Edwards v. Kerry: Good or Bad

[mot78]

Is having a competitive race between them good? Or will it divide our party beyond salvage?

[MercutioATC]

1. Divide? Where's the divide? They're the same candidate.

Well, at least their votes (and subsequent contrary stances) on the IWR, NCLB and the Patriot Act were the same. They're both candidates with almost NO ammunition to use against Bush unless Bush is completely stupid and fails to "stimulate" the economy in July/August.

I don't see that much af a difference between them. Both represent what this Party's doing wrong, IMHO.

[mot78]

5. What I mean by "divide" is a primary that's too negative

one that could give us a damaged nominee come Boston.

[MercutioATC]

9. I understand your concern, but I don't think this has been much different

than other primaries. My biggest concern is their voting records on the "big 3" not the hits they've taken from each other.

[kurtyboy]

2. It's ALL good!

The GOP thinks that this is bad for Dems--but in the end, it'll keep us (Dems) in the headlines for a much longer period. * won't be able to co-opt the media with useless photo ops (check how many headlines you read about his speech to the LA Nat Guard tomorrow morning--NONE! It'll be all Edwards-Kerry, all the time!).

This is fantastic for our party, to have some competition at this point. I can only hope that it lasts into June (And hey, Terry McCauliff, take a chill-pill about it...).

Bring it on!

[mth44sc]

3. I'm a Kerry supporter

And its fine by me. There is a plus to having this campaign go on some longer and have the media continue to focus on the Democratic debate on issues.

[SangamonTaylor]

4. Edwards doctrine changed the 2004 election...

...by creating a positive atmosphere within the nomination process.

As long as the race remains clean, the candidates use tact when emphasising policy differences, and steer clear of personal attacks, the extension of the nomination process will be a blessing for the Democratic party.

The press coverage is free exposure, and it has been destroying bush.

[spooky3]

13. EJ Dionne agreed with you today in the WaPost

[Kathleen04]

6. It's excellent

A competitive race is good...it will keep the Democrats in the news and keep people interested.

I don't see how a 2 man race between Kerry and Edwards will divide our party more than anything else we've been through.

Wanting George Bush out is what has led voters to frontrunner Kerry and that's what will unite us all in the end.

[union_maid]

7. It's very good!

We have a horserace! If it doesn't get too nasty, it's the best thing that could happen. They need to point out their differences in a positive way and each make every effort to convince voters that he is the electable one. We need to keep it interesting. My bet is that the first one to really negative will be hurt by that.

[stickdog]

8. Spy vs. Spy -- Good or Bad?

[edzontar]

10. On the whole--good.

And much better than the Kerry juggernaut story.

[Blayde Starrfyre]

11. Good

Keep in mind, as long as the race is competitive, the focus of the Rove Smear Machine is divided. Once that nomination is locked, Rove can focus his vitriol. On the other hand, right now we have two strong candidates crushing Bush.

Keep it going right up until the convention.

[DjTj]

12. Good. They both have been running pretty clean campaigns...

...since Iowa.

It has been their bread and butter and they'll stick with it.

[Renew Deal]

14. Good

Let them fight it out.

[DemocraticDonkey]

15. good.

I hope that the party wholehartedly supports our candidate, but as others have said, it keeps us in the headlines. I'm actually hoping for a kerry-edwards ticket, so the more exposure the 2 get, the better.