Well…it looks like Senator John Kerry has picked Senator John Edwards of North Carolina as his running mate.
This will not be the first time that a candidate in a close race and/or one viewed as an “Elitist Liberal” has tried to “pull in” the Southern vote with his running mate. (Kennedy picking Johnson was perhaps the most famous).
Will this strategy work?
I think that it’s really hard to say…Bush has a STRONG, very Conservative, Southern base, both religious (The Evangelicals of the South, who vote and gavalnize voters) and within the ranks of those directly or indirectly connected to the Military…
I think Edwards is someone who energizes democrats, and I think this helps Kerry because he’s seen as a bit of a bore.
I don’t think the voter that is between Bush and Kerry even exists, so I don’t think Kerry’s picking Edwards will change anyone’s mind. I do, however, think Edwards might pull some of the Nader voting Dems back to Kerry. I think they make a nice one-two punch.
Rainjack - because Kerry can point out Edwards’ shortcomings does NOT mean Edwards’ lacks all merit. And, they WERE competing with each other - you don’t hear the Lakers say the Pistons are playing great and point out their strong points during the finals…such an acknowledgement comes afterward.
Keep chewing on what the Right Wing Diner feeds you.
Rainjack – do you think John McCain is a flip flopper? How about George W. Bush? Because there’s a great new ad out of McCain supporting GWBush for a second term, despite being opponents in the '00 primaries.
[quote]Right Side Up wrote:
Rainjack - because Kerry can point out Edwards’ shortcomings does NOT mean Edwards’ lacks all merit. And, they WERE competing with each other - you don’t hear the Lakers say the Pistons are playing great and point out their strong points during the finals…such an acknowledgement comes afterward.
Keep chewing on what the Right Wing Diner feeds you.[/quote]
He said it - and he obviously meant it at the time. But he changed his mind when it became politically expedient. Isn’t that the basic definition of flip flop? Isn’t that what Kerry’s been doing since he started his run at the whitehouse?
I think Kerry WAS listing Edwards’ ‘strong points’.
I especially like the part when you said that Edwards would ‘unite the party’ - Whose drivel have you been swallowing?
Edwards adds some zing to the Kerry ticket. However, I think there is a problem if Edwards actually makes Kerry look even more like Herman Munster than he already does, due to the contrast in charisma that will be highlighted whenever they appear together.
Edwards is definitely personable, but he also has the rather large downside of being a trial lawyer, and turning the Democratic ticket into an all-lawyer affair. Far be it from me to claim that lawyers are a bad thing, but there are those out there who don’t trust them…
On the other hand, I think Edwards perceived weaknesses on experience and foreign policy won’t matter, simply because Kerry has some strengths in those areas.
Net-net, I mostly think VPs don’t have a huge effect. I predict an initial bump in the polls on the announcement and with all the inevitable positive news coverage, but that will dissipate.
More interesting, however, is how this would make Edwards a serious front-runner for 2008 if Kerry fails this year – probably vaults him ahead of Hillary.
Mufasa, if you believe Al Hunt, the liberal political pundit in the WSJ, the only time in the past century that a running mate demonstrably allowed a candidate to pick up states he otherwise likely would have lost was the Kennedy/LBJ ticket picking up Texas and one or two other states.
Yes, McCain is a flip flopper. We would be better served if he were to switch parties.
Bush will welcome McCain’s support, much like he will welcome Zell Miller’s support. Does that make Bush a flip flopper? absolutely not.
Your assertion that Bush flip-fopped on McCain is wrong - Bush never aske McCain to be his running-mate after demoralizing him in the primaries.
BB-
This is a Clinton coup for 2008. I don’t think Edwards has the support to vault over Hillary. He won his senate seat by default, and probably wouldn’t have won re-election. Now Hillary can start running against whoever wins in November, almost immediately.
Not a bad pick - probably the best of the group. I did hear that the two don’t get along very well, but who knows if that’s true.
Dean would have been a bad pick.
Also, the Democratic Party likes to go for veeps that can be presented as Presidents-in-training, like little brothers or apprentices. Edwards fits that bill nicely.
Downside? His megawatt smile and charismatic style may upstage Kerry. Also, he’s going to have to defend his lack of experience, whether that’s a fair charge or not.
Upside? He is neither Dean nor Clark. And he’s Southern, which can’t hurt, since the Democratic Party has essentially abandoned the South for the new school liberalism of the metropolitan New York and California.
Dems are making such a huge deal over Kerry’s choosing a running mate, when it really doesn’t matter.
By the way, it was a horrible choice. If Kerry was thinking straight he would have chosen a more conservative candidate to balance out his ticket; not some mega liberal, freshman senator from the south.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
I especially like the part when you said that Edwards would ‘unite the party’ - Whose drivel have you been swallowing?
[/quote]
How can you quote me on something I never said? I’ve only posted three times on this thread and not once did I say “unite the party.” What I did say was “energize” – was that not clear? Did you think energize was spelt u-n-i-t-e? This pisses me off – get your shit in order.
Edwards will be much more of an asset than Dick “Halliburton” Cheney is. Cheney is going to be an anchor around Bush’s neck this time, but Dubya is too weak to fire him. Dubya would win the election if he’d fire Cheney and bring McCain on board.
As far as Edwards’ supposed lack of experience, Edwards already has more foreign policy and experience on a national level than both Dubya and Ronald Reagan had - combined (!) - before either of those GOP presidents took office.
The fact that Edwards is southern is irrelevant. Edwards was the next-strongest contender, and Kerry was smart to pick him. It’s not like there weren’t plenty of other southern candidates to pick, including Wes Clark and Bob Graham. Edwards is considered a rising star in the party.
Boy I can’t wait to see John Edwards and Dick Cheney debate!!!
Edwards served on the Intelligence committee. He has some experience to be sure.
But there is a world of difference between riding shotgun on a committee as a junior Senator and making executive decisions for state. That’s why governors have historically had an advantage over others when running for the Presidency - that ‘top of the food chain’ experience translates well.
Also, Edwards has held only one office - his current one - and did not seek re-election for it.
Edwards is a fine guy - but he comes across as unseasoned. I keep hearing that Bush had no experience coming into the White House. Though the governor in Texas is not as powerful a position as it is in other states, the executive experience of such a large and diverse state as Texas is as good a training as you can get.
Also, Bush was wise enough to surround himself with talented and experienced folks loaded with foreign policy experience. This is where Kerry would have a problem - there doesn’t seem to be a stable of Democratic power players to draw on, unless he employs Bill Clinton. And who in the hell would be a Democratic Secretary of Defense? One would hope and pray McCain would show bipartisan character and do the job - otherwise the list is short.
As for the veep debates, should be interesting - style versus substance.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
And who in the hell would be a Democratic Secretary of Defense? One would hope and pray McCain would show bipartisan character and do the job - otherwise the list is short.
[/quote]
I’d imagine Clark would be on that list. McCain and Cohen also…
My apologies - unite, energize, whatever…I left my total recall pills at home yesterday.
Were it that I had my shit together as well as you do…[/quote]
Thanks for the apology. I’m used to some of my adversaries contorting my positions to meet their opposing arguments, but to quote me with different words with different meanings is unacceptable, and I got upset.
On the Drudge Report the front page picture “They are LEFT than Ted!”
In the article in the Boston Globe it says this…They branded the Democratic ticket as radically left of most of America - particularly business.
He’s public enemy No. 1,‘’ said Tripp Baird, director of Senate relations for the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank. ``Anyone to the left of Ted Kennedy can’t be good for business.‘’
A Republican National Committee press release taunted Edwards as ``A disingenuous, unaccomplished liberal and friend to personal injury lawyers.''
Bay State Gov. Mitt Romney [ was among the first Republicans to swipe at Kerry's choice, foreshadowing a bruising race to come.
``I think John Kerry [related, bio] is more liberal than the people at large and I think John Edwards fits that mold,'' Romney told reporters at the State House in Boston.
Then this is in the drudge report…
DISNEY CHAIRMAN MITCHELL CONSULTED KERRY ON RUNNING MATE
Dem presidential hopeful John Kerry quietly consulted with DISNEY Chairman George Mitchell over vice presidential picks, it has been learned.
Kerry reached out to Mitchell for advice and counsel on VP options, sources explain. The DISNEY chairman’s responsibilities include the ABC-TV Network and ABCNEWS…
This is in WorldNetDaily…
Kerry was quoted by the New York Times in January, disparaging Edwards for a limited public career in comparison to his own.
“In the Senate four years ? and that is the full extent of public life ? no international experience, no military experience, you can imagine what the advertising is going to be next year,” Kerry said.
With a grin, he added, according to the Times, “When I came back from Vietnam in 1969 I don’t know if John Edwards was out of diapers then. Well, I’m sure he was out of diapers.”
In another instance, according to a Feb. 3 Los Angeles Times article, Kerry said: “I think the American people want an experienced hand at the helm of state. This is not the time for on-the-job training in the White House on national security issues.”
Kerry also criticized Edwards for his lack of military as well as foreign policy experience.
Responding to Edwards’ comments that the candidates had similar plans to rebuild Iraq, Kerry said, “Well, I think he would like it to be that way, but I think I have 35 years of experience in international security, foreign policy, and military affairs, and I think that makes an enormous difference here. I think that the world is looking for leadership that is tested and sure.”
Kerry also mocked Edwards’ “ambitious” nature, seeking the presidency after only one term in elective office.
“And people call me ambitious?” a Boston Globe reporter overheard Kerry asking an aide, according to a June 10 story in the paper.
Kerry vice presidential pick Sen. John Edwards has so little foreign policy experience that he reportedly couldn’t identify the name Yitzhak Rabin as belonging to the late Israeli prime minister.
Edwards was said to be organizing his campaign schedule in 2003 when his advance man suggested, “Maybe we ought to go to the reception for Leah Rabin.”
When informed that Mrs. Rabin was the widow of Yitzhak Rabin, Edwards reportedly asked, “Who was he?”
Scary…ANd to think these far leftests, farther left than Ted Kennedy even, could very well be our next President!!! Especially if the soclialists keep pushing and pushing in our aspects of our lifes, their socilaistic ideals, values, and theories. Think what is needed is on TV in magazines, internet, a socilistic government needs to be studied, and explained to the American people what it is. Also to show the countries which have socialism, in their governments, how much in taxes do they pay? How much control does the government have over their lives? How many decisons does the gov’t have, or make for its citizens? For if they come our next Pres. and Vice President, then we are going to move to the far left than we ever did…And God help America…