Why has Edwards been counted out so early?

[prolesunited]

I was watching the CSPAN rebroadcast of Harkin's steak fry and I thought Edwards did quite well. He's an articulate speaker. He made some good points, particularly about jobs and sticking up for working class men and women. He seems charismatic and I'm sure his good looks wouldn't be a negative.

My question is why doesn't his campaign seem to have any traction? Does he have some negatives I'm not aware of? Is the problem with his staff, his message, a crowded field. I don't hear him mentioned in the top tier. Why?

BTW, I have not settled on a candidate and I think all of the Dems are putting great points and arguments into play.

[Jonte_1979]

1. Edwards is a darkhorse

I think Edwards will come on strong in the next months and might very well get the nod if Dean somehow screws up.

Edwards is my ideal pick for Dean's running mate.

[PAMod]

2. No one should count him out.

He's not my first choice, but he would be a strong candidate and a wonderful president.

His only problem seems to be getting anyone to say they will vote for him.

It is a big problem, no doubt, but perhaps not as detrimental to him as it would be to others. In other words, low poll numbers won't necessarily cut into his fundraising. That means he will be able to stick it out longer, as the field thins.

[blm]

3. Edwards is just hitting his stride, imo.

I think he's going to do well.

Why no traction? Ask the media. They seem to be the ones who like hot rhetoric over substantive policy discussion.

[maggrwaggr]

4. I like Edwards but he voted for the war

so to HELL with him.

[prolesunited]

10. I don't think he voted FOR the war

It's not as if the Bush administration gave them or the UN the truth about the situation in Iraq. It's not as if they said, "Iraq has no WMDs, thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians will die, hundreds of troops will be killed, we'll spend billions of dollars on a quagmire with no exit strategy. So, do we have your support."

I though the resolution authorized * to work within the structure of the UN and existing resolutions. I didn't support the war and was out in the street protesting against it, but I'm not so ready to blithely dismiss candidates on that basis.

What is Edwards' current take on Iraq? What does he think we should do now? Does he support the $87 billion blank check? The answers to those questions are more of a determining fact for me.

[Pastiche423]

27. You thought WRONG

He voted YES for the IWR. There is no way to spin it. He voted for *'s slaughter.

[prolesunited]

33. I really have a hard time believing

that those who voted for the resolution, which was predicated on deliberate deceptions, had any idea that this would be the outcome. I'm sure many of them today regret their decision. For me, the blame lies with Bush and his PNAC cabal for lying in the first place and for their disastrous execution of the invasion and occupation. I'm sure you'll disagree.

[maggrwaggr]

41. I wasn't fooled, so why were they?

unless they were just going with the crowd, doing what they thought would be popular.

That's not what leaders do. Leaders don't follow, they lead.

This is something that seems to have been forgotten these days.

Those who voted for the resolution were either

a. stupid

b. naive

c. gullible

d. pandering

Either way I want them OUT of office.

[prolesunited]

43. So that leaves who on your list?

Kerry and Edwards are out? Graham and Kucinich didn't vote for it, did they? Dean said he wouldn't have, so does that count? What about Clark? Or Mosley-Braun or Sharpton? Saying what they would do and being put to the test are two different things.

Who will you support if it is a choice between Bush and one of those Dems who voted for the resolution?

[PurityOfEssence]

53. How high is your security clearance?

Did you hear and see everything they did behind closed doors? It is telling that some of the ones with the most Intelligence and Foreign Relations experience voted against it (like Levin and Graham) but there are some other unexplainable ones like Harkin.

You don't know what assurances they were given that this was leverage to be used and you don't know what balderdash they were served up as proof. You weren't there. I agree that it looks like crap, and I saw it for what it was too, but we weren't there. This is not absolution or even much in the way of excusing, but it does qualify it a bit.

[Pastiche423]

54. One hundred and thirty three

lawmakers voted against the IWR. In the six week lead up to the vote, Senator Robert C. Byrd spoke every day, 3-4 hours a day. He spoke about our Constitution. Remember the document our country was founded on? He stated that a pre-emptive strike was against what our forefathers wrote in that document. He also stated that no evidence had been forthcoming of whistle ass et al's allegations of WMD or of them being an imminent threat.

Thousands upon thousands of emails, faxes, phone calls and snail mail letters flooded into each and every lawmakers office, begging them 10-1 to vote NO! This was stated on the Senate floor, time and time again.

Sure, the PNACers lied. But the PNACers weren't the ones doing the voting. I watched the vote. Not one of those voting had a gun to their head. They freely voted to side w/whistle ass et al and allow thousands of people to be slaughtered.

If those that vote for the IWR did not have "any idea that this would be the outcome", then that makes them stupid and they do not deserve to serve in the highest office in our land.

I do not want another stupid idiot in that office. I do not believe I am alone in that assessment.

[prolesunited]

55. You make a very convincing argument

I AM really torn on this. I was out there in the streets several times and some of those e-mails and faxes were mine. But if it comes down to someone who voted for that resolution, like Kerry or Edwards, I will be voting for them over Bush.

[maggrwaggr]

56. Don't get me wrong. I am for anybody but Bush

If it's Edwards of Kerry or even Lieberman I'll vote for them over Bush, but for right now .....

And now is when we're trying to decide on who the Dem candidate is going to be, right .......?

I say to HELL with the guys who voted for the war. You asked me who's left?

Who do you think? Isn't it obvious? I liked the guy before he came out against the war. And since then, every time he opens his mouth, he says what I want my candidate to say.

That's Dean by the way.

[bearfartinthewoods]

42. just as a reminder.....

70% of dems approved of the war. Edwards vote hardly puts him out of the running.

[jab105]

58. yep..

that's my thought also...I actually called his campaign and addressed it with them, and they said that they would get back to me and took down my name/address/phone number...they haven't gotten back to me yet, it's been a week....

[prolesunited]

59. If they do respond to you

please share the answer with the rest of us.

[uptohere]

5. his timing has always been geared to begin later

Dean decided to break the mold and create a foothold by starting in ernest way earlier than has been done.

And the power brokers fear him a little because of the qualities you describe. It puts a lot of pressure on Kerry, Gephardt and Lieberman.

Traction is taking hold, as planned. Prepare to be amazed.

[chimpymustgo]

12. Prepare to be amazed. Great line, uptohere. A lot of folks will be.

Edwards is "The Natural". And his campaign is coming together when it counts.

[uptohere]

15. I like your "the Natural" reference

he is natural in public, he's smart and at the same time personable and when needed rather direct and pointed. But in all cases he looks like being this way is natural to him.

People wonder about his experience, I point to the position paper hes had out there for months while the others are still crafting theirs. And I defy anyone who questions his experience to support Clark. The guy may be nice and all but he's never been elected dog catcher or higher before and that counts for something.

[AP]

18. Let's be clear: he's like the movie Natural, and not the book Natural

In fact, he's the opposite of the book version of The Natural who throws the game in the end for a bribe. In the movie, he declines the bribe and hits a home run, winning the penant for his long-suffering team.

[uptohere]

31. I didn't know there was a book, no problem

n/t

[chimpymustgo]

40. Thanks, AP - you're so smart. I didn't even know there was a book.

Go Edwards

[alcuno]

6. Has he completed even a term in the Senate?

Or is this his first?

[Oracle]

7. No substance.

First he tried to get by on looks with very little message, then he changes his message, goes away comes back with a new "tough" idea...wow, "new" Cheer...that doesn't sell...then he trys a bit of attacking to get noticed...then a new message...such bullshit...why do you think he looks good? Not enough.

[uptohere]

16. what new message ?

I've yet to see him deviate from his positions as defined in his published paper from summer.

But I'm not omniscient so tell me about it.

[AP]

20. I read his message loud and clear, by the way.

You are spinning your wheels, Oracle. Talk about not getting and traction. "Trys a bit of attacking"...you've got to be kidding.

"A new message"...he's the candidate who has been most consistently on message since the very beginning...of his career.

[theboss]

22. I completely disagree

I think his message is potentially the most interesting since it contrasts a Democratic respect for "work" against a Republican respect for "wealth."

He hasn't gotten any traction yet. Early on, the big names (like Kerry and Lieberman) got the press, and now Dean has taken all the oxygen. He still has a chance. This thing is going to go through at least two more cycles before New Hampshire.

I predict they will be a Clark 'honeymoon' were the press swoons and Dean loses a lot of his lead. Then there will be a Clark backlash/let's look at the other guys moment where someone like Edwards can jump into it.

[AP]

23. I think you're exactly right. What do you do for a living?

I'm curious when I read things by people whom, I think, got it exactly right. I wonder what it is in my background and your background which make us see this the same way.

[theboss]

26. I dunno

For online purposes, I go by Ivy-educated attorney who lives in DC and leave it at that.

[AP]

28. If you are the boss,

I might just have to send you my resume.

[Vikingking66]

8. he's not really doing much

I mean he's good looking and charismatic,
but he's extremely vague on the stump when
it comes to what he stands for, besides
the little guy in general.

He's not really going anywhere in the polls,
and his money and buzz has been overshadowed by Dean.
I get the feeling that he doesn't respond well to the kind
of frustration that Democrats are feeling right now.

[NashVegas]

13. Isn't He Just Starting to Get Around?

Edwards was to have made a Nashville stop on Friday, but Johnny Cash's death kinda overwhelmed anything else going on.

[BuelahWitch]

9. I liked what he said about the Dems and Clinton

About how he's tired of Democrats not wanting to stand on the same stage with Bill Clinton. Sounded like a direct slam at Lieberman, who was not at the Steak Fry (to be fair, neither was Sharpton, but I sincerely doubt it was because he didn't want to be seen with Clinton. I suspect Lieberman might not).

Even though he voted for the war, I like Edwards. If he gets the nomination he'll certainly have my support.

[Kolesar]

38. I do recall that Edwards was "Clinton's candidate" in this race

I vaguely recall that there were hints months ago that Clinton was backing Edwards, but I never saw this materialize.

[slackmaster]

11. I agree Edwards has done well in the debates, etc.

He's a good man but apparently doesn't have enough of a track record for some peoples' tastes, and some peoples' tastes count more than others'.

[denverbill]

14. Here's my take.

1) Like Kerry, in many important votes, he's sided with Bush (war, Patriot Act, e.g.). Unlike Kerry, he has no military background. So he's like John Kerry, except he's no war hero.
2) He's a trial lawyer. Trial lawyers have about the worst rating with citizens as any group of people. Bushco would repeat that mantra over and over and paint him as a greedy ambulance chaser. It worked incredibly well against Strickland in Colorado.
3) He wouldn't even win his homestate, if current polls are correct.
4) He might not have even won his Senate seat back.
5) He's inexperienced. Not even one term in the Senate and AFAIK, no other govt experience (maybe I'm wrong here)

That being said, I do like him. He is very articulate and a good speaker. I'd definitely vote for him in the general, if he won. He isn't my top pick though, or even in my top 4.

[AP]

17. He's on the exact same traction arc as William Jefferson Clinton

People thought Clinton didn't have it early on. People who understood politics thought he did have it early on. Jerry Brown ran as a far left candidate, making Clinton seem too moderate to many on the left. It turns out that the appearance of moderation camouflaged a deep concern for the most liberal of principles (jobs and wealth for the middle and working class), and he arc'ed his way from single digits in NH one month before the primary right into the white house.

[jos]

19. A misjudgment

Assuming Clark does not get in, this is a four person race IMHO. Dean, Gephardt and Kerry, with Edwards being the darkhorse. Edwards is quite viable, but a Clark entry will probably hurt him and Kerry the most.

[AP]

21. Actually, I think Clark would divide the democrats focusing on war,

and cause a fight, and confusion viz Dean who's either for or against the war (not clear), but that's the territory he's chosen upon which to focus.

Democrats who think that the economy is the central issue will gravitate towards Edwards, and the primaries will be a fight over whether you think the Dems need to run someone with the concerns of FDR, or a Democratic version of Eisenhower. I think the FDR camp will win out.

[uptohere]

32. Clark hurts Dean the most Kerry 2nd

without taking anything from the rest.

and even with Clark, who has never been elected to anything, his game plan doesn't change.

I really think Clark will flame out once he has to start appearing in public and cast the portions of Dean and Kerry's camp who jump out looking for something else and Edwards will be positioned and ready to take them in.

Its all in the plan.

Despite it all, Clark is running for VP or SecState

[AP]

36. He hurts Dean with the media. Dean has been the media favorite,

but I think they'd like Clark even more. They just want someone who only makes people think of war and I think the media thinks Clark does that better than Dean.

[tjdee]

47. I think Clark is too much of an unknown.

I think Edwards can do fairly well even with a Clark entry.
The Dean/Kerry nonsense clears the way for Edwards, and if Clark and Dean split the anti-war vote, Edwards again may benefit from that--but I see Clark as steamrolling over everyone (today, that's my perception).

Edwards' best thing is that he's so consistent, and he's been so on message...it's such a pleasure to see someone so focused on what he's supposed to be focusing on.

But Clark is an unknown--there's so much discussion about him from both sides, but right now there are *no* specifics. For all we know, he *is* an FDR liberal. After all, he taught economics at West Point.

Sometimes I feel so bad for Edwards, he deserves better. I don't know why so many are sure he's been offered VP (anyone want to enlighten?), and I don't think is true. I almost wish it were though--it would be a crime to let him go off into the night. Eh, but then the next day I'm sure he'll pull it out.

On edit:
This is supposed to be in reply to your other post on FDR vs. Eisenhower, but....

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

24. I don't think he has been counted out....

There's still a lot of campaigning to do as well as (IMHO) the fact that a lot of the larger contributors are waiting to see who say/does what.

On edit: Just rcv'd this in email:

Formal Presidential Announcement - Tomorrow!

Tomorrow, at 10 AM, EST, Senator John Edwards will make his formal Presidential announcement in Robbins, North Carolina. Sen. Edwards is making the announcement at the Old Milliken Mill, where his father Wallace worked. The announcement will be attended by many supporters, and we hope you can be a part of this historic occasion.

If you live in North Carolina, you can attend the event! Busses will be shuttling people from points throughout North Carolina to Robbins and back. Click here for more information on how you can attend this event.

If you live in South Carolina, you can see the Senator in Columbia in the afternoon as he continues his announcement day. Busses from points throughout South Carolina will be taking people to Columbia and back. Click here for more information on how you can attend the Columbia, South Carolina event.

How can you be a part of this event in your hometown? The announcement is a terrific opportunity to introduce your friends and family to John Edwards and his presidential campaign. Wear your Edwards for President t-shirt, or put up a sign in your window to show your support for John Edwards! Signs are available for download from the web site.
<snip>

[onecitizen]

25. I love the guy..........

and have always felt that had Gore chosen him as a running mate in 2000......well you know what I'm gonna say.

[sugarcookie]

29. I haven't counted him out..

He's moved up on my short list of preferable candidates. If my guy doesn't make it..I would work for Edwards with enthusiasm.

[prolesunited]

30. All in all

I think this has been a very good thread. It's nice to discuss a candidate without all of the bomb-throwing.

It seems like a lot of Dean supporters like Edwards as well. What similarities do they share that would explain this.

[realFedUp]

34. I think he'll be the Veep candidate

of whoever gets the nomination.

[uptohere]

35. nah, thats Clark's job

but he would be good at that as well.

Theres just no getting around needing a southern accent to win the White House.

[mlawson]

39. Yep, he will be VP with Kerry.

That is why Edwards has decided not to run again for the Senate: he has been promised VP.

Why do I say 'with Kerry'?? Because he is the one I think the DNC will maneuver into the nomination.

[uptohere]

45. Mr Kerry has always been the party favorite

and an Edwards 2nd helps minimize the northeast bias and sets Edwards up for prez after Kerry has his shift. Look, we all know Mrs Clinton will never be allowed to run.

But I still prefer Edwards/Clark.

[mlawson]

37. Who has counted him out????

Is this going to be the next Edwards 'truism' here at DU???? Now, we have a few DUers who hate the man viscerally, and one or two of them only post when they see his name; I don't respond to them anymore. But most DUers seem to either like him, or say that it's not his time, yet.

But he has rejected running again for his Senate seat, so it is obvious to me that he has been promised something, probably the VP slot with Kerry.

[chimpymustgo]

46. It's so great to see so much Edwards support on the board.

He'll be on all the morning shows (unfortunately not the lead because of the recall decision - but maybe more folks will be tuning in because of that).

[mlawson]

48. Yes, the morning shows!

Keep your fingers crossed that someone big in Hollywood doesn't DIE overnight! Or some celebrity gets charged with a murder.

The media whores will be desperate to find some way to shunt Edwards to the side.

[LittleApple81]

44. That was exactly my reaction when I saw the re-run this morning. n/t

[sendero]

49. ya know....

... the *nice* thing about this primary is that there are a plethora of good men running, any one of whom I could vote for with a smile, Edwards included.

I did not feel his message was clear during the PBS debates, but I'm willing to listen some more. And his vote "for" the war is troublesome, but less so depending on what he has to say about it now (I believe in forgiving mistakes when they are owned up to).

We as Dems are lucky. With one exception, all of the men running for the nom seem like good men with a reasonable mix of integrity and wisdom.

I am however, looking forward to narrowing it down to the contenders :)

[Hippo_Tron]

50. I'm about to write an article about the primary

And I'm placing him in the "still has a chance" category along with Gephardt and Lieberman.

[SoCalDem]

51. oops

oops

[SoCalDem]

52. In politics, you either "catch fire" or you don't

the secret is to catch fire and burn brightly for the whole campaign season..

some catch fire early, and then just burn out.. I think that's what Edwards did.. It takes more than good looks and a southern drawl to win.. He probably thought he was "Kennedyesque" enough to carry the day.. Sadly, the people who still remember Kennedy from first hand experience, saw Edwards as a lightweight..

He should have waited til he had 2 terms under his belt... now he will end up back home or maybe in an administrative position , if a dem gets elected..

He had his timing off...just like Gore did in 88 and 92..

Timing is everything :)

[janekat]

57. My opinion is that he is not ready.... Too bad

Maybe in 2008.