Eh, maybe its effective in a sort of let’s-see-if-we-can-fool-the-rubes way, but best? I don’t think so. I’ll save that qualifier for something that actually has some integrity to it.
The edits are stilted because–aside from the bit on illegal immigrant driver’s licenses–they are misleading at best, patently dishonest at worst, as anyone who watched the debate would be aware. Not that Hillary is an entirely sympathetic character in regard to misinformation and demonization, but if she wants to respond to this ad, she should just buy ad time right alongside it. Run her full answer, without editing, on the Iraq question, for example. Basically he chided her for saying we were going to continue fighting al Qaeda in Iraq with a residual force even after a general redeployment of most of our troops. Inside the walls of Fortress Code Pink that might be a crazy idea. And sure, it’s still an answer many of us here won’t like. I have a feeling, though, it probably sounds like the adult anti-war position to most middle-class Democrats voters.
Edwards should have stuck to the licenses, a more potent Hillary misstep. Then again, he’s never been good at engaging reality. He’s turning Hillary into another Other America, a fictious character in the personal passion play he is so enthralled with acting out. The blustering exaggerations are as predictable as his hair, if not as perfect. (In fairness, his haircuts probably cost more than this commercial.)
Notice to Readers: The American Spectator and Spectator World are marks used by independent publishing companies that are not affiliated in any way. If you are looking for The Spectator World please click on the following link: https://thespectator.com/world.