Am I missing something? Not being a Christianist voter, maybe I just don't get the big deal. Well, almost certainly I don't. But I do follow politics closely, and John Edwards' position as a national politician has been deader than dead for months. And since he's shown no interest in a return to state office, well, isn't this story getting oddly heavy airplay? Yeah, I know, we are the US of A, and if there's anything we get frothingly excited over it's sex and who's sleeping with whom. But this sort of seems about as relevant a news story as Mike Huckabee having an affair - heck, he's actually got a political future, so maybe that'd be a bigger story. Which is another way of saying, who'd want to know/care about such things?
Posted by armand at August 8, 2008 04:03 PM | TrackBack | Posted to PoliticsWell, he was running for president a few months back, and was discussed as a VP possibility even more recently, and made a big show of holding his endorsement until a few weeks after the last minute. He's very definitely still a national political figure, one we would certainly have expected to see on the stump on Obama's behalf this fall. And Elizabeth's very public battle with illness -- and her prominence generally; she's speaking in prime time at the convention -- adds to the arguably legitimate newsworthiness here.
The interesting side story is why the LAT and other major media outlets sat on the story for so long. Would they have done the same for, say, Romney?
Posted by: jacflash at August 8, 2008 04:41 PM | PERMALINKEh, kind of I suppose. But his 2 presidential campaigns were abysmal failures, and I haven't heard anyone put him on any supposedly informed Veep shortlist. And just b/c he's a national figure ... well, that means any celebrity's affair is news, which I guess it is in the age of E!, but I don't get why the national press/populace would care.
I also find truly bizarre the "how could he have risked it!" and "what if he'd been the nominee!" cries. I mean McCain had an affair when he had an ill spouse, and it doesn't seem to be hurting him - in fact it's virtually never mentioned (I don't think I've ever seen it referred to on any tv news show - though perhaps it has been).
Posted by: Armand at August 8, 2008 04:58 PM | PERMALINKThe 'fooling around on the terminally ill spouse' storyline is a compelling one, narratively speaking, all the more so when the spouse is a public figure. Doesn't make it right, but it makes it a hard story not to want to tell.
McCain gets gentle treatment (mostly) because the cor of the Washington press corps know and really like him. But beyond that, it was a long time ago and his wife at the time wasn't prominent like Elizabeth Edwards is.
Posted by: jacflash at August 8, 2008 05:04 PM | PERMALINKTrue on both counts.
But this would seem to really open the door to stories on McCain's lack of fidelity in the past. So I suppose he's happy that this is coming out on a Friday afternoon, when the Olympics are starting, and when Russia is waging war on a little neighbor. And given the press's general affection for him, plus an otherwise full news cycle, I suppose that that open door will remain closed.
Posted by: Armand at August 8, 2008 05:08 PM | PERMALINKAmbinder has Edwards's statement, released sometime in the last hour. I think it's a good one, as these things go. Hopefully it will hold up.
Posted by: jacflash at August 8, 2008 06:03 PM | PERMALINKYou can't run for President and expect an affair to remain secret. And, given our tabloid press and strange social mores, you can't win the Presidency with a (recent) affair hitting the news. And the "wife battling cancer" part of it makes it worse.
I vote for Edwards being the dumbest man alive.
Posted by: baltar at August 9, 2008 10:28 AM | PERMALINK