Edwards Begins Major Push in New Hampshire
18 July 2007 10:47 am by Taylor Marsh
…and not a moment too soon.
As Bowers posted
this morning, Edwards has fallen to fourth in the latest New Hampshire poll,
behind Gov. Bill Richardson, though a five poll average, according to Chris,
still finds Edwards one point ahead of Richardson. But it’s still a struggling
position for Edwards, which needs to be addressed.
However, it’s not like the Edwards campaign isn’t aware of what’s going on
in New Hampshire. That’s why they’re just now starting a strong push in that
state, beginning with the ad from Elizabeth Edwards. Joe Trippi stated
that this is a “really aggressive campaign that’s ramping up.”
This morning, while Senate Republicans were covering for Bush on Iraq, I participated
in a reporter call with the Edwards campaign, which included Joe Trippi as well
as Jonathan Prince, the campaign’s (national) Deputy Campaign Manager.
The reporters who asked questions on the call particularly focused on the strong
role Elizabeth Edwards is taking in the campaign. A reporter from NBC asked
whether the dominance of Elizabeth Edwards was hurting her husband. Another
question focused on why, with Edwards officially ramping up in New Hampshire,
is a surrogate like Elizabeth Edwards being utilized instead of the candidate
himself.
“This is an incredible team.” – Joe Trippi
Trippi’s response above made it clear that the Edwards campaign knows how invaluable
Elizabeth Edwards is, as well as effective, but also that she’s known the candidate
for “30 years” so who could speak more directly about him? If you’re
still confused about this tactic see Hill and Bill.
The AP reporter on the call, a woman (didn’t catch her name), asked about Elizabeth
Edwards “taking on” Clinton in the Salon article I posted on yesterday.
Jonathan responded that he didn’t accept her characterization of the Edwards’
interview, saying that she was “accepting Drudge’s characterization”
of the interview. The AP reporter said, no, she actually read the interview.
It was classic and I have to agree with the AP reporter on this one. If Elizabeth
wasn’t “taking on” Clinton then I’d like to hear a better description,
because by any standard that’s what was happening. But so what? As the old saying
goes, politics ain’t bean bag.
Ben Smith of Politico.com asked a leading question on the same subject. Paraphrasing
it, he asked if the Edwards campaign had polling showing that women have doubts
about Clinton, so maybe that’s why Elizabeth Edwards was up front on John’s
policies being better for women than Clinton’s. Jonathan said to “forget
polling,” and that John is the guy leading on issues that matter to women,
which Trippi strongly seconded, saying more women are in poverty, to which John Edwards has dedicated his life.
Trippi’s contribution on the call was important, because he was able to easily place the current New Hampshire polling in stark perspective, given his prior presidential campaign experience. He knows there’s a long way until January. Prince and Trippi made a confident presentation, which you’d expect, but the passion for their candidate was unflinching as well, which is a lot harder to fake for pr purposes.
John Edwards will be giving a major speech this afternoon as he finishes his
poverty tour. So a final question about Obama was asked, because he’s going to give
a speech on it as well. Did Edwards mind Obama getting in on the poverty issue? Short
answer, my words: hell no. The more people talking about poverty in America
the better. Obama also, according to the reporter asking the question, said
he didn’t need a campaign to talk about poverty, because he’s been doing it
his whole life. So the reporter asked if the Edwards campaign considered that
a “shot” at Edwards. Neither Trippi nor Prince would bite; saying
that they didn’t see it as a shot at Edwards at all.
The tone of the call was feisty on the Edwards side. Trippi was good, as usual,
with Jonathan direct. They know the new New Hampshire poll is going to cause a lot of speculation about the health of the Edwards campaign. For one, that the focus on poverty by Edwards is bringing him down in the polls, which was also brought up in the call. It’s certainly a risk.
