Effect of a Kerry/Edwards ticket…

[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.

[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.

[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.

[opebo]

Clark's also a bit kooky.

[opebo]

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.  

Zell Miller is NOT a conservative Democrat, Jo Lieberman, Evan Bayh and John Breaux are conservative democrats... Miller is these days (back in the 1990's he was more leftwing) pretty much inline with the mainstream of the GOP... once again he is even less of a democrat than Lincoln Chafee is a republican IMHO...

Yeah check out their ratings on American Conservative Union - Miller's better than Chaffee or Specter.