The good thing about Edwards possibly winning in OK and getting nomination

[dumpster_baby]

In the exit polls right now, Edwards is leading in OK, and so Clark could possibly be out. I agree with Dan Rather who on Charlie Rose said that the feeling among neutral pundits is that if Edwards ever gets one-on-one with another candidate, and breaks out of the pack that way, he cannot be stopped: he is just too talented. In a one on one debate with Kerry, I think he could take it all the way to the nomination.

I would prefer Clark to both Kerry and Edwards. But I would prefer Edwards to Kerry. I just don't trust a zillionaire family in the White House.

The good thing about nominating Edwards is that although Edwards has no military record, we still have 2 very good VP candidates in Kerry and Clark who could exploit Bush on his Guard AWOL record. And these 2 guys have had a LOT of media exposure so far. THey could carry the ticket a long ways.

So if Edwards get the nomination, we could have an Edwards-Clark or Edwards-Kerry ticket....man, with Edwards' talent, and Clark or Kerry's military background and name recognition....that sounds like a winner!

[girl gone mad]

1. Great.

then it will be the pro-war candidate against the mostly pro-war candidate.

A shining moment in Dem. politics.

[RummyTheDummy]

3. Your bitterness is obvious and amusing......

Just remember to do the right thing in November.

[girl gone mad]

10. Doesn't matter what I do..

in November. My state will go to Bush.

If it's Bush v. Kerry, I'll probably just move on to a country where people are in to real progress, not progress for the sake of political expediency.

[dolstein]

6. If that's the only thing you can see, you have my sympathies

You know, a lot of DU'ers would probably have said the same thing about the 1968 race. They would have been wrong then, too.

When I look at Edwards, I don't just see someone who voted for the war resolution. I see someone with a genuine commitment to the 98% of Americans that the current administration doesn't care about. I see someone who wants to make it possible for struggling middle class families to pay for their health care, send their kids to college, own a home, and save for their retirement. For some Democrats, these things still matter.

[girl gone mad]

11. Too bad..

his senate record doesn't match his populist rhetoric.

[Malva Zebrina]

12. when I look at Edwards, Kerry, Gebhart, Lieberman

who voted to give the idiot a blank check, sorry that is what I see.

Isn't it about time that some people on DU stop with the judging of others as "bitter" "jaded" or similar judgements? That is really confrontational and borders on flaming, although not quite. No one here is qualified to make that judgement, especially on an internet talk thread.

[beyurslf]

14. I can think of very few overall issues that are one

issue items for me. (Pro choice is one that can make up my mind regardless of other issues.) I certainly dont think I can make my mind up on one vote.

[GreenArrow]

16. The only commitment Edwards has is to his own career

this country is so screwed.

[katieforeman]

2. Edwards on the top of the ticket with a miltary vp is unstoppable

We need the most talented candidate on the top of the ticket. A vp with a military record would still allow the Democrats to criticize the chicken-hawks in the Bush Administration.

Please see my post- Edwards is the most Electable.

[RummyTheDummy]

5. KF.......

I voted for Edwards in Oklahoma today. Word on the street is it's going to be pretty close here. I think Edwards may pull off a shocker tonight in the Sooner state.

[katieforeman]

19. You made my day!

[kstewart33]

4. I agree up to a point

Edwards has great talent, speaking ability, and personality. And he's a decent guy. But he lacks the resume, especially on foreign policy and national security. That's his roadblock to the nomination.

But he would make a GREAT VP. I hope he wins SC and Oklahoma because it will give him more visibility which he needs to get that VP slot and to be a strong VP candidate.

I wish he would run in 2008 if we lose this year. A few more creases on his face and gray hair at the temples, and he'd be ready to go.

[katieforeman]

20. Please reconsider.

I know Edwards looks young but he's 50 years old. Kennedy was only 44 when he was elected President and that was at the height of the Coldwar. Bill Clinton was only 46 when he was elected president.

I just don't think people vote for President or any high elected office based on resume or experiecnce. If they did Arnold Schwarzenneger would not be the governor of the state with the 5th largest economy in the world and Al Gore would have beat George Bush in a landslide.

Also people vote for President not Vice-president. If we nominate someone who seems like a career politician or someone who seems to change positions frequently to gain public approval we will not defeat Bush.

Edwards is the next Bill Clinton minus the baggage and I think we should take advantage of that sooner rather than later.
Please see my posting- Edwards is the Most Electable.

[nixonwasbetterthanW]

7. What's your definition of a "zillionaire"?

Kerry's wife has hundreds of millions.

But Edwards is worth tens of millions, made as a trial lawyer.

Is there really much difference? Neither one will ever have to solicit bribes -- like Gov. Rowland in Connecticut -- for want of personal money. That's (sometimes) a good thing.

[maxr4clark]

8. Exit polls should not be published by anyone before the voting is done!

Drudge should be arrested for trying to tamper with the vote.

[nancyharris]

17. Oh Yes, it’s a well-known fact

That Oklahoma Democrats check out the Drudge site before going to vote.

[killbotfactory]

9. The best part about an Edwards win

Would be that it's not Kerry.

[yellowcanine]

13. Oklahoma hardly a done deal for Edwards

I believe Edwards was leading by at most 2 points over Kerry in early exit polling in OK-hardly enough to hang a nomination on, even given an Edwards win in SC. Also it is not at all clear to me that given your scenario of two men standing after today that Edwards would have any advantage over Kerry. First of all, Kerry would still have a great deal of momentum and as far as debating talent goes, Kerry is no slouch - he was a college debating star. Also, on national security issues, Democratic primary voters are much more likely to vote for the war hero as the presidential candidate against Bush than the maybe of a VP slot. The VP war hero candidate just does not trump incumbent president commander in chief candidate - imo.

[Skwmom]

15. Too talented?

At what? Giving a stump speech which he lifted from the book (Two Americas). He should be good at giving a speech, he's had years of practice in front of juries. Our country is in a mess. We have serious issues to address. How is a personal injury attorney equipped to deal with these issues? We wonder why this country is in such a mess.

[DjTj]

18. Edwards/Kerry or Edwards/Clark would be unstoppable...

Bush's campaign in 2000 and his campaign this time around will be all about putting a likeable face on the top of a ticket and a big resume (Cheney or Giuliani) on the bottom of the ticket.

Edwards will out-"regular guy" Bush's "regular guy" image and Kerry or Clark would totally out-resume the VP.

This ticket could not lose...