John Edwards entered the auditorium at North Carolina Central University in Durham Thursday night, all smiles, hand-shaking his way through the approving audience, and approached the stage where “Hardball” host Chris Matthews waited with a grin.
And shortly thereafter, the grins disappeared.
The longtime MSNBC program is on its “College Tour,” and had come to N.C. Central at Sen. Edwards’ suggestion for an hour-long interview with the Democratic presidential candidate. I guess that the Edwards people were looking to guarantee a friendly audience for this key media appearance, and figured that holding the event at an historically black institution would likely result in an overwhelmingly Democratic and supportive crowd. Throughout much of the hour, you could see what they were thinking about. On the economy, affirmative action, the Confederate flag, and other issues, Edwards did indeed end up with a reliable chorus of applause.
The problem was that Matthews wanted to start the discussion, not surprisingly, with the Iraq situation. And on this issue, Edwards’ position was much closer to that of President Bush than of most of the audience, who appeared strongly opposed to military action.
During most of the first segment, Edwards sparred awkwardly with Matthews. I don’t blame the senator completely, by the way, as Matthews’ “Hardball” shtick of rapid-fire questions, interruptions, and (no offense to y’all from up there) “obnoxious Yankee” behavior got old a long time ago. Still, you’d think that a serious candidate for a job in which you have to take on tough adversaries every day could handle an annoying TV host without getting flustered. Edwards couldn’t. He let Matthews set the pace. He blinked nervously and gestured wildly. He didn’t look calm, mature, and presidential. On several occasions, I think he looked visibly angry at Matthews, when he should have simply laughed him off and risen above him.
The performance reinforced, yet again, Edwards’ strengths and limitations as a player on the national stage. He can be masterful in situations, such as televised floor debates or committee hearings from the Senate, where he is in control of the timing, pacing, and subject matter. After 20 years of pitching juries with just the right set of facts and emotions to elicit a favorable result, Edwards obviously has a knack for this sort of presentation. But put the senator in a situation where someone else controls or impacts the flow – a moderator, a questioner, perhaps even an opposing candidate in a debate – and he can seem testy, evasive, and, well, small.
Too bad in this case, because on the Iraq issue Edwards was saying not only a lot of wise things but, given the national direction of his increasingly pacifistic party, quite a lot of brave things. He acknowledged that many Democrats disagreed with his position that Saddam Hussein was a serious threat, that America should strike militarily with the allies we now have even if France and others remain opposed, and that the resulting campaign might well be lengthy and costly. Basically, he stuck to his (and our) guns.
Some may think this a strange point to make, but John Edwards is a good example of a Clinton Democrat (though he did refuse to label Clinton a “good president,” despite Matthews’ repeated attempts to get him to and the crowd’s raucous support for the former president). That is to say, Bill Clinton was a traditional liberal in many respects, but he was willing to use military force overseas and he did favor free trade. These two issues are the primary ones where Edwards departs from today’s liberal Democratic script. That’s good politics – and, I think, good policy.
The most painful moment of the night, I think, was when Matthews asked Edwards if he thought that George W. Bush had been elected legitimately to the presidency. The crowd roared its approval of the question, which I thought to be at best inappropriate given the international situation. After some fumbling around, Edwards said that yes, Bush was the legitimate president. Matthews then asked the audience if they agreed – and they loudly indicated they did not.
It was a great embarrassment for the students and others attending, and for the institution. It was a lesser embarrassment for Edwards, given that he had set himself up. Perhaps the conspiratorially minded will think this was some clever plan, a sort of “Sister Soulja” moment in which Edwards was trying to underline his independent streak and moderate sensibilities. I don’t think so. I think it showed, yet again, that Edwards retains real assets in his presidential bid, assets that some partisans may want to deny, but that he and his team are also prone to miscalculation and miscommunication.
John Edwards just doesn’t look much like a president. Not yet.
Hood is president of the John Locke Foundation and publisher of Carolina Journal.