company, who would you choose between experienced executive who has couple decades of management skills or some foot soldier/entry level employee without any experiences."

    BAD comparison. Choosing Hillary is choosing the executive's wife. That's al lshe was, that's all she'll ever be. 8 years of being married to the president does NOT count as experience and does NOT qualify one to be president. By that measure, Laura Bush has the same experience as Hillary, and Nancy Reagan has MORE experience than Hillary. So why don't we elect one of them?

    January 6, 2008 01:41 am at 1:41 am |
  23. Bill W - PA

    People in India love Hillary Clinton – she brought the #1 outsourcer of US jobs to India into New York. Look up TATA consulting. They employ 10 people in New York. They outsource over $4 Billion annually. Hillary brought them here shortly after she was elected senator. This will be used against her soon. Is this part of her so-called experience?

    January 6, 2008 01:46 am at 1:46 am |
  24. Mike in Kentucky

    indy, just to more finely sharpen the point, I have lived in my life in, West Virginia, Virginia, North and South Carolina, Pennsylvania, California, Florida, Tennessee, Lousiania, Indiana and Kentucky. (I am 55 years old)

    Just thought you might want to know what you did not know before you list me as an urbanite!

    You have staked out your position as an "anti-Clintonite", however, given my world view, I am not one!

    Don't hate...Hillary in '08!

    January 6, 2008 01:59 am at 1:59 am |
  25. Kermee

    I loved Edward when he was running for President in '04. I was seriously rooting for his Candidacy this year, but during the debates he seemed so angry and desperate. He has good ideas about restoring the middle class.
    He should focus more on what will do for America, and less on personal attacks and name calling.

    I can't believe he's hinting about Hilary getting out of the race. He's disillusioned because that's not going to happen until the last primary state has voted. The Clintons are persistent, well financed, and connected she is not going anywhere anytime soon.

    Elections should be about ideas, visions, and inspirations. None of which has been displayed by any of the candidats but Barack O.

    January 6, 2008 02:24 pm at 2:24 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22