In a new interview with TIME, Elizabeth Edwards asserts that her (very wealthy) husband is "in touch with the guy on the corner" and thus could have beaten President Bush if he had been on the top of the ticket:
"The President had portrayed himself as somebody in touch with the guy on the corner. What you needed to show the falsity of that was to have somebody who really was in touch with the guy on the corner, who really understood the lives of people who work in factories, people who struggle, people who live middle-class lives built around their children, Saturday or Sunday soccer, and Friday-night football."
I'd sure like to know why she thinks that her husband is any more of a "regular Joe" than President Bush. The very idea is absurd.
She was asked if John Kerry's "privileged background" created problems.
"I'd be telling you things that weren't true if I said that he didn't have an impediment. He did. He was certainly able to be painted as someone who didn't understand what people did with their free time or what their concerns were when they sat around the table."
She says that she and her husband enjoy "a different kind of luxury."
So John Kerry was too privileged, but she and her husband aren't? Right.