Of course, they will not make explicit link between his hair-combing image and national security. But in election, perception trumps everything. It just seeps into voters' deep psyche. You can argue it's not fair, it's silly, but that's how election politics works. The worst thing is that there's no good way for him to fight back. It's a softball, but it's lethal.

I'm afraid to say Edwards' days as a presidential candidate are numbered.

There's no need for Hillary to apologize for her vote. I supported her vote 100%.

Heck, he can no longer say Hillary's Iraq vote will crush her (because it didn't and it won't).  He can no longer say her unwillingness to offer a sobbing apology will crush her (because it didn't and it won't).  

You made my day, exactly my thought. Lots of sour grapes. I am waiting for lots of BOYS to pee in their pants when Hillary cruises to the white house.

Well, you can argue idiots elected GW due to that silly swiftboat ad, so what? There is one winner in an election, and I'll be happy to take any idiot's vote.

fox news poll, unlike fox news is a legitimate and rather objective national poll. Only this poll asked Edwards' haircutgate, that's why I cited the data.

Of course every democratic candidate will be attacked, ridiculed. But the problem is which one will stick? That's exactly why I like Hillary's chance the best. She's been through this for decades, but just getting stronger and stronger.

Edwards, on the other hand, after 2 months of this haircutgate, still can not find a way to shake off his lousy image.

The current attack against Edwards is fairly minor, if he can't get over it, how can he win a general election?

This's exactly why you Edwards guys do not get it!

Hillary Clinton is a FEMALE. Whatever she spends on haircut won't cause any stir among ordinary people.

The side effect of this Edwards' haircutgate together with the video is to make Edwards look like a whimp, to effeminate him. When people see him as a whimp, they will not trust him in national security.

Denial can't solve your candidate's problem. His biggest problem is a perception problem.

40% of voters in a recent fox poll knew this story.

You still don't get it. Edwards has been ridiculed into a cartoon character by those gaffes and videos.

He's no longer been taken seriously by ordinary people. Voters won't vote for a cartoon politician into white house.

To fire or not to fire won't change a thing. Perception is everything in politics. Just as Markos said, this haircutgate definitely had a negative reinforcement on voters' doubt of Edwards.

He'll be destroyed in no time with that 'beauty' video in general election.

Just imagine a 'swiftboat team' put the following video into an ads immediately following Edwards' nomination...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AE847UXu 3Q

How possibly is Edwards going to debunk those videos???

It may seem silly to you, but voters do care about those things. In a recent fox news poll, 40% of people polled heard about the haircut story.

Just imagine this video flashes across TV screens with talking heads from CNN/Fox/MSNBC talking about it 24/7.

Yes. To be honest, it's hard for me to vote for Edwards under any circumstances. He just reminds me of the very unpleasant persons we've encountered in our lives. It's a guts feeling, nothing particularly political.

People vote on their guts.

Last time when i checked George W. Bush's 'negative' coattails, he almost wiped all running democrats in red/purple states off the map in 2004.

You're making yourself even more foolish. Did Bush's high negativity prevent him from winning in 2004?

John Edwards
Some of you will shoot me for this, but the more time passes, the more his "haircut" deal pisses me off. Why? I see it as a stategic, tactical, and personal failure, and one that was so easy to avoid that it makes me question his judgment in a long, tough, presidential battle.

Strategic: There are two narratives Edwards' opponents are building against him -- one, that he's a "pretty boy", and two, that he's so rich he's out of touch with "regular" people. And in one fell swoop, Edwards reinforced both negative narratives!

Tactical: The only reason anyone knew about that haircut was because it was in campaign finance disclosures. Why was it in those disclosures? Because he used campaign funds to pay for the haircut! If he wants his pimp haircuts, I couldn't care less. But why do it in such a way that it's easy for your enemies to use against you?

Personal: I don't know Edwards' net worth, nor care. But he has a lot of money. I'm willing to bet that most of the small dollar donors Edwards has solicited don't have that much. For them, that $20 or $50 or even $100 contribution is a big sacrifice. Yet given the choice between taking out his own checkbook or having his campaign pay for the $400 the haircut cost, someone made the choice to put this on the contributors. More than anything, it's this that offends me about this incident. People expect their money to be well spent by campaigns, not used as personal slush funds for whatever luxuries they may want.

So as stupid and media-driven as that whole "haircut" mess may have been, it really was a disaster on way too many levels to completely ignore and shrug off