Deleted message

[Name removed]

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PATRICK]

1. Or it has more to do

with the current disastrous look at Bush's record. they have all the women pundits out in effect belittling all Vietnam vets or peace activists- take your pick. This is more a desperate attempt to prop up their guy than simply throwing everything against Kerry as the nominee. Also, at the least they wanted the Dems to bleed each other in a prolonged contest although this has been backfiring very badly too.

It is too late for Bush to brush it off but at the same time we are months away from November at the picture will be shifted very drastically toward a different slant by then, Kerry or Edwards both notwithstanding.

[Leilani]

2. It seems to me

that there are 2 major issues at play: economics & war on terror.

Edwards addresses the economics issue more effectively than Kerry.

However on national security, which the Rpublicans will run on, Kerry is more effective.

Kerry can also be effective on economics, whereas Edwards cannot address national security.

Because of Kerry's background & experience, it seems he is a much broader candidate.

[ChiefJoseph]

3. I disagree

I think edwards would be much stronger against Bush than Kerry. Edwards has much more energy and positive vision. Kerry, while a good man, is just too dry and officious.

[jpgpenn]

4. Edwards doesn't address economic issues more effectively...

then Kerry! The man has really no experience in domestic affairs and lets not even talk about world affairs!

[ChiefJoseph]

6. so what?

Clinton didn't have much foreign policy experience. Neither did Carter. As for domestic affairs, Edwards has been in the Senate since 1999. I think he understands domestic policy just fine.

[Meshuga]

8. But we are at war right now and experience is more important now...

in the mind of voters than when Clinton and Carter were running for president. I like Edwards and this is the best case scenario for the primaries but I've been getting the fear since Edwards couldn't even answer questions about Islam in the NH debate.

Edwards is a good and decent person. I like him but it's not his time yet.

[KurtNilsen]

12. Hmm..

What where he asked and what did he answer?

[jpgpenn]

11. This isn't 1992!

and trying to make a statement that Edwards has an understanding as opposed to experience is really not a good way to show the man can lead the greatest country in the world!

[KittyWampus]

5. Pretty Much Agree. I Loathe Kerry But He's The Best Man Standing

Edwards is a lightweight with little pertinent experience.

[AP]

7. In WI, people cared more about jobs than Iraq when Edwards started

talking about it, even among moderates.

[AP]

9. This is hardly and endorsement. He describes Edwards as the "soak the rich

candidate" and concludes with this: "the pressure would be on Edwards to cut the class warfare lest he expose the deep economic split in the Democratic Party."

He's telling Edwards to stop doing exactly the thing that is going to win the election for Edwards.

[Meshuga]

10. I agree.

Kerry and Clark were the two men who scared Republicans.

Edwards is being pumped up by Republicans because Kerry is a threat.

[AP]

13. Quote the lines where Safire is endorsing Edwards. There aren't any.

This is a case of giving something a label and hoping nobody reads the article to the end.

[DrFunkenstein]

14. Would Bush Go On MTP If Edwards Was The Frontrunner?

It's hard to tell, but I don't think the GOP would be quite so desperate. Seriously, look at them - they are running scared.