Why should John Edwards be counted out in '08?

[XOKCowboy]

I heard it on the Young Turks yesterday and wondered "Why?". The guy has potential. He's a great orator. He does good humanitarian work against poverty. I'd probably vote for the guy.

[Alexander]

1. Because he was elected to only 1 Senate term?

Even Jimmy Carter and Dimson had more elective experience than that.

[XOKCowboy]

5. Huh?

Carter and Dimson were state governors. So was Clinton. What does that have to do with it?

[Alexander]

15. 1) What has Edwards DONE? 2) Elective experience helps with presidential runs.

Name one major piece of legislation passed through Congress that Edwards has his name on. One hearing that he was actively involved in. One major news item that came about largely because of him.

Even Obama has his name on a bill, and he's not even 2 years in. I think Obama could use another election or two before he runs for president, but he's already doing something with his time there.

Something you might want to know about elections - when somebody runs and gets the nomination, whether they win or lose, they build a network of supporters, volunteers, campaign headquarters and an almost business-like system to getting people to vote for them.

The more races you run, the more you build on this system. In turn this leads to more supporters, better ID of who might vote for you, more money in the campaign coffers, and so forth.

Edwards was elected exactly ONCE in his whole life. Not only that, it was a 51%-49% photo-finish squeaker. IMO he needs to run another campaign or two before he'll be taken seriously as president (and I voted for him for VP).

I'd personally like to see him knock off Elizabeth Dole and take the other North Carolina Senate seat. My confidence in his elective abilities would increase dramatically if he could do that.

BTW, Carter and Shrub being governors is irrelevant. I mentioned them because with Carter, we also had a guy who won ONE statewide office before he ran for president (although I believe he was a state senator before that). If you are aware of the 1976 campaign, you could kind of tell. Carter turned a 33% lead over Ford into a 51%-48% squeaker, because of gaffes, miscues and poor campaigning. It was only Ford and Dole's huge gaffes about the Soviets and the Nazis respectively that did them in, not anything brilliant Carter did (although he is a brilliant man).

A very similar thing happened with Shrub, who won one more office than John Edwards has won (and even the second time, he faced token opposition). He was initially leading Gore by 17% in the polls, only to see it evaporate and himself struggle in the courts to steal the presidency. Regardless of his idiocy, had he been a more experienced campaigner, he might not have needed to steal the 2000 race.

When one-term officeholders or people with little to no elective experience run for an office like the presidency, it shows. And if they win, it's largely despite themselves.

[MH1]

38. Major legislation that Edwards has his name on:

He cosponsored IWR.

For all the flak some Senators and Reps get for voting for it, this fact is often forgotten.

[jsamuel]

20. does that rule out Obama then?

[Alexander]

21. For 2008, yes, IMHO.

Obama needs more experience. He might be a decent VP candidate in 08, the same way Edwards was a decent VP candidate in 04. If either one got the nomination I'd vote for them without question.

But I think both men need to experience another election, and get some stuff done, before they go looking at a national ticket.

[Clark2008]

34. I don't think "elective" experience matters all that much, but

Edwards doesn't have a lot of experience in fields that would give him a solid background to deal with the issues a president faces.

I'm sure he did some good work as a personal injury attorney, but, I'm sorry - I don't see how that translates into issues, such as foreign policy, national security, tax reform and other weighty issues a president deals with (which is why Bush 43 is such a colossal failure).

[upi402]

2. I didn't like that particular YT show

I thought they were slipped some Kool Aid or something. Usually they're great. But they had me thinking there was a stubborn Republican root that needs to be turned to mulch.

[XOKCowboy]

7. Young Turks

In my mind the jury's still out on their show. It's better than Springer but that's not much of a recommendation. It was the same show that they dissed Al Sharpton. That was interesting. When they got to who was in or out for president in '08, it got strange.

[Rhiannon12866]

3. I would vote for him, as well. He's really stepped up to the plate, starting during the campaign

and has really grown since 2004, has done some wonderful work. IMHO, his speech during the 2004 convention was the best. BTW, he's going to be on Letterman on Friday, promoting his new book. You might want to tune in. :-) I'm not counting him out...:D

[SPKrazy]

49. I Supported Edwards

After Clark dropped out (another Arkansan Mr. Clark)

I thought he was better than Kerry (donning flame suit) mostly in that he is more charismatic, and his "two Americas" speech resonated with me.

His downside is he's a millionaire trial lawyer, and that is hard to overcome. (IMO)

But like I said, he's got that charisma (not quite Bill Clintonesque but he's got it!)

peace

[Nite Owl]

4. Why? I got no idea

I like John Edwards, he is a good, decent person with the experience of the campaign trail. He's been out of DC for a few years and that in itself is a plus, he's been with real people. I don't know if he has my vote but he should have a chance if he wants it.

[jobycom]

6. Hypothetically or realistically?

Hypothetically, this is a democracy and he has as much chance as anyone else.

Realistically, he's a one term former senator who has won exactly one election in his life, who flip-flopped on the war, and who comes from the South, which means that his base in the primaries will be a part of the country we can't win. And he's a lousy debater and comes across as phony from time to time. I like the guy, I like his heart, I love his accent, and he has a lot to say, so I hope he is involved in the election. But he's a long way from my first choice, and franky, I'd be stunned if he won more than two states in the whole primary. Let me restate that--I'd be stunned if he won one state in the whole primary. Not upset, just surprised.

But I've been surprised before. It's his job to prove the "experts" (and me, who is far from an expert) wrong. I won't complain if he does.

[dysfunctional press]

8. the dlc and bilderberger connections REALLY bother me...

plus, he's a one term senator, and from the south- i'm really tired of presidents with southern accents.

[Rhiannon12866]

9. Bush*, Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter?

:shrug:

[dysfunctional press]

14. the past 14 years have been pretty twangy...

and i'd like not to hear it next time around.

after all, i thought we were supposed to have won that war.

[Rhiannon12866]

26. Well, I got to see and hear Bill Clinton in person last week.

It made me remember how it could be. And I wouldn't complain if we could have 14 more years of him. :-)

[dysfunctional press]

44. i have a long list of problems with clinton

that starts with welfare "reform" and the telecom act of 1994.

[Apollo11]

33. Please withdrawl your remark

Last time I checked - there are 50 States in the Union.

Any citizen can run for the Presidency ...

Plus - Al Gore has a Tennessee accent !!! B-)

[SPKrazy]

50. That's A Really Disparaging Remark About The South

"we" were supposed to have won that war?

who is "we"?

I don't know anyone that is alive today that was alive then.

I wouldn't support a war like that and don't know many that would (except maybe the white supremacists that have a compound up the road from here, you know, the ones that harbored Tim McVeigh at Elohim City)

So get off this region bashing, it isn't cool.

We talk slow because it is so fricking hot down here in the summer if you talk fast it makes you sweat, so you learn to move and talk slow.

Actually, there are a wide variety of dialects in the south, and all regions have accents. That makes us all unique in our regions, but tied together by the unity that came from conflict and the realization that united we stand and divided we fall.

As a liberal southerner I invite y'all to come on down.

I happen to live in Arkansas which has a newly elected Democratic governor, lt. governor, attorney general, majority in state legislature, 2 Dem US senators, all but 1 congressman Dem

Pretty solidly BLUE!

Can your state say that?

[dysfunctional press]

53. thank-you, no.

been too the south too many times already- 5 seperate times- 7 if you count d.c...do NOT like it one iota of a bit.

and yes, my state is pretty solidly blue- except for the southern portion...naturally.

[saracat]

12. And yet everyone talks about Obama and he isn't even a one term Senator!

[dysfunctional press]

42. i have the same opinion of obama- not enough experience.

plus- i think that he's originally from southern illinois

[Clark2008]

36. And I'm really tired of those with Northern accents having their

shorts handed to them because they sound too elite for the Heartland to think they care about them.

:eyes:

[fhqwhgads]

41. i think we'd better get used to it...

...somehow i feel like we'll be forced to nominate a southerner, and the republicans will be forced to nominate a non-southerner in order to have a chance. maybe i'm wrong about that, i don't know. i don't believe, though, that john edwards has the experience to be president. i think mike easley is term-limited, so why not edwards run for governor of north carolina for a term before making a presidential run?

our biggest problem is that the potential candidates with any name recognition right now are guys seen as retreads (even if i disagree) and hillary clinton (who may as well change her middle name to "electoral disaster"), whereas the 'thugs have mccain and giuliani, who have huge name recognition and high, if undeserved, approval ratings.

depending on who the 'thugs nominate, i'd almost think about punting on 2008 (i just don't see any way of beating john mccain) and concentrate more on increasing our majority in congress. let speaker pelosi run things with an iron fist and make the republican president irrelevant.

[liberalpragmatist]

10. I don't think he should

Although if Obama runs, I don't see how he gets the nod.

But if Obama DOESN'T run, Edwards has to be considered the likely non-Hillary candidate, with an excellent chance of upsetting her in the primaries.

Edwards is polling in the 10-15% range in national polls. He is the only candidate in current polls to poll competitively (or even ahead) or Giuliani and McCain. He is leading early polls in Iowa, in Nevada (where there will be a post-Iowa/pre-NH caucus), and in South Carolina.

Moreover, with Warner and Feingold out, Edwards will get much of Warner's support from Southerners and moderates (Wes Clark will probably get some too) and will pick up many (though not all) of Feingold's supporters, given that he has unequivocally reneged on his war vote and is pushing a very progressive economic agenda.

He should not be dismissed. My dream ticket is Edwards/Obama '08, which I'm really pumped for, although their lack of experience would give me pause.

[kiahzero]

11. Polls in 2006 don't mean a whole lot for 2008.

Right now it's all name recognition. Your post smacks of wishful thinking.

[liberalpragmatist]

16. Yes, I know a lot of that is name recognition

My point is that he starts with plenty of residual goodwill. He has a base of support on which he can build. THAT is not insignificant.

Also, what is important in his polled matchups with Giuliani and McCain are that his favorability ratings are good to begin with. That will change, but it's an important contrast with, say, Hillary, Kerry, and Gore, who have high unfavorability ratings that are unlikely to subside. They start out with a huge handicap which Edwards doesn't have.

[whirlygigspin]

13. is the wind blowing?

John Edwards? Haven't seen him since the last election cycle.

Sorta like a political groundhog.

Where's the leadership quality in that?

not dissing, just saying.

[liberalpragmatist]

17. Well...

... he's heading the UNC Center on Poverty, has travelled across the country to campaign and lobby for minimum wage increases and living wage ordinances. He's campaigned strenuously for Democratic congressional candidates (he was here in Missouri for Claire McCaskill, and he campaigned a lot for Heath Schuler in NC, as well as campaigning for Ned Lamont and calling on Lieberman to withdraw from the race).

He's also written a book (non-political) and taken care of his wife, who just recovered from breast cancer.

He's also been visiting Iowa an awful lot, travelled to Uganda with an aid group to focus attention and bring money to help with the refugee and political crisis going on there.

[Alexander]

18. Edwards showed up for Lamont ONCE, was asked back and never returned.

Somewhere in GD or GD: Politics there's a thread which has the diary of someone who worked for Lamont. The picture painted of Edwards was not very flattering - he didn't mention Lieberman at all in his ONE speech he gave, he was asked to return and promised to do so, and then never showed up again.

[liberalpragmatist]

19. Edwards DID Call on Joe to drop out

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2006/11/14/122820/27/272#272

[Alexander]

22. Yet he could only be bothered to show up once?

It's not like Edwards has a job now or anything. And he's sitting on tons of money, some of which Lamont would've been happy to receive, I'm sure.

This kind of lukewarm support hurt Ned's chances.

[unc70]

25. Actually, he does have a job -- at UNC Chapel Hill

Head of UNC Poverty center (under the Law School). I believe it is considered a half-time position.

His remaining time was apparently tightly scheduled and spread around the country supporting candidates and minimum wage initiatives. I think he was also in Africa a few weeks back.

[The Straight Story]

23. Let em all run, the voters will sort em out. I back each dem wanting to run

Gives us more choices. The people will speak and we will have our candidate.

Bitch about each one all we want - they are still better than any repug running.

I'll take a half assed dem any day over a fully assed repug :)

[blm]

35. That's how I feel. If they can add to the debate and go on to dominate those debates

then they will emerge as the strongest nominee - if they can't, well, at least they tried and and added to the overall debate.

[dmosh42]

24. Shouldn't be counted out

I supported Edwards in '04 with a donation leading to the primaries. He's the only one, besides Kucinich, to speak on 'working man' issues and problems. He gets good union support, but I think his problem is that he lacks some of that 'attack dog' mentality that might be needed in campaigns against these 'Rove' Repubs. I think if you're not one of the heavyweights in the party, you have to gamble a little, and get your positions known. Clinton came out of nowhere by stating his positions pretty well, and he could convince you that he was right.

[LWolf]

27. Because I'd rather nominate someone else, lol.

Outside of that, because many people would like to see more than one senate term under his belt before putting him in the WH.

[Mass]

28. He should not. I would not vote for him, but nobody should be counted out.

This is just plain silliness to count people out at this point.

[FrenchieCat]

29. Edwards is very, very serious about running again, so he should not

be counted out. However, I would not vote for him because he co-sponsored BOTH the Patriot Act and Lieberman's Iraq War Resolution, and voted for them besides (but I don't even know why he would co-sponsor these bills :shrug: but that's too much for me). I understand that he has remade his image to be the champion for the poor, but I'm just not sure how "sincere" this is, as opposed to something for him to tout as his "thing" while he promotes himself all around the country, which he has been doing non-stop.

I saw him on Charlie Rose tonight hawking his new Coffee Table Picture Books about famous folks houses (each wrote an essay on what home meant to them as they were growing up). He actually edited the book, cause there was nothing for him to write. Any ways, now he's on a Book tour a la Obama and is giving the proceeds of the book sales to charity (actually he's campaigning, not trying to make money, just like his wife was campaigning last month with her new book) which is great PR and a smart way to show up all over the media for free publicity (so I can't really knock it cause it works). He mentioned that he went to China last week twice while on Rose. Mentioned that he was in Uganda as well. Guess he's boning up his National Security Bonafides. He answers questions pretty simplistically, as though he doesn't really have a whole lot of answers....but he sure looks good! Gotta give it to him.

He's gone to Iowa (he's been hanging out at all the places that the poor are, he said, in Iowa) and New Hampshire and SC and Nevada, all 1st primary states too many times to count since 2004 (he couldn't even give the number of times when Charlie Rose asked him)....so he's definitely running.

He may end up being our suprise winner considering the only other two people that the media will give the time of day to are a Woman who's husband is the former President (and who they have been pushing since 2001), and a Black good looking and intelligent young man who's name is Barack Hussein Obama (and is enjoying a media frenzy as they give him more coverage than he could know what to do with --Oprah is really really ridiculously powerful, it would appear).... So those not wanting to choose between a woman or a minority can opt for the clean cut white guy with the cute kids who talks about poverty and has an awesome PR machine and a media that just loves him.

Nuff said.

I'd rather take Obama, if those are my three choices. At least he understood that the war wasn't something we should have gone into. Edwards just recently got the clue. I don't need a leadership from the rear.

HOwever, I will close by saying that John Edwards may get his wish......and he will have earned it just based on sheer determination of his really, really good PR machine. The man is a born politician and self promoter (but not in that gross Biden way) who knows how to get what he wants thus far....and that's not really a bad thing for a politician, no matter if I don't really care for him. Just hope the media doesn't turn on him at the 11th hour.

[Vinca]

30. I love Edwards - don't count him out.

Why should the criteria be elected office? Maybe that's what's gotten us into the mess we're in. I'd like a compassionate leader who knows when he refuses to sign a trade agreement he's saving jobs. A leader who wouldn't veto universal health care. A leader who wasn't born to wealth and knows life in the real world. Edwards is that leader.

[mmonk]

31. He shouldn't be counted out.

People are just positioning for their heroes.

[FlaGranny]

32. I saw him on Jon Stewart's show last night.

He IS very appealing and would probably get votes on that alone, but we don't decide who runs. The candidates do. We get to decide which one to vote for in the primaries. I'll give them all my permission to run - like they really care what I think. There are those I hope will stay out of the fray, but I doubt that makes a bit of difference to them. It should be an interesting couple of years.

[Clark2008]

37. See - I just don't get this "appealing" thing, at all.

I think he sounds like a snake-oil salesman. Slick and ungenuine.

And I'm from the South.

[FlaGranny]

45. Very engaging

smile and quite good looking. He's not my choice, but he has an "appeal" IMHO. I don't know what to make of the "slickness," though. Some of our candidates get trashed because they are not slick enough, Kerry, Gore, etc. Oh that we could come up with a real progressive with the style of Bill Clinton.

[DixieBlue]

46. Really? I don't get that at all.

Edwards strikes me, and always has, as a genuine fellow. I saw him on the Daily Show last night and was reminded of how much I like him. I like that he's pushing the minimum wage and poverty issues; these seem to be real passions.

I'd like to see him run in the primary ... I think he'd bring a lot of focus on poverty issues in this country. Whether I'd vote for him depends who all's in the field. I'm a bit of a Clarkie, so we'll just have to wait and see.

[youthere]

48. I agree with you..

I never understood the Edwards appeal..I'm from southeastern Iowa..does that count?

[1932]

39. Wes Clark Jr's best friend runs that show. That's why they want to count him out.

The guy who runs the show - Mankiewicz - is the guy Clark Jr said in a Daily Kos post told him the highly improbable story about Edwards showing up at TMC to talk about his favorite movie without knowing what it was, but had prepared comments about it.

This is the show on which Clark Jr went on a foul-mouthed tirade about democrats and on which he said that the people he met on the campaign trail were asses, or something like that.

[bigwillq]

40. I like Edwards.

Right now, he would be my pick.

Edwards/Obama 2008! :bounce:

But talk to me in about six months or so and I could be singing a different tune.

[helderheid]

43. I'd be thrilled to support Edwards - Gore is my #1 pick but I love Edwards too

[Lex]

47. Edwards will not be counted out in 2008

despite whoever these Young Turks are. Radio guys don't get to decide.

[txindy]

51. He shouldn't be counted out, at all. I really like him.

My problem is too many good choices. Not that I truly mind that. It's better than the reverse.

:patriot:

[Bozita]

52. Thom Hartmann today: "I'd endorse Edwards; work for him too."

Thom called Edwards one of America's great populists.

His warmth, sincerity, and humor quickly win over any town hall type of gathering.

[upi402]

54. I was glad to hear that!

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[XOKCowboy]

55. I agree with that..

Glad to hear that Thom agrees also.

[VOX]

56. Edwards should not be counted out. He's planning on being a candidate....

And, unless he fares poorly in the primaries in 2008 he should be considered a viable candidate.

He's got a lot going for him. :thumbsup: