![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
The company we keep.
Feb. 7th, 2007 02:17 pmJohn Edwards hired a pair of bloggers.
Bloggers who, qu'elle surprise share his views.
Which caused some people to go apoplectic (I'd have said ape-shit, but that would be vuglar), and say that he needs to fire them; since they in their private capacity as bloggers have been known to use foul language. One of them even said some mean things about the positions of the Catholic Church.
Right now there are rumors that the two are going to be fired. That would be stupid on Edwards part. It would be stupid if the people complaining were on his side, but they aren't. They are people who will be voting, come the primaries, for the person the Republicans will be running against Edwards (for the sake of this argument, and all arguments [until a candidate is selected] I will assume whomever I am writing about is going to be the candidate, it's a conditional stipulation).
Why, in the name of sweet reason, should he listen to campaign advice from people who want him to lose?
Glenn Greenwald has a good post up on the relative merits of the various bloggers working for the nascent campaigns right now.
There are a lot of reasons for Edwards (or any other candidate) to reject such pleas.
1: It's from the opposition.
2: It cedes the initiative.
3: It makes him look weak, not just to the opposition but (more importantly) to his potential supporters.
4: It makes him look stupid; which will sway those who aren't sure yet.
This really is a make or break sort of moment.
The last two are the important parts. If the opposition thinks you are weak, they will keep pushing you around. It's a form of bullying, and it can't be allowed to gain traction. Kerry lost a lot of ground with the undecided middle when he 1: didn't come out swinging at the Swift Boa Boys, and 2: when he let the Bush campaign tell him to muzzle MoveOn.org.
If Edwards lets these idjits push Amandanda Marcote and Melissa McEwan off his team, they (or some other group) will try to tell him who next is unacceptable.
The stupid part... If Edwards' team didn't have the brains to vett these two, and were shown they had written things (which are still on the internet, where anyone can find them) with which Edwards couldn't agree, then he's not smart enough to be worth electing (if this is how thorough they are, when it's something as small; and important, as a campaign, how can you trust him to appoint an ambassador to Malaysia, or any other part of something so large, and important, as the entire swath he would control as president?).
There are other issues on this subject, relating to how "the Left" and "the Right" see the blogosphere, and what strategies need to be used in dealing with those diffreneces, but for now, this is Edwards' fight to lose.
I've not made up my mind on a candidate; Edwards was looking pretty good. If he caves in to this sort of pressure, he's slipped a long way back, in my estimation of his merits.
If you want to share your thoughts with him, (I have) you can do so here
Bloggers who, qu'elle surprise share his views.
Which caused some people to go apoplectic (I'd have said ape-shit, but that would be vuglar), and say that he needs to fire them; since they in their private capacity as bloggers have been known to use foul language. One of them even said some mean things about the positions of the Catholic Church.
Right now there are rumors that the two are going to be fired. That would be stupid on Edwards part. It would be stupid if the people complaining were on his side, but they aren't. They are people who will be voting, come the primaries, for the person the Republicans will be running against Edwards (for the sake of this argument, and all arguments [until a candidate is selected] I will assume whomever I am writing about is going to be the candidate, it's a conditional stipulation).
Why, in the name of sweet reason, should he listen to campaign advice from people who want him to lose?
Glenn Greenwald has a good post up on the relative merits of the various bloggers working for the nascent campaigns right now.
There are a lot of reasons for Edwards (or any other candidate) to reject such pleas.
1: It's from the opposition.
2: It cedes the initiative.
3: It makes him look weak, not just to the opposition but (more importantly) to his potential supporters.
4: It makes him look stupid; which will sway those who aren't sure yet.
This really is a make or break sort of moment.
The last two are the important parts. If the opposition thinks you are weak, they will keep pushing you around. It's a form of bullying, and it can't be allowed to gain traction. Kerry lost a lot of ground with the undecided middle when he 1: didn't come out swinging at the Swift Boa Boys, and 2: when he let the Bush campaign tell him to muzzle MoveOn.org.
If Edwards lets these idjits push Amandanda Marcote and Melissa McEwan off his team, they (or some other group) will try to tell him who next is unacceptable.
The stupid part... If Edwards' team didn't have the brains to vett these two, and were shown they had written things (which are still on the internet, where anyone can find them) with which Edwards couldn't agree, then he's not smart enough to be worth electing (if this is how thorough they are, when it's something as small; and important, as a campaign, how can you trust him to appoint an ambassador to Malaysia, or any other part of something so large, and important, as the entire swath he would control as president?).
There are other issues on this subject, relating to how "the Left" and "the Right" see the blogosphere, and what strategies need to be used in dealing with those diffreneces, but for now, this is Edwards' fight to lose.
I've not made up my mind on a candidate; Edwards was looking pretty good. If he caves in to this sort of pressure, he's slipped a long way back, in my estimation of his merits.
If you want to share your thoughts with him, (I have) you can do so here
