Effect of a Kerry/Edwards ticket…

[Ben.]

What would be the effect of a Kerry/Edwards ticket… which demographics would it help the Democrats with?, which states would it help in? and how would it play out in “media land” in interviews, in the debates and in the electorates mind how would such a ticket fare?...

Any Thoughts?        

[Michael Z]

Good question. It may help in the Midwest, which is bound to be extremely close (particularly Iowa). Not sure whether it will have any effect in the South though... Kerry may as well forget about that region and concentrate on winning Ohio, New Hampshire and West Virginia. Edwards, with his charisma and across-the-spectrum appeal, may just help him achieve that. At any rate, a Kerry/Edwards ticket strikes me as a no-brainer.

[opebo]

Good question. It may help in the Midwest, which is bound to be extremely close (particularly Iowa). Not sure whether it will have any effect in the South though... Kerry may as well forget about that region and concentrate on winning Ohio, New Hampshire and West Virginia. Edwards, with his charisma and across-the-spectrum appeal, may just help him achieve that. At any rate, a Kerry/Edwards ticket strikes me as a no-brainer.

Hah, Edwards=no brainer.. I agree!  The man's annoyingly dumb.

[Michael Z]

Good question. It may help in the Midwest, which is bound to be extremely close (particularly Iowa). Not sure whether it will have any effect in the South though... Kerry may as well forget about that region and concentrate on winning Ohio, New Hampshire and West Virginia. Edwards, with his charisma and across-the-spectrum appeal, may just help him achieve that. At any rate, a Kerry/Edwards ticket strikes me as a no-brainer.

Hah, Edwards=no brainer.. I agree!  The man's annoyingly dumb.

Didn't stop Quayle.

[opebo]

Good question. It may help in the Midwest, which is bound to be extremely close (particularly Iowa). Not sure whether it will have any effect in the South though... Kerry may as well forget about that region and concentrate on winning Ohio, New Hampshire and West Virginia. Edwards, with his charisma and across-the-spectrum appeal, may just help him achieve that. At any rate, a Kerry/Edwards ticket strikes me as a no-brainer.

Hah, Edwards=no brainer.. I agree!  The man's annoyingly dumb.

Didn't stop Quayle.

Ah, but he was a decent person.  Bush also has that factor going for him - though he's much smarter than either Edwards or Quayle.  

Edwards is both stupid and of bad character.

[Michael Z]

Good question. It may help in the Midwest, which is bound to be extremely close (particularly Iowa). Not sure whether it will have any effect in the South though... Kerry may as well forget about that region and concentrate on winning Ohio, New Hampshire and West Virginia. Edwards, with his charisma and across-the-spectrum appeal, may just help him achieve that. At any rate, a Kerry/Edwards ticket strikes me as a no-brainer.

Hah, Edwards=no brainer.. I agree!  The man's annoyingly dumb.

Didn't stop Quayle.

Ah, but he was a decent person.  Bush also has that factor going for him - though he's much smarter than either Edwards or Quayle.  

Edwards is both stupid and of bad character.

I'm actually tempted to agree with you on the last part (not the "stupid"-part though) - I recently read some stuff on Edwards's record as a lawyer, things he got up to and cases he represented, and it doesn't exactly reflect well on him. But then politicians with a clean slate are a bit like four-leaved clovers...

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

Good question. It may help in the Midwest, which is bound to be extremely close (particularly Iowa). Not sure whether it will have any effect in the South though... Kerry may as well forget about that region and concentrate on winning Ohio, New Hampshire and West Virginia. Edwards, with his charisma and across-the-spectrum appeal, may just help him achieve that. At any rate, a Kerry/Edwards ticket strikes me as a no-brainer.

Hah, Edwards=no brainer.. I agree!  The man's annoyingly dumb.

Didn't stop Quayle.

Ah, but he was a decent person.  Bush also has that factor going for him - though he's much smarter than either Edwards or Quayle.  

Edwards is both stupid and of bad character.

I'm actually tempted to agree with you on the last part (not the "stupid"-part though) - I recently read some stuff on Edwards's record as a lawyer, things he got up to and cases he represented, and it doesn't exactly reflect well on him. But then politicians with a clean slate are a bit like four-leaved clovers...

What exactly did you read?  True, Edwards was a trial lawyer, but he represented only the most worthy of clients, usually children who had suffered grave injuries due to negligence by big corporations.  

If Edwards' clientele could have possibly been attacked, you would have already seen those attacks, whether in his senate of presidential campaigns.  Those attacks haven't happened because Edwards' opponents can't find anything specific in his record (because it isn't there).

[Lunar]

Kerry simply won't choose Edwards.  Everything Edwards has going for him only helps if he's at the top of the ticket,

Kerry wants someone who:

1- Is from a critical region to this election
and
2- Compliments him somehow for the other regions.

I think it will be Evan Bayh or Bill Richardson.  Evan Bayh can make Kerry more moderate and help in the extremely critical region around Indiana (Iowa, Indiana, Ohio Pennsylvania, Missouri, Minnesota, Wisconsin and West Virginia) while Richardson will help Kerry with the Hispanic vote, helping him with Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado, and Florida.

[opebo]

Good question. It may help in the Midwest, which is bound to be extremely close (particularly Iowa). Not sure whether it will have any effect in the South though... Kerry may as well forget about that region and concentrate on winning Ohio, New Hampshire and West Virginia. Edwards, with his charisma and across-the-spectrum appeal, may just help him achieve that. At any rate, a Kerry/Edwards ticket strikes me as a no-brainer.

Hah, Edwards=no brainer.. I agree!  The man's annoyingly dumb.

Didn't stop Quayle.

Ah, but he was a decent person.  Bush also has that factor going for him - though he's much smarter than either Edwards or Quayle.  

Edwards is both stupid and of bad character.

I'm actually tempted to agree with you on the last part (not the "stupid"-part though) - I recently read some stuff on Edwards's record as a lawyer, things he got up to and cases he represented, and it doesn't exactly reflect well on him. But then politicians with a clean slate are a bit like four-leaved clovers...

What exactly did you read?  True, Edwards was a trial lawyer, but he represented only the most worthy of clients, usually children who had suffered grave injuries due to negligence by big corporations.  

If Edwards' clientele could have possibly been attacked, you would have already seen those attacks, where in his senate of presidential campaigns.  Those attacks haven't happened because Edwards' opponents can't find anything specific in his record (because it isn't there).

'Worthy' clients.  Hah.  But seriously that's why he was handpicked by the trial lawyer cabal - he looks good to lefists and other soft-headed types.  He helped the children against those bad rich corporations.

[Michael Z]

What exactly did you read?  True, Edwards was a trial lawyer, but he represented only the most worthy of clients, usually children who had suffered grave injuries due to negligence by big corporations.

Really? Oh. May well be the case that I was shown skewered information... something right-wing propagandists are usually pretty good at creating.

[Kghadial]

Although I like Edwards he's always seen like a phony to me.

It seems to me that he sat down some day in late 96 after Clinton was reelected and thought to himself that he could be president. That HE could beat the republican incumbent who would be elected after clinton. So he decided to run for the senate. He got elected, he looked pretty, and he ran for president. Now he'll be Attorney general of sec. state or VP and he'll run in '12 or if Kerry loses he'll just shrug his shoulders and continue with his being an attorney .  

[TheWildCard]

I like Edwards from what I've seen, though in my opinion he doesn't come off as a very intelligent person(Yeah I know, didn't stop Qualye) but he has charisma and in politics thats a big deal.

Edwards would help with younger voters, a group the Dem.s already have in their pocket...

I just don't think Edwards is ready for the big time I do think camparing him to Dan Qualye is pretty much right on. I believe that the latter wasn't ready for the big time and nor is Edwards at this time.

[GOPhound]

I think Wesley Clark would be a much better addition to the ticket than Edwards for a number of reasons.

First, Bush's strongest areas are in homeland security/military/foreign policy issues.  Clark would be a logical choice to attack Bush in these areas.

Second, Clark is extremely intelligent and eloquent.  Edwards I think comes off like an empty suit and a phony.  All flash, no substance.

Third, Clark would help Kerry play up the whole service in Vietnam issue.  Who would ever expect the Democrats to have 2 war veterans on their ticket and the GOP none?

Four, I think Edwards would get his ass handed to him by Cheney in a debate.  I could see Clark holding his own (though Cheney's experience would shine through I think).

Five, if they win, I think Edwards would have a hard time playing second fiddle.  He seems to be a publicity hound who needs to be the center of attention.

I think Bob Graham would offer all of the above as well.  However, he has more legislative experience and is from a key state.  I think Graham and Clark would be the strongest picks.  

[zachman]

Clark doesn't add enough charisma. He'd be a poor choice.

[opebo]

Clark's also a bit kooky.

[Gustaf]

Edwards got himself name recognition in the parimaries and will help with moderates everywhere, mostly in the South and Mid-West.

[Ben.]

Edwards got himself name recognition in the parimaries and will help with moderates everywhere, mostly in the South and Mid-West.

lol

[classical liberal]

I think that a Kerry/Bayh ticket would win like this:



Kerry/Bayh- 439
Bush/Cheney- 99

Mostly because Bayh is an actual conservative, even more so than Bush.  He's not of the religious right, but on all other issues is to the right of Bush.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

Mostly because Bayh is an actual conservative, even more so than Bush.  He's not of the religious right, but on all other issues is to the right of Bush.

This is the reason why I think Bayh would be a terrible nominee.  He voted for the Bush tax cuts!

Edwards attracts the same sort of moderates Bayh would be going after, without abandoning the fundamental principles of the Democratic party.

[GOPhound]

I like Bayh for a Democrat, which really isn't saying much.  However, he is not a conservative.  Take a look at some of his ratings, his voting record is more liberal than his rhetoric.

Zell Miller is a conservative Democrat.  Bayh is a centrist at best, and even that is a stretch.  

[classical liberal]

Bayh is "not of the religious right".  That's why his ratings are what they are.  On fiscal matters he is to Bush's right.  One most social matters he is to Bush's right.  On religous matters he is centrist.

[GOPhound]

Just in the past year Bayh:

-Voted against accelertaing the repeal of the death tax
-Voted against the FY2004 budget which contained further tax cuts
-Voted against accelerated phase out of the Marriage Penalty
-Voted against elimination of the dividend tax

These are just a sample of his votes.  This my friend, is not a fiscally conservative record.  

[Lunar]

Bayh would help make Kerry seem more moderate and is a seasoned politician to help balance him out.  He's against abortion and whatnot.

Edwards won't be able to carry his state or help in the region, and would have a hard time working to compliment Kerry.  The possibility to get a boost in a half-dozen swing states will be too much of an advantage for Kerry to choose Edwards.

[angus]

Good question. It may help in the Midwest, which is bound to be extremely close (particularly Iowa). Not sure whether it will have any effect in the South though... Kerry may as well forget about that region and concentrate on winning Ohio, New Hampshire and West Virginia. Edwards, with his charisma and across-the-spectrum appeal, may just help him achieve that. At any rate, a Kerry/Edwards ticket strikes me as a no-brainer.

Don't advise democrats not to use their brains, as they'll take you literally.  Otherwise, I agree.  

Welcome back.  

[minionofmidas]

Don't advise democrats not to use their brains, as they'll take you literally.

lol!