Would you vote for John Edwards to be the Demo candidate in 2008?

[Enquiringkitty]

I see on his web site, he has buttons and T-shirts already for sale which says"Edwards 2008" in addition to bumper stickers saying "Don't Blame Me, I Didn't Vote For Him". So I assume he plans to run again in 2008. There will probably be many candidates running to be the Demo nominee for president. Would you vote for him or would you like someone else?
If so who and why do you like him better than Edwards? I am trying to see who I might be looking at in 2008 so I can watch them now.

[shraby]

1. Throw Russ Feingold into the mix.

He and Edwards look good to me.

[pauliedee]

38. John Kerry is the strongest candidate in either party

No...I would vote for John Kerry over both of them...He's twice as strong.

Edwards hurt campaign by ignoring voters at restaurants. Was cordoned with family. Bypassed crowds at bus stops in Arkansas...
Edward's wife was a better campaigner than he was.

Instead of helping win the south, he was giving it away with dumb moves like that. The media ran with that one ...

[leyton]

62. Good lord, that had nothing to do with the end result.

Sorry, but Kerry and Edwards both made gaffes but Kerry's were far worse. "Global leadership test"? "I voted for the bill before I voted against it?" Please, the RW had a field day with both of those many times over. That is far worse than one piddly mistake at a restaurant.

[nickshepDEM]

2. Im looking at alot of potential candidates right now and

John Edwards is definitley one of them.

[pauliedee]

39. Kerry a better choice and a GREAT leader

I would vote for John Kerry...He's twice as strong.

Edwards hurt campaign by ignoring voters at restaurants. Was cordoned with family. Bypassed crowds at bus stops in Arkansas...

Instead of helping win the south, he was giving it away with dumb moves like that. The media ran with that one ...

Still like him ....maybe intel director or ambassador to UN...
:dem:

[SeanQuinn]

3. Well, what has he done for the last four years?

Hypothetical freeper question.

Poli Sci professor, UNC.

[independentchristian]

80. Shortsighted

The biggest issue come 2008 will be "poverty" and economic hardships.

Don't think so?

Oil will be between $80 and $100 per barrel before '08, and people in this country are going to be severely struggling financially.

Edwards isn't an idiot.

He's ahead of the game with this Center on Poverty, Work, and Opportunity. He could gain a lot of valuable information on a lot of subjects, because those 3 topics touch a lot of different issues.

[JI7]

4. i will vote for whichever Democrat ends up being the Nominee in 2008

as for the Primary i really love Kerry but i'm thinking i might distance myself from the Democratic Primary or at least not get involved in arguments with other Democrats. whoever i support i might do some volunteer work.

but what i'm seriously thinking of doing is infiltrating the Republican Primary and causing fights between their candidates.

[Enquiringkitty]

8. That's a good idea. I don't know if I could pull it off. They say

such outrageous things, I might not be able to keep my cool. But, Divide and conquer is a good ploy!

[pauliedee]

41. I got John Kerry's back in 2008!!!

Glad you'll infiltrate....me too...Domcratic Roves :toast:

[AP]

5. Do you have a link for those tshirts and buttons?

I think you're mistaken about that.

[Enquiringkitty]

9. Yes I do. Check out the whole site. "One America"

http://www.cafepress.com/beatbushgear/456224

[AP]

11. That site is just some poster's cafepress store. Has nothing to do with...

Edwards.

That's like saying Pedro is running for president because of this:


http://www.cafepress.com/cp/get_latest_product_view.aspx?showBleed=false&ProductNo=18616122&pr=F

[Enquiringkitty]

13. No it isn't.....Look.

http://johnedwards.meetup.com/

Is the link on this web page not sanctioned by Edwards?

[AP]

15. The meetups are not affiliated with OneAmerica. Those are just...

...private citizens doing their thing.

And did you look at that cafeshop's home page: http://www.cafepress.com/beatbushgear

Why would OneAmerica be selling Hillary and Obama for president gear alongside Edwards gear?

[Enquiringkitty]

16. Oh1 I got all hopeful there....lol

[NoPasaran]

36. Don't knock Pedro

He's for universal healthcare, a balanced budget and didn't get hoodwinked into voting for IWR!

[AP]

52. Pedro speaks softly, but he's got two mean-looking cousins with...

...a cool ride.

[XemaSab]

77. Pedro's also from

the south, can pull a lot of southern votes.

[In Truth We Trust]

6. NO! with all due respect we need PAPER ballots and HAND counts!

and he hasn't said A SINGLE WORD about that! He also played the DLC game and voted for the Iraq war. As a resident of NC I was not impressed with his tenure as a US Senator. I will give him kudo's for his "two America's" populist style campaign however I think it either peaked too early or it was too often repeated verbatim giving it a sense of a script or perhaps seeming too contrived.

If he were wise and REALLY wanted to win in 08 he should contact me and I'll get him elected. Seriously though if he really did want to get elected I believe his best chance would be to becomt THE go to voice on electoral reform and advocate paper ballots and hand counts as well as articulating his campaign rhetoric of speaking to the 40 million people without healthcare, jobs etc.

I was extremely disapointed in both he and Mr. Kerry's lack of fight after the fraWd of Nov. 2nd

I would vote for his lovely wife in a heartbeat though.

edit for typo

[AmericanDream]

27. He did speak out

He spoke out in his first big speech at NH about election reform... but you are being politically naive if you believe he can win by advocating election reform at this point. If he starts doing that, he will be painted as a loser who can't deal with the reality (regardless of whether its the reality or not)... as a politician, he is playing the right cards currently. He has been one of the toughest critics of bush out there... very vocally exposing bush's pro-wealth mindset, defending social security, and speaking up for core dem values. I think its sad that here in our party, we look at such petty things and hold them against good candidates... who else is talking about voting reform? I know boxer and clinton introduced a reform... but only boxer talked about it to the press. For clinton, it was just a measure that she could tout in her primary bid... I don't think she had her heart behind it or else she would tried to get it some publicity by talking about it in public and bringing it up in the media.

As for his lack of fight after November 2... many campaign staff members have already talked about how edwards was hell bent on not conceding until every vote was counted. Man, he was also the one who wanted to fight back the swift boat vets on the day after the ads came out. Kerry didn't take either of those pieces of advice and edwards had little authority. I think people forget that it was kerry's campaign not edwards. Edwards has good political instincts... kerry should've listened. But alas, I think we need to look at real virtues of all the candidates rather than handpick certain issues that are not policy related and munch on them.

As for elizabeth edwards... I like the woman, but why would you vote for her and not John Edwards? I haven't seen her talk about anything differently than her husband. She would be a good first lady though.

[In Truth We Trust]

31. I don't have time to elaborate but I do want to respond by saying

simply that I feel voting according to PRINCIPLE is not being politically naive. It is being principled and true to beliefs. Electoral integrity is the most important issue of our time because without honest elections nothing else can be changed IMHO.

After Nov. 2 I swore of political pragmatism and nuanced positions. Either you represent integrity or you don't. Either you represent the peoples will and intelligent democratic policy or you don't.

The Iraq war resolution vote by Mr. Edwards was a pandering and non principled vote. His silence from Nov. third on (after no longer being a "second fiddle" and thus subordinate) is deafening to me. To wait until after Noiv. 3rd, Dec. 12th, and Jan. 6th was wrong. He had the opportunity to shine a spotlight on Ohio and multitude other states but deliberately chose not to. He waited til a February New Hamphire chicken dinner date to say anything. I am sorry but I maintain that he would not look like a sore loser if he articulated the TRUTH and took a PRINCIPLED positon. People are not that naive when it comes to understanding a politicians fiber. In fact I would further postulate that it is naive to succumb to pandering to the MSM dynamic of defining debate. In other words I would suggest that if he wants to be successful in 08 then he should immediately take to the pulpit of populist change and call for electoral change (paper ballots and hand counts), healthcare, Iraq, media reform, corporate crime and responsibility, and most importantly I truly believe he and all pols with a voice should demand impeachment proceedings now.

[AmericanDream]

92. Okay check this out

He was in Kansas a couple of days ago as many here know and addressed the Kansas dems and he said the following:

"We must also ensure that democracy remains strong here. We have work to do. It is time to move past these days of division where we have “vote challengers” and “vote protectors”—and launch a historic effort to ensure more participation and confidence in our elections. It is an outrage that anyone in America—America—would have any reason to doubt their vote.

So in this century, let’s finally build the best that money can buy here in America. So that when we elect the next leader of the free world, every American will have confidence in their vote and that their vote was counted."

I would like to add that his iraq vote was not pandering... he believed in it and so did many others, including a majority of the country... because the president scared the s$it out of all congressmen. Yes, the congress failed to do its job... it should've investigated more thoroughly and part of the problem is that the congress doesn't get the same intelligence as the President. They purely relied on the briefings by the white house... and that was a failure at their part. Additionally, one needs to read the resolution and understand that the vote required the president to use the war as a LAST resort, which he certainly did not.

Anyway, I also have to disagree with paper ballots... when developing countries like India, where half the population is illiterate, can have fair and successful elections through computers and machines... then why should we give up on technology? What we DO need to do is ... end the corruption that has rigged our elections... let's not have governors of states managing the data in/out of these computers, lets have "fair" elections by reforming elections and not just the tools used for elections... let's fix it, not give up on it. And who says that hand recounts cannot be messed with? Nothing will work until the system is reformed and corruption-free.

And my point of you being politically naive was not that you shouldn't vote on principle... I think edwards is a very principled man... but instead, I was trying to express that politicians also have to be politically savvy... he is not a senator right now and he can't initiate any legislation, but he's the only one actually talking about it right now with conviction ... however, have we seen the media quote any of edwards' speeches where he has quite strongly outlined dems' values, including election reform? No, and when I talked about him being deemed as a "loser" ... I meant "by the media"... not by the people. And, you have to understand the power of the media... they destroyed kerry with their unfair coverage of all the swift boat crap on kerry... they are ready to twist and play with people's words and that's where edwards and any other politician has to be careful.

From your post I understand you are not swayed by the media... but the majority of the country IS... many of the people out there are influenced by the media pundits' interpretation of things. So, while its important to stand up for principles, which he has been doing since the election, it is equally important to not give the media any fodder for criticizm or spinning

[Mark E. Smith]

7. If Edwards Is The Democratic Nominee

..I will vote for him.

[Dagaz]

10. I assume you are asking about the primary

He's a lightweight as we saw in the last election. Not yet sure who will run but there will be stronger candidates. I think Gore could do well in Iowa and NH and maybe make a run.

[Enquiringkitty]

12. Well, Bush pulled off this "good-ole-boy-" thing and fooled everybody

I was just wondering if those who voted for Bush thinking he was a down to earth guy like them would turn to Edwards after they turn out to be soooo wrong about Bush. You know....some of the NASCAR crowd.

[independentchristian]

82. If he's a lightweight...

...then what are Clark, Kucinich and Dean?

He did better than each one of them did, and based on the fact that he didn't opt out of public financing, he did better than Kerry who promised not to and did anyway in order to win.

[AntiCoup2K4]

14. We all know that Senators can't win

So now that John Boy has "retired" from the Senate, his chances probably depend on what he does for the next 3 years. When are the governors seats open in North or South Carolina? Edwards could probably run for either one, being born in SC and later residing in NC.

[Enquiringkitty]

17. I wonder why governors do so well. Is a state really good experience

for prez?

[AP]

19. Clinton says that to win an national election people need a good idea of

for what you stand. He said that Senators aren't associated with a set of policy because they're always reacting to other people's legislation.

He said governors can sheppard a coherent set of policies which set out, in people's minds, and policy persona.

The problems for senators, then, is not that it's impossible for them to establish policy personas. The challenge is to find some way to do that.

Look at Kennedy. Do you think people had any problem figuring out what he stood for? Nope. He won against an established persona (but it was close).

Did people have a problem figuring out what Lincoln or Eisenhower stood for? Nope. They weren't governors or senators.

I'd say people weren't so sure what Bradley was all about. And Gore let Bush define him.

Gary Hart would have made a great candidate. He was a senator. Dukakis was a governor, but what he stood for wasn't so appealing to voters.

What Edwards is doing right now is establishing what he stands for.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

56. Senators do have a long road to hoe.

And twisted voting records to defend. There's a reason it's difficult to name the last Senator to be elected President.

[AP]

57. But if you work your way back to Kennedy, you can see why some fail

and some win.

The ones who establish a clear persona win. People knew what Kennedy stood for...

[pauliedee]

43. Senators CAN win

Senator Kerry will win in 2008....Better foreign policy experience than governors

[leyton]

64. Nah, there's no governorship in store for him.

North Carolinians are not going to elect the guy governor. I like the guy, but a lot of North Carolinian's don't. Count on a current member of the State Council, like the state AG, being nominated and winning handily. Besides, the position is up in 2008.

[The Zanti Regent]

18. NO!

Edwards had his chance and he blew it

[AP]

20. So, if he declined Kerry's offer for the VP spot, you'd consider him?

How does that make sense?

[The Zanti Regent]

22. Never!

Bonesman Kerry and Bilderberger John are two peas in the same pod. Both of them voted to send my son, my only child, to die.

Both of them give Bush everything he wants. Both of them laid down and died for Bush.

No thanks, I'll support Clark, Kucinich, Warner, Boxer, Durbin or Rendell.

[AP]

24. So your problem isn't that he had his chance and failed?

It's that you didn't like his IWR vote.

What makes you think Warner would have voted differently or even Clark?

And here's what Boxer said about that vote:

In defense of colleagues who voted for the resolution, Boxer said that Democrats forced the President to go through several channels before they voted to approve, and that the final resolution was drawn narrowly.

“The Democrats said, ‘Go to the U.N.’ and went to the U.N.” she said. “I also again believe that he wasn’t going to come to the Senate or the House. He was going to bypass us and say, ‘I don’t need to come here — they gave me this power through the resolutions back in ‘91’”

Boxer charged the Bush administration with having nefarious motives for seeking the resolution. “The whole thing was brought up because of politics,” she said. “It was all part of the grand plan by the Bush administration to get the Senate.”

http://www.hlrecord.org/news/2002/10/24/News/Senator.Boxer.Defends.Vote.On.Iraq.Resolution-304772.shtml

You see that part in bold? She's telling Democrats like you not to do what you're doing.

[The Zanti Regent]

30. All I got out of the 2004 ticket was a dead son.

my only child.

No way in hell will I vote for such a phony as Edwards who talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk.

[AP]

32. Why doesnt't the buck stop on Bush's desk for you?

And why do Dems consider Gulf of Tonkin supporters like Gore Sr, Fulbright, McGovern, and McCarthy anti-war, but you've written Edwards and Kerry off as pro-war when it's so obvious, as Boxer points out, that the IWR was political move by Bush to get people like you to make sure the buck doesn't stop on his desk?

[AP]

34. John Edwards might be the best chance the Democrats have of winning...

...and ending imperialst wars that kill other people's sons.

These are not the words of a war monger:

JENNINGS: I'd like to continue in this vein a little, if I may.

Senator Edwards, many people, I think, believe that the greatest security threat to the United States in the 21st century is the possible confrontation between the West and Islam.

Now, I know and take for granted, having heard you before, that you respect Islam. But could you take a minute to tell us what you know about the practice of Islam that would reassure Muslims throughout the world who will be listening to you that President Edwards understands their religion and how you might use that knowledge to avoid a confrontation, which, as Tom alluded earlier, might indeed end up sending sons and daughters from New Hampshire to war.

EDWARDS: Well, I have been in these parts of the world. I have been in Pakistan, met with President Musharraf, been in Afghanistan, met with then interim chairman — interim head of the government Karzai. I have met with other Islamic leaders around the world, discussed with them the problems that their country and their people face.

I would never claim to be an expert on Islam. I am not. But I do believe that Islam, as in a lot of other faiths that we as a nation embrace and lift up, that I have shown respect for faiths that are different than mine my entire life. I think I do understand the tragedy of the day-to-day lives of people who live in Arab countries, who live lives of hopelessness and despair.

I think that contributes to the animosity that they feel toward the United States.

And part of our ongoing vision — my ongoing vision for America includes getting at the root causes of that animosity toward the United States, which means being able to communicate, not just with the leadership, for example, in Saudi Arabia, but being able to communicate directly with the people...

JENNINGS: Do you think, Senator...

EDWARDS: ... to express...

JENNINGS: Do you think that we suffer and will suffer at the policy level because we do not know enough about the practice of Islam?

EDWARDS: I think we have a responsibility when we deal with the leadership of these countries. Our relationships, Peter, have been at the leadership level. And we see the results of that. We have ongoing relationship with the Saudi royals, with President Musharraf, with Chairman Karzai. We have relationships with the leaders of these Islamic countries.

The problem is, we have no relationship with the people. And not only do we have no relationship with the people, it's absolutely clear that they feel great animosity toward the United States. We need to, first, be able to communicate directly with the people.

Second, find opportunities. For example, President Musharraf said to me when I met with him: They desperately needed a public school system as an alternative to the religious schools, where their kids are taught to hate Americans.

We need to take advantage of the opportunities available to us and our allies, to reach out, not just to the leaders of these countries for our own purposes, but also to develop a relationship for the people themselves so that they understand what Americans care about and that we actually care about the peace and prosperity of the entire world.

[The Zanti Regent]

61. Bilderberger John talks the talk, but don't walk the walk.

All I got from Bilderberger John was a DEAD SON

I have NO OTHER CHILDREN

NOTHING that sack of hot air says will get me to forget that HE GAVE BUSH A BLANK CHECK TO KILL MY SON.

No wonder he's a good trial lawyer, he loves that bullshitting. Meanwhile he lives in his mansion with his family and his fat Swiss bank account and is totally ignorant of those like me who struggle from paycheck to paycheck and now have nothing left; nothing to pass down to a child that was killed and taken away from me forever.

NOTHING you can say will make me forgive Edwards. NOTHING!

[pauliedee]

44. Kerry still fighting hard for us

That's false, Kerry still fighting hard for us. He voted against Rice, Abu Gonzales and has been in Boy George's facc.

He's still the one the repugs fear. Igot hsi back in 2008.
:dem:

[The Zanti Regent]

63. Did Kerry fight for my son's life?

NO HE DID NOT.

Bonesman John made the deal as outlined by Sherman Skolnick at http://www.skolnicksreport.com/

Bonesman John made the deal to guarantee the election of his fellow Bonesman GW Asshole.

Bonesman John let the so-called Swift Boat Veterans destroy him, it was all part of the Bonesmen's plan.

and now my son, my only child is dead...

[pauliedee]

45. Kerry still fighting hard for us

That's false, Kerry still fighting hard for us. He voted against Rice, Abu Gonzales and has been in Boy George's facc.

He's still the one the repugs fear. I got his back in 2008.
:dem:

[pauliedee]

46. Kerry still fighting hard for us

That's false, Kerry still fighting hard for us. He voted against Rice, Abu Gonzales and has been in Boy George's facc.

He's still the one the repugs fear. I got his back in 2008.
:dem:

[AmericanDream]

21. What chance?

I would gladly vote for him! The guy can really rock a party if he is talking about his own beliefs and plans... I didn't feel the same passion when he was advocating kerry's ideas. I think he is a solid candidate, but its a long time for '08.

[Clark2008]

23. Self-delete

I'm glad he doesn't already have them up on his website.

I certainly wasn't going to give him a hit to go there and see.

Thanks other bloggers for making it clear that it was a fan site.

[ZootSuitGringo]

25. Let me think....

NO!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

26. No. No more 2 faced pro-war Democrats.

[housewolf]

28. I don't know... ask me again in mid-2007

Who knows what the choices will be by that time?

[The Zanti Regent]

29. John Edwards allowed Bush to kill my son, my only child.

He helped put my 19 year old son in a VA Cemetery.

I wouldn't give Edwards the time of day.

[faithfulcitizen]

42. I'm so sorry...

I don't know what to say. I can't imagine you would.

[Roland99]

33. No

[demwing]

35. The problem I have with Edwards in 2008

is the problem I had with Edwards in 2004.

He doesn't yet have enough experience to run the country, and I don't see him doing anything to work beyond that.

He's a likeable candidate with apolished image, but not enough substance to support package.

What will Edwards do when/if he's faced with a Cuban Missile Crisis, or a 9/11?

We haven't seen him tempered by the fire of extreme difficulty. His short term in the Senate is not enough, IMO. Let him win the Governor's seat in his home state, and hold it for one or more terms, or something.

Anything.

[AP]

53. Cuban missile crisis: what was experience worth? JFK probably had less

experience than anyone else in his cabinet, yet he was the only one in the room who didn't want to start a war on Cuba.

It's about values, not experience.

[demwing]

58. It's about strength of character, not values

We were lucky JFK had character.

I wouldn't want to rely on luck again. I want a candidate that has had a chance to prove the strength of his or her character.

Edwards, while a promissing face for the future, has not yet had that chance.

If you want a "values" candidate, there are plenty of Republicans to vote for. I want more than "values." I want strength of character, and I only see that in the Democratic party, and even then, much less frequently than I would like.

[demwing]

59. Strength of Character...

I see Howard Dean, Wes Clark, and John Kerry as the candidates from 2004 that had it.

Who has shown that they have it now? Who else can run in 2008 on his or her character?

Al Gore and Barbara Boxer come to mind. Perhaps Russ Feingold.

???

[ZootSuitGringo]

68. I think that JFK was a war hero and wrote a book about it

I don't think that Edwards compares with JFK. Sorry to disappoint you.

[Leilani]

84. JFK had traveled the world as the son

of the American Ambassador to England, he met world leaders, he attended the London School of Economics.

Then he went to war, saved his crewmates, & was hurt severely.

He served several terms in the House, & I believe was beyond his first term in the Senate when he ran for Prez.

He also wrote a book, "While England Slept" which was a discussion of world foreign policy.

No comparison, none at all.

[pauliedee]

37. John Kerry is the strongest candidate in either party

No...I would vote for John Kerry...He's twice as strong.

Edward's wife was a better campaigner than he was. Edwards hurt campaign by ignoring voters at restaurants. Was cordoned with family. Bypassed crowds at bus stops in Arkansas...

Instead of helping win the south, he was giving it away with dumb moves like that. The media ran with that one ...
:spank:

Edwards could be good ambassador to UN or intelligence director... something like that. :dem:

[The Zanti Regent]

65. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.

The only good thing I can tell Mr. Ketchup is that he cannot kill any more of my children, I have none left alive.

Kerry burned me twice. First when he gave his Bonesman pal a blank check and second when he threw the election.

[leyton]

66. Please, post that several more times.

Seriously, I think once is enough per thread.

[faithfulcitizen]

40. no, i agree with Kerry actually...

...'what makes him think he can be president?'

[Crunchy Frog]

89. Hey, I agreed with Kerry

when he guessed that Edwards was still in diapers when he got back from Vietnam.

[kentuck]

47. Edwards is stronger than Kerry..

in my opinion.

[pauliedee]

49. John Kerry has more grit and leadership fro 2008

I respect Edwards but he was too soft. His resume is too short. Kerry has the grit and toughness that the repugs fear.

Kerry 2008 all the way!

:dem:

[pauliedee]

50. John Kerry has more grit and leadership fro 2008

I respect Edwards but he was too soft. His resume is too short. Kerry has the grit and toughness that the repugs fear.

Kerry 2008 all the way!

:dem:

[AmericanDream]

74. I beg to differ

Please, tell me you are kidding. I was never sold out on kerry, but I did support him and I do not regret my decision considering Dubya was the other choice. However, I just have to say that kerry was not tough by any measure, despite his military service, which I honor. I can't believe he did not take edwards' advice to fight back the swift boat vets from the first day. While Kerry is a life-long politician, he lacks political instincts, at least for a national campaign. And, I think that is one of edwards' strength... he was virtually unknown when he started his primary campaign and yet, he went on to score some major wins including NC and SC and getting strong second place in Iowa, Wisconsin. He has great political skills... I always found his answers very measured, to the point, and believable while kerry did fumble around a lot of issues (not because he didn't know the issues, but because he speaks in elitesville... he doesn't communicate as readily to the common folks!). Though I do agree that Edwards as a Veep candidate wasn't really rocking... because he isn't cut out for that kinda political spot. Traditionally, the VP candidate is the one causing fear and dishing out controversial talking points and the presidential candidate is the one who is supposed to be the inspiring one who projects hope and optimism. And, I've to say that edwards is more like the latter than the former.

Lastly, I just have to say that Kerry just doesn't inspire me. I have heard him speak a lot and I know he's a smart guy who has been wrongly labeled a flip-flopper, but he has never inspired me or made me feel energized and all excited about President Kerry at the end of any of his speeches, except for the DNC acceptance speech (which was impressive). I would like to see Kerry as a cabinet member but really, Kerry didn't show the one thing that I like most about edwards... and that's some political guts. Maybe, its all because I long for a true-blue populist like FDR & JFK. And, I see shades of both in edwards... but let's see what kerry and edwards do in the next four years.

[Leilani]

87. Why do you post twice on everything?

I think that's against DU rules.

We can all read, & once is enough.

[kentuck]

48. Edwards is stronger than Kerry...

in my opinion. But I think Al Gore would light a fire under the Party, if he decided to run. He or Edwards either would have more of a "populist" appeal than Kerry. IMO.

[cali dem]

54. It's too early

Right now, it seems populism would be effective in unifying the dems and countering the current capitalists-gone-crazy agenda of BushCo. As much as I like John Edwards, I think it's way too early to cast even a cyber vote for Prez in '08.

[goodhue]

51. Depends who else is running.

I would certainly vote for Edwards over Kerry, Clinton or Clark.
But there are other conceivable candidates I might vote for over Edwards -- Kucinich, Feingold or Gore, to name a few.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

55. No.

He added absolutely nothing to the 2004 ticket and will be out of the game for quite a long time before the next election. He needs to get back into politics SOMEWHERE and quickly.

[Generator]

60. Sure

I like him a bunch. Unlike so many here, Kerry/Edwards have nothing but fondness in my heart. I didn't know I'd feel this way, but since I believe they both won the votes that were never counted or could be counted (that means they really were elected but can't serve because we have lying fascist pigs in charge) I would put them before any other candidate.

Plus did I mention I really like Edwards? He was my first pick before Kerry won my heart. Even though I was planning on Dean-oh you know the drill, anybody but Bush, still love happens. Sorry-Doctors and Generals..I still like my "sunshine boys". Cue the music.

[GreenArrow]

67. No

No. Hell no.

[AmericanDream]

69. Sure

He has the potential to be both a good candidate and a great president. But, boy we have a long way to go and a lot's gonna happen between now and then... let's see how he does with his center at UNC!

[Cuban_Liberal]

70. Maybe, and leaning toward 'yes'.

I liked him a lot in 2004, and I frankly think our ticket might have fared better had he been at the top, but that's just conjecture. Depending on who else is running in '08, I give a qualified 'yes, maybe'.

[LizW]

71. Yes, if he's the nominee

I like Edwards a lot. It's WAY to early to commit to a particular candidate (for me, that is), but I like Edwards and will be eagerly watching what he does to get ready for a 2008 run.

[McCamy Taylor]

Oops. Duplicate

[McCamy Taylor]

72. Yes! This man will win the presidency! Carter, Clinton and Edwards!

[McCamy Taylor]

73. Did Karl Rove WANT to make Dems untouchables with the Iraq vote?

Dont throw the babies out with the bath water. Remember when LBJ took all that heat for Viet Nam and decided not to run and we got stuck with Tricky Dick instead, and he illegally expanded the friggin war into Laos and Cambodia instead of trying to end it?

If LBJ had run again in 1968 he would have won. Maybe he would have had a tough time getting us out of Viet Nam, but at least he saw the need to do so and he sure as hell would have been better than Nixon.

Edwards sure as hell will be a million times better than Brother Jeb or any of the other candidates the GOP will field and

EDWARDS CAN WIN!

:dem:

[lojasmo]

75. Not in the primaries, not in the generals. Never. EOM

I will never vote for another senator who voted "yea" on the IWR, the patriot act, and NCLB.

[iwantmycountryback]

76. I'd certainly vote for him if he became the nominee

However, I don't know who the candidates will be in the primary. I'd definitely consider voting for Clark, Feingold, and others as well as Edwards.

[independentchristian]

78. Of course I'd vote for Edwards

I voted for him this past "Presidential" election.

If the media and the democrats "coronate" Hillary, I'm doing nothing to try and make sure she wins.

If we have a fair nomination process Edwards will be hard to beat.

[robbedvoter]

79. No.

[Placebo]

81. No.

[Auntie Bush]

83. Not enough experience...plain and simple. But he has a nice smile.

[AmericanDream]

86. That's a good republican talking point

Experience at what? I mean how many sensible people out there believe that working in the congress gives you experience to be an effective leader? George H.W. Bush has one of the most impressive resumes ever... yet, would anyone count him as one of the great american presidents? I have to say that leadership requires skills, principles, vision, and a clear understanding of the people one is going to lead. Edwards has those.

I think its important to have a democrat elected in '08, but not just any democrat. We should not be looking for just a good candidate... the bigger question should be whether or not that candidate will make a good president and whether he shares the goals and vision for this country that you and I as a voter do. My problem with bush is not that he doesn't have experience, my problem with him is that he is way out of the mainstream of the american public and he has no vision to counter the threats that will come to haunt the next generation of americans... and I mean threats like our defragmenting public school system, us loosing the technological and research edge that has been driven by american innovativeness, our corrupt energy & environment laws, the insolvency of medicare, free trade and labor abuse, our ignorance of the condition of so many poor people of africa, the stenghtening of china (militarily & economically) ... and I can go on forever. Let's judge the man by his vision for the country and not by how many years he has spent in washington.

So, my point being... lets not use the republicans' talking point against our own party members... JFK was criticized for his youth and inexperience too and yet he is one of the best we have ever had, who actually moved the country forward in a direction of civil rights for all, among other measures. And to quote the man (edwards) in question here, "It's not the length of your resume but rather the strength of your character that decides whether you are ready to lead or not." I happen to believe in that too. :) We need to stop letting the repubs characterize our nominees in whatever way they want... we should be defining our own leaders.

[independentchristian]

91. Bingo!

"I have to say that leadership requires skills, principles, vision, and a clear understanding of the people one is going to lead. Edwards has those."

Bingo!

It's called, "judgment."

That's what it's all about. When will people get the fact that it's not about "experience"? For a President, it's about who you surround yourself with, and that is a product of vision and judgment.

[Digit]

85. Of course!

Remember his two Americas speech?
Things have only gotten worse in Bushworld.
We need Edwards and his anti-poverty message!

[Crunchy Frog]

88. No I would not.

My preferred candidate is Wes Clark. I do not feel that Edwards is qualified, I don't like the position he took on the Iraq invasion, and I don't see him as being particularly electable.

Other possible candidates that I would support ahead of Edwards include Feingold, Boxer, and possibly Warner of Virginia.

I'm not looking to get in a fight with anybody. Just giving my honest answer to the question asked.

[Awsi Dooger]

90. At this point, yes

But it's far too early to make an informed judgment. An open race is much different than an oust-the-incumbent battle. I thought a charismatic and optimistic voice was easily our best chance to deny an opponent, not a strategic pick like John Kerry. Only Reagan and Clinton have ousted an incumbent in my lifetime. It wasn't exactly difficult to gauge if Edwards or Kerry was more in that mold.

[GOPBasher]

93. He's one of my favorites, along with Clark, Richardson, Warner, Rendell,

and maybe some other governors.

[Spinoza]

94. Only if I wanted the democrats to lose.