John Edwards is for real.

I'm watching the re-run of the "debate". Edwards is really speaking from his heart, to the people's hearts. He's got great ideas and could turn this economy around, and bring a new sense of hope and optimism to the country. He is very charismatic and likeable.

Edwards is the anti-Bush.

he lacks the experience and resume of the other major candidates.

I do like the fact that he's a moderate Democrat with humble roots --he's practical and "in touch" with average people. That goes a long way with me as a Democrat, this is supposed to be "the party of the people", after all.

I support Kerry, but it troubles me that the two leading candidates (Dean and Kerry) are both "old money" bluebloods. The fact that Kerry fought in Vietnam (and protested the same war) does give him a connection to "ordinary people" that goes a long way for making up for his aristocratic blood lines, IMO. Dean didn't fight OR protest, as far as I know.

He can get a lot of middle America, people who would vote Rethug, but are hurting badly in their pocketbooks. I also think he has the ability to inspire people, and give a sense of idealism about what this country can be.

He exascerbates alot of dem weaknesses, much less than Dean, but still many.

He's from among the worst locations a dem can be from today.

The massachusetts democratic party, with Bulger, the southie autocrats, the church scandals, and the big dig, is a very bad place to come from right now.

And he's not just rich, he's the richest senator, and is a very easy target for the "golddigger" label. He married women worth over $300 million, not once but twice.

Edwards has scaled back his biographical/roots talk alot because he doesn't need it as much as his agenda has become so detailed, yet Kerry can't stop bringing up Nam even when it doesn't relate even slightly to the issue at hand.

If I was a betting man I would say I'm probably going to be working for his campaign at some time in the future

hopefully it'll be as VP to Edwards

of "my father worked in a mill all his life..." I think I'll scream.

It'll take a lot more than that to get to the WH and that is what we hear the most from him every single time he is at an event. It is the bulk of his stump speech.

Is it a strength? Yes. Is it enough? No. Is it getting irritating? Oh yes.

Julie

. . . Kerry served in Vietnam? In combat? I think he should emphasize that more.

The son of a mill worker thing is going to get old fast, but Edwards desperately needs to lose his "millionaire trial lawyer" image. Also, in primaries, candidates tend to repeat themselves a lot. Primaries are really tedious if you pay too much attention.

would make a fine VP.

on Edwards gets to this, and it's the truth. I've said it on these threads before, and I'll say it again: Edwards will not be the Dem. candidate for president. However, he would make a great VP. He has neither the support from the inside the beltway folks (hasn't been around long enough, they'll throw their support behind Kerry or one of the others), and he DEFINITELY does not connect with the activists whom he will need to movitate to get the primary votes. Why doesn't he just start an Edwards for VP or Edwards for prez. in 2012? That way, he'll have the experience, and, we could get a hold on the presidency for a long time;)

on edit: added "primary"

would make a fine millionaire trial lawyer.

To be a millionaire trial lawyer? That means he was successful in obtaining some tangible justice for people who have been injured by Corporate America. It means he is a helluva fighter, because believe me, the idea that all you have to do is file a lawsuit and people start throwing money at you is just bullshit: you have to chase them down, wrestle them to the ground, and pry the damn money out of their hands! So it tells me that Edwards is a fighter, that he has heart and backbone, and that he cares about the "little people." All of that is a GOOD THING, not a bad thing.

Bake

I really wish people would stop relegating him to this. he wouldn't veep for Kerry or Dean, and those are the only candidates people around here seem to want nominated other than Edwards. He and Gephardt are very much disagreeable on Healthcare so that wouldn't happen.

He is the best candidate we have for president, he is overqualified for vp

not a chance. Where does he have this massive experience? What has he done that is really maverick in the Senate that he can attach his name to? from where does this "overqualification" stem? from his "son of a millworker" background? from his years as a trial lawyer? im not saying that either of the two preceding statements are a knock at him, but you can't just make that statement with no background. he is too far right for my liking, and most people who will vote in the primary to boot. he also doesn't have the support inside the beltway (who has endorsed him)? if you can back these statements up or give me some reason as to WHY Edwards is overqualified for veep, I'll listen, but I haven't seen any yet other than "he is good-looking, he excites people, he has charisma, he is the son of a millworker, he can beat bush, republicans are scared of him, etc...". give me some substance!

far right?

I guess it's just my opinion that he is overqualified for veep, and more acuratly to good to Not have as a presidential candidate, AGAINST Bush.

It's important to not be seen as an insider, which he really can't. He's the best qualified candidate to take on Bush for his alleigances, specifically to corporate interests

You can parallel almost anything he has done with Bush and America will side/relate/trust with Edwards on everything


Like Clinton he doesn't exascerbate the democrats weaknesses, and he's the candidate who can Most excite the dems working class base, and independants the most.

He has more substance than any candidate. Look at his platform why don't you. What other candidate has any proposals for permanant civil liberties protection? Intelligence, homeland security, and DOJ reform?

What candidate has as comprensive proposals and his workers/shareholders bill of rights? His Kennedy/Edwards/McCain Patients bill of rights?

What other candidate knows how to take on big insurance and pharmacueticals as well as he?

Noone

his tax plans, military plans (defending Iraq), PATRIOT ACT (although I can let that one slide as long as he votes for sunsetting it and against PATRIOT II). Where you say he covers dems weaknesses, I hate to say it, but this is where I think his policies are to the right of center b/c they are closer to GOP positions than I would like (his war vote and natl. security stances do not impress me). Basically, you mentioned a few things, one bill (i'll give him credit on taking on the pharma industry). I like a few of his proposals, but most of his social/civil liberties/defense issues seem to leave much to be desired IMHO.

socially or fiscally

He voted with 99 percent of the senate on the patriot act, and unless you're voting for Kucinich or Carol Mosley-Braun in the primary, you're guy voted or would have voted for it as well, and that includes Sharpton.

He's the only candidate with an actual proposal to stop the patriot from infringing on civil liberties, by creating an office of civil liberties and civil rights, that would protect Americans during ALL administrations. He also has proposals that would further democratize intelligence intelligence gathering and spying powers of the government, AND he has authored privacy legislation on things such as cell-phone monitering protection.

AND he hammered Ashcroft harder during his confirmation hearings than any other candidate, and voted against him as well

I think that puts him in the most liberal third of candidates anounced, on civil liberties easily.

His tax plan increases taxes on unearned wealth more than any other candidate, which is not right-wing at all.

The things I know that he's fought for as a trial lawyer were the kinds of things people appreciate. The swimming pool drains had killed several children. An insurance company wasn't providing appropriate coverage for a child with brain damage. Edwards can hit Bush straight up with the fact that he's been working his whole life to protect children while Bush has slashed school lunches, slashed health insuranace and protected big business over the needs of children. John Edwards earned his money and paid taxes on it, he isn't going to inherit it tax free like George W. Bush. There's a bunch of angles John Edwards can use to go after Bush; his success and the way he achieved it doesn't need to be a hindrance. It's frivilous lawsuits people don't like, not lawyers who actually help people.

He could have sued for civil damages when his son was killed in an auto accident and he didn't.

EVERY argument/smear against Edwards that the GOP can throw at him can be countered simply and effectively. They do NOT want to run against him.

There is so much said as these forums/debates/whatever that it is hard to remember what exactly people say and what they want you to take away.

Edwards wants you to remember that he is the 'regular guy' whose dad worked in a mill. He's just like you, and will govern accordingly. That's what he wants you to remember.

Now--what did Kerry want you to take away from the forum? What did Gephardt want you to get from him?

He is a regular guy.


And people need to stop the trial lawyer bashing. It, oh, so , Republican.

They would prefer for the little guy to have no advaocate at all so the big corporations can have their way.

95% of the population doesn't pay as much attention as you. They may only see him speak one time.

Him and Lieberman are the DLS poster boys. Or am I misinformed?


Click Here For Hard Hitting Buttons — Visit The Cronus Connection

All of these guys, with the possible exception of DK have been involved with the DLC. It is a Democratic organization, one of many.

It is a RUMOR, and this is where it came from.

ABC's email newsletter The Note said (in a piece about Dean or something) that Al From had advised Lieberman, and that Bruce Reed had "informally, at times" advised Edwards. It is unclear whether those informal advising sessions were for their senate runs, or how long ago, or what the nature was. It was a throwaway line, but some people took that to mean that Lieberman and Edwards were the "DLC boys". Which is a HUGE leap, but hey, some people like doing that if it serves their purposes. I mean, gads, Reed was domestic policy advisor to Bill Clinton. I imagine he has a thing or two of value to say.

In fact, if you go over to Politic/Campaigns, there's a thread about how the DLC have shifted their support to Kerry--less out of policy similarities than other considerations.

Tidbits here and there from various reporters--some believe him to have been handpicked by Pres. Clinton--and has a lot advice re his campaign from Pres. Clinton. Perhaps this is why Tim Russert in his
interview a whild back worked so hard to bring him down. Does this make one a DLC Insider??

I must admit his performance last night was great--has developed a little more gravitas when he speaks.

Every thing he says starts off with him going back to his childhood, and having reverence for his family andtheir struggles. It got old....REAL QUICK!:eyes: This maybe a southern thing, so I may not quite understand why the love of nostalgia is improtant for him to shove down our throats. I don't care what his family did. I care about what he plans to do.

http://www.johnedwards.com/media/real-solutions-for-america.pdf It should give you an idea what he plans to do.

I understand his point about coming from humble roots, but sheesh he repeats it one too many times.

he doesn't need to. He has the most realistic, well rounded, substantiative platform of any candidate

doesn't do it anymore? I guess you're too busy reading his brochures to listen to him.

and He takes questions and answers them with great authority from every person who wants his time at them. He can connect to people like no other politician I've seen.

Maybe at big events he still talks about his roots more often than you like, but thats because he's trying to reach people who might not have seen him before. And people are more likely to trust someone than if they began "When, as a youth, I would go yaughting In Sag Harbor with the family..."

And I trust him so much more because he waited until after his first trial win to take his yacht out.

Personally, I do respect that a bit more than someone whose yacht is really daddy's.

Terwilliger, but that is what works. That is what wins elections these days. You have to keep repeating a simple message that will appeal to the greatest number of Americans.

If you're looking for more substance, just take a closer look at his economic and healthcare plans.

Bombtrack is right, he matches up the best out of all 9 contenders against *.

He really impressed me in the first debate. Then I read this speech:

http://www.johnedwards2004.com/page.asp?id=125

I was completely won over by the way he hammers B*sh without being negative at all. He has a positive message and the widest appeal.

He also has the most well-thought out and impressive platform (IMO).

NNNNNNNNNNNNEXT!

he voted for it, and unlike Dean who would have voted for it, who I assume you support ,has proposals to protect liberties from the parts of the act that people like Ashcroft infringe apon. He's the only candidate with such proposals

and I don't think there is anyone who doesn't know that he supported regime change,

his grandpappy was a share-cropper!

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

He's a good looking guy and he's smart.

He gives me the creeps! He seems like a real phoney.

I've seen that there are a lot of Dems who you don't like, but I've yet to see you mention even one Dem that you do like.

Care to share?

humble roots,

self-made man,

articulate,

honest,

hard-working,

and the biggest difference between him and chimpy, when forced to make a choice, he always favors the weak over the powerful.

He is THE ANTI-BUSH!

And I really think the GOP fears him more than any of the others.

Andy

NT

he needs to head back to the bullpen and get some practice in for 08, 12 or 16 (or later)

not Pataki, Guliani, Romney, Frist etc

n/t

Edwards can win NC, FL, TN, and AR with any number of veeps. Kerry could't win any southern state other than Florida and only if Graham is his veep

I think that If Kerry is the winner(of both the primary and general) and Edwards either doesn't run for reelection to the senate or loses it, that Edwards would be Kerry's attourney General, not only because Edwards has received comparisons to Bobby Kennedy and Kerry wants to be JFK, but because Edwards has the biggest(and really only) DOJ-reform proposals of any candidate, and is the most anti-ashcroft in the campaign

At this stage of high anxiety for candidates and their close supporters it is obvious that the locked in position has Dean and Kerry vying for the top attention which hurts Edwards. Whenever and IF either of these two melts down AND if that is soon enough, Edwards has a chance. Electorally I agree he has more value in the top spot.

I guess these are my three top choices. I think we still at this date are in need of a smashing electoral win although any of the three could.
Dancing around with Hillary and Al is doing no good, but not a lot of harm yet.

My only concern other than frayed nerves snapping, like Smokin' Joe, is the silent stage of the GOP manipulations. At this stage Nixon was moving to set up and derail Muskie offstage. This situation is more complex and I think has dissipated the GOP focus as well. There main strategy is to keep US spread out and dissipated for the time being, adding other darkhorses to belittle a great field. But they are still trying. Dems should be cautious in falling for negatives and distractions(dark horses, Hillary, etc) especially when they come from the sly side attacks of Time/Newsweek or others. We have great cnadidates. Having to resort to SINGLE issues to scratch off mentally one of them is a dangerous mindset, one that the GOP will exploit to the hilt.

If a candidate gaffes or offends they will have to personally have to try VERY hard before I give up on our top choices. Let's build all their positives here at DU.

And I think his character will carry him to the nomination. It is the cornerstone of his policies, ideas, and hope for America.

he's the only candidate to recieve that kind of attention and advirsity from the right. They've put anti-Edwards billboards up in Iowa and New Hampshire through their front group club-for-growth. They've sent disruptors to his events in primary states and in North Carolina. The parts of the media they control either ignore him or only report the worst polling.

I have no doubt that they are helping the least electable serious candidates win the primaries, and people like Sharpton stay in it for as long as possible

He is....I'm watching the campaign ad...that's why I support him. I have since I heard about him.

I never saw his niceness as just an act. I think he IS nice and thoughtful, and can be VERY tough when the rubber meets the road.

I still haven't seen last night's show, and yes, the "daddy's a millworker" gets old, but he's a gem.

This is the persona I'd like to have representing this country.

Glad to see others are warming to him.

Wasn't he a NAFTA supporter? South Carolina lots tens of thousands of decent paying textile jobs because of NAFTA - hopefully Edwards will support a minimum wage at least as a band aid for some of the damage it caused.

considering Gephardt just introduced the idea I believe

2002 On the votes that the CATO Institute--Center for Trade Policy Studies considered to be the most important in 2002, Senator Edwards voted their preferred position 17 percent of the time.

1999-2000 On the trade votes that the CATO Trade considered to be the most important in 1999-2000, Senator Edwards voted their preferred position 40 percent of the time.

those were the only trade ratings available

Cato is libertarian and very pro free trade if you didn't know

Gephardt has been talking about an international minimum wage, but unions have been pushing for it since GATT - Gephardt certainly didn't make it up - even though maybe he'll try to take credit :)

Too bad - Edwards could really run with that issue. For the most part, I have a favorable impression of Edwards - the working class roots, he's smart, telegenic - but the last thing we need is more DLC-style economics. He'd have to make a clear break to get my support.

of Clintonomics.

take a look at his economic plan from his website, AND google his workers/shareholders bill of rights