For everyone who was worried John Edwards affair would have harmed his candidacy and or presidency

[RB TexLa]

should he have won. You have seen that with just the power of an actor's money and the California governor's office the same thing was hidden. The Democratic party, Edwards' friends and the power of the presidency would have assured no one would have ever heard of what's her name until John Edwards decided someone was going to hear of her.

[LisaL]

1. Really? Just because Arnold managed to hide it for so long,

you assume everyone else would be able to as well?
:eyes:

[RB TexLa]

3. I have no doubt the Democratic party and the power of the office of President could have easily

handled it.

[Orrex]

6. On what possible basis can you conclude that?

Have we ever seen evidence that the Democrats can work together to "handle" something positive, let along totally "handle" something so negative?

[LisaL]

8. Really? Tell that to Clinton.

[Journeyman]

2. Monica Lewinsky will attest to this. . .

[RB TexLa]

4. Edwards wasn't as reckless in his choice of who to be with as Clinton was

[lynne]

41. Exactly! That sex tape wasn't reckless at all!

:crazy:

[karynnj]

50. They actually were similarly risky

The early stories of Rielle were supposedly from a friend who said that she was having an affair with Edwards - just as Monica confided to Linda Tripp. In reality, it might be that both soon found that the most important and the most exciting thing in their life was something that they could not speak of to anyone. It is not surprising that both failed - at some point - to keep the secret.

Both Edwards and Clinton were extremely reckless. That Edwards did not find a way to access some of his own wealth to pay for her keep is recklessness that may send him to jail. (This was AFTER EE knew - he could have said it was to keep her quiet - unsavory - but the whole thing was - and it would have eliminated the jail risk.)

Not to mention, Clinton was President of the US. Edwards never really was a strong contender. In spite of part of the media loving him - he won just one primary in two years (and the NK caucus that happened after Kerry was the defacto nominee.) He lost both years before any of this was known.

[Lasher]

5. Didn't work for Clinton, did it?

The Democratic party, Clinton's friends and the power of the presidency didn't do squat to keep that one secret.

[RB TexLa]

7. Clinton chose a woman too young to know to keep quite also with Edwards there is a child to use

against her if she ever had the notion of talking.

[LisaL]

9. How was he going to use the child against her?

Must be nice to live in fantasy land.

[RB TexLa]

10. People usually do what someone wants them to do when their child is threatened.

[LisaL]

12. Oh wow.

Now you are suggesting he should have threatened his own child?

[RB TexLa]

14. Presidents don't take care of problems like themselves personally.

[Lasher]

19. You are aware that Edwards was caught, right?

If he was so clever like you're trying to make it seem, how is it that his affair was exposed?

[RB TexLa]

23. When it was exposed it no longer mattered, he was a two time presidential loser.

[Lasher]

24. It mattered to a lot of people but that's irrelevant.

If Edwards wouldn't have been caught during the General Presidential campaign because he "...wasn't as reckless in his choice of who to be with as Clinton was..." then why didn't this precaution protect him during the Primary?

[karynnj]

51. He would have been caught if he were genuinely in contention

The amount of scrutiny increases as you become the frontrunner. Edwards was never subjected to that spotlight.

Remember that in late 2006, the NE already had the story and the Edwards campaign pulled the videos off their website. The videos already had extensive viewing - they were well discussed here. So, they knew who she was and they had strong reason to believe that there was an affair - they were not going to simply drop it. I suspect the reason the rest of the media left it alone at that point was a combination of sympathy for Elizabeth and that he was not going to win.

[LisaL]

25. The child is his, as well.

And I don't want to comprehend as to what you mean by "taking care of the problem."

[cali]

37. bwahahaqhahahahah. yeah, because a woman who freaking films your

sexual bouts is just so mature and discreet. Infuckingsane.

[tabatha]

11. The Edwards affair would have been/was uncovered

a) he is a Democrat and no dime would be spared to find dirt on him
b) the National Enquirer was already on to him; it was why he quit the race

Arnold is a Republican. They don't dig up dirt on Republicans as much - if it comes out, it is usually the Republican's fault.

[CelticThunder]

22. And not only a Repub but a Repub with loads of power in the entertainment industry, married

to a powerful member of a political dynasty powerful in her own right in the news industry.

The Edwards' were nobodies.

[Hannah Bell]

35. "The Edwards' were nobodies" - yep. parvenus. climbers. how dare they.

didn't have the right connections, that's probably why they got taken out.

[CelticThunder]

48. Compared to Arnold/Maria? Damn right they were nobodies in the power class.

[karynnj]

53. Nonsense

Edwards, if anything, was given the benefit of the doubt. There was a lot in the original NE/Salon(?) stories. There was also the videos disappearing from the website as soon as they were related to the rumor.

[Hannah Bell]

34. who is "they"?

[tabatha]

47. Did you not remember the "they" that hounded Clinton?

[Renew Deal]

13. Democratic party insiders were ready to torpedo his campaign if he ever had a chance

So you're wrong about that.

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2009/05/13/edwards_says_campaign_sabotage_unlikely.html

[CelticThunder]

15. I don't get the point of your assertion. Are you saying that would have been a GOOD thing?

[RB TexLa]

17. To keep a Democratic president's affair and lovechild out of public knowledge? Yes that would have

been a good thing to keep hidden.

[Renew Deal]

18. Why? Because he's a Democrat?

That's insane!

[NYC Liberal]

16. Wrong. "Edwards Staff Had Affair 'Doomsday' Strategy"

But by late December, early January of last year, several people in his inner circle began to think the rumors were true.

Several of them had gotten together and devised a "doomsday" strategy of sorts.

Basically, if it looked like Edwards was going to win the Democratic Party nomination, they were going to sabotage his campaign, several former Edwards' staffers have told me.

They said they were Democrats first, and if it looked like Edwards was going to become the nominee, they were going to bring down the campaign.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2009/05/edwards-staff-h.html

[RB TexLa]

21. That was his hiring mistake. Not the kind of people you want working for you.

[LisaL]

27. So basically we'd have to live in an alternative universe for it

to work. O'key.

[struggle4progress]

28. Nah. He had good people working for him

[Lasher]

30. Oh I get it, it's like he's got a split personality.

There's the dumb John Edwards who hired campaign staffers that would have betrayed him. Then there's the smart John Edwards who was so wise in his selection of a discreet mistress, nobody would ever catch on. Except that they did.

Maybe this is like that South Park episode where there was a good Cartman from a parallel dimension, and an evil Cartman from our dimension. Or, giving credit where it is due, there was that evil Dr. Spock on that old Star Trek episode.

[NYC Liberal]

32. That may be, but your assertion that it wouldn't have come out

is doubtful.

[Raine]

36. but the fact is THEY WERE WORKING FOR HIM

and would've brought him down.

[JDPriestly]

31. I worked on Edwards' campaign.

The odd thing was that we printed the campaign handouts out on our own computers. The campaign was not at all slick, not well organized.

It was strange from the beginning.

But Edwards brought issues into the campaign like healthcare and other issues that might not have been raised had he not been a candidate.

[pnwmom]

20. No reason to think the identical thing would have happened

in two very different situations - with two very different political wives.

[struggle4progress]

26. Um ... I volunteered for his 2008 campaign here in NC, and looking back I'm pretty frickin sure that

his staff had figured out what was going on and were scared shizzless by the possible impact on the 2008 race

If Edwards had been the D-nominee, the story would have come out in 2008, and we'd have McCain in the White House today

I say this as someone who adored Edwards as a candidate: I supported him to the bitter end here. I'm sorry he botched it, because I really liked him, and I don't think we need to dwell on it forever and ever and ever -- but he did botch it big time

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hannah Bell]

33. what it tells me is someone didn't want it hidden; likely the someones were dems.

[Walk away]

38. So what? He was still stupid enough to get caught.

I think we should all be very happy that Edwards never got near the nomination. After the way he handled the situation and it's obvious effect on his dying wife, he would have lost any hope of a Democratic presidency as well as majorities in Congress. Coat tails of death!

[leeroysphitz]

39. That ONLY works when the politician in question has an (R) after their name.

[JVS]

42. I'm surprised it took this many posts for someone to point out the obvious.

[dionysus]

40. i don't discuss smoove johnny with you.

[Gold Metal Flake]

43. You're still here?

Sheesh.

[LanternWaste]

44. I often find that two individual scenarios...

I often find that two individual scenarios, despite a veneer of similarities, are rather quite different in form, format, content and resolution.

However, I do realize that many people will force an equivalency to better validate their own positions.

[aikoaiko]

45. Maybe, but it would have been awkward when Rielle Hunter moved into the White House for Xmas 2010

[brooklynite]

46. I'm guessing the OPPO efforts of a Presidential Campaign are a bit tougher...

[City Lights]

49. You forgot to mention the power of the corporate media.

They choose which stories they will help bury or further expose, and nothing gets them worked up more than an extra-marital sex story involving a Democrat. The love child would simply have been too good to pass up.

[Renew Deal]

52. The "media" ignored this story for a long time because it came from the National Enquirer

And why should they "pass up" a story like this? He was running for president. What he did was wrong on many levels including possibly criminally.

[City Lights]

54. They shouldn't pass up any story regarding the possible criminal activity

involving elected officials from either party. Unfortunately, the media doesn't have a good track record on covering possible criminal activity involving Republicans.