What Does Edwards Add to the Ticket?

[adios]

If you look at it in relative terms, I think very little, perhaps nothing, maybe he's even a negative. He won't bring in North Carolina for Kerry; he doesn't have a track record politically that the Kerry campaign can point to; and his record as a private citizen doesn't seem extraordinary to me in terms of promoting the Democratic party ticket for the presidency. He was runner up to Kerry in the primaries but so what? The Democratic party was anything but divided coming out of the primary season in fact Kerry had it sowed up early. The Democratic party was actually solidly galvanized behind Kerry coming into the convention. It would have been much better for the Democrats to add someone who would at least have had a good chance of delivering a swing state that's in doubt. Were there no Vice Presidential candidates available to at least increase the chances of bringing in a swing state?

[vulturesrow]

If I remember correctly the rationale behind bringing in Edwards was to give Kerry more traction among Southern voters, forcing the Bush campaign to spend more effort in those states. Obviously this hasnt worked out quite so well.

I did read an interesting editorial suggesting that Dick Gephardt wouldve been the better choice in order to strengthen the Kerry campaign in some mid-Western swing states and add someone with a little more of a political resume than Edwards.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
If I remember correctly the rationale behind bringing in Edwards was to give Kerry more traction among Southern voters, forcing the Bush campaign to spend more effort in those states. Obviously this hasnt worked out quite so well.

[/ QUOTE ]

The southern state that offered the best chance for the Democrats and still does is Florida. If that was the Democratic party's reasoning it was flat out stupid. Better to bring in a guy like Graham who might deliver Florida for them. But I don't mean to shoot the messenger, that's for the insight.

[ QUOTE ]
I did read an interesting editorial suggesting that Dick Gephardt wouldve been the better choice in order to strengthen the Kerry campaign in some mid-Western swing states and add someone with a little more of a political resume than Edwards.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah I think Gephardt would have been a much better choice.

[MaxPower]

I don't think Edwards was a good choice either. They should have picked an ex-military person like Wesley Clark or someone from a swing state.

[adios]

I think Clark would have been a better choice as well. Given that there seemingly are much better choices, relatively speaking it appears to me that Edwards is a negative in that he represents a lost opportunity.

[andyfox]

Absolutely nothing. Terrible choice.

[Cashcow]

Holy crap.... a thread where everyone agrees?


BTW I agree, Edwards was a very poor choice which may very well cost Kerry the Presidency, which doesn't bother me too much since I will be voting for Bush anyway.

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]
he doesn't have a track record politically that the Kerry campaign can point to; and his record as a private citizen doesn't seem extraordinary to me in terms of promoting the Democratic party ticket for the presidency.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know you are talking about Edwards here, but this could as easily be said about Kerry.

I would really have liked to see a good alternative to Bush, but Kerry-Edwards ain't it. Kerry is the worst candidate I can remember. Gore was really bad, but Kerry is worse. Kerry has been a zero as a candidate, and Edwards moved the ticket into the negative range.

I thought that Kerry actually improved to mediocre in the debate. He still had no content, but at least he didn't ramble incoherently. The time clock was a major mistake for the Republicans. They should have let Kerry drone on endlessly.

I could not get too focused on the VP debate, but Edwards came across as aggressive and inexperienced, while Cheney acted like a seasoned pro, putting up with a brash kid.

[Dynasty]

Edwards was the guy the Democratic base wanted. He provides some ability to rally the base and doesn't come with any significant negatives.

[Beavis68]

That is a good question.

The abality to law and attack while looking sincere?

Edwards was a total war hawk and was even booed for his support of the war during the primaries. The entire ticket is bizarre.

I was really looking forward to a Dean/Clark ticket, it would have been Mondale/Fererro all over again.