Edwards Weaknesses, Link to Strengths

[Annie]

http://www.vodkapundit.com/archives/006079.php#006079

July 06, 2004

Pick a Winner? III

John Edwards has a weak spot. . .
MORE...

Posted by Stephen Green at 11:01 AM | Drinks (2)


Pick a Winner? II

Larry Sabato lists John Edwards's weaknesses:

John Kerry cannot possibly claim that Edwards was the most qualified and experienced candidate available to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency. Edwards has a very thin public resume, with a single Senate term under his belt. He is noted for little in the Senate, and as mentioned earlier, he's been absent a great deal from his Senate work. The "experience gap" with other potential VP nominees, such as Dick Gephardt and Bob Graham, is enormous. Edwards could easily be classed with other barely-experienced VP-nominees in modern times: Bill Miller (R-1964), Spiro Agnew (R-1968), Geraldine Ferraro (D-1984), and Dan Quayle (R-1988). In the post-9-11 world, is Edwards' skimpy resume good enough? And here is where Dick Cheney will shine in any side-by-side comparison, not to mention the vice presidential debate in the fall.
While some see him as charismatic, others see him as slick. Supporters often compare him to Bill Clinton, meaning it as a compliment to his ability to connect emotionally with a crowd. It won't be long before opponents are also comparing him to the former President in less favorable ways. Slick Johnny, meet Slick Willie? And where's the gravitas? Edwards looks to be barely out of law school…and not very presidential.

Unlike other potential VP nominees, Edwards does not have a secure home base. Bob Graham could carry Florida, Tom Vilsack could carry Iowa, and so on. Edwards' hold on North Carolina appears shaky indeed. And as we have already argued, Edwards doesn't carry much or any weight in other Southern states.

Edwards is a wealthy trial lawyer, one of the least liked occupations in America. Yes, we know that Edwards has been able to turn this to his advantage in prior years by citing tear-jerking cases of big business and medical abuse of the "little guy." But there is no hothouse like presidential politics, and for all the vetting he's been put through, we wonder whether all his cases will hold up to critical scrutiny--assuming the Republicans and the news media do their jobs.

If Edwards has so much voter appeal, then why did he get so few votes in the Democratic primaries? Lest we forget, Edwards won only his two native states, North and South Carolina. He was slaughtered even in the Southern states (such as Tennessee and Virginia) that are neighbors to the state he represents in the Senate. [emphasis in original]


For his strengths, click here.


UPDATE: Legion writes, "Seriously, 'not enough experience and credibility to be a heartbeat away'? I got two words for you: Dan Quayle."


Posted by Stephen Green at 09:03 AM | Drinks (15)

Embedded links.

 

[davidpro]

What experience did George W. have when he was running on 00?

I think he owned a baseball team....

-David

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by davidpro
What experience did George W. have when he was running on 00?

I think he owned a baseball team....

-David

I guess his terms in Texas didn't count? How many other 2 term governors were there in Texas' history?

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by davidpro
What experience did George W. have when he was running on 00?

I think he owned a baseball team....

-David

Governor of a large state (Texas) for two terms. Plus, business experience is a MAJOR plus in my opinion. He is not a lifelong politician like Kerrey, Clinton, et. al. A matter of fact, most GOP members work before going into politics. How dare them!

 

[freeandfun1]

Voter appeal where? Most (and I am one) Southerners will not like Edwards. He is slick and he doesn't even appeal to his own statesmen so how is he going to appeal to Texans, Arkansans, etc.?

 

[freeandfun1]

Edwards was selected by Bill and Hillary so it would look like Kerrey was trying to win. They know he cannot get elected with Edwards, and that is better for them so that Hillary can run in 2008.

 

[davidpro]

Originally posted by freeandfun1
Governor of a large state (Texas) for two terms. Plus, business experience is a MAJOR plus in my opinion. He is not a lifelong politician like Kerrey, Clinton, et. al. A matter of fact, most GOP members work before going into politics. How dare them!

I would bet that the Rangers are the only business that did not fail.

Plus...Governors in texas are mearly a figure head. The Lt. Governor has much more power.

-David

 

[MtnBiker]

I think its a little late to be debating GWB's experience before 2000. He has been the President for over 3 years now.

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by davidpro

Plus...Governors in texas are mearly a figure head. The Lt. Governor has much more power.

-David

Really?

The office of governor is probably not as strong in Texas as in some other states. Legally, at least, the governor has little power over certain administrative functions and has no removal power over important elected officials. His privilege of legislative veto may be his strongest executive weapon. Politically, however, the governor has been an influence on the decisions of state government at almost all levels.

LINK

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by davidpro

Plus...Governors in texas are mearly a figure head. The Lt. Governor has much more power.

-David

So, since Edwards could not get re-elected by his state as Senator, he isn't qualified either? Right? I mean, he failed at politics. At least Bush has experience and I suspect he learned from his experiences.

Edwards' experience consists of suing based on unproven science. A matter-of-fact, a strong case could be made that Edwards has contributed to the out of control medical expenses since most of the increase in costs for medical care is because of increased insurance costs due to lawsuits.

 

[RogueVamp]

"Edwards is a wealthy trial lawyer, one of the least liked occupations in America."

But yet most parents would love their sons and/or daughters to become attorneys. I keep hearing how trial attorneys are scumbags but what would you suggest? that we didn't have any, that we allow the powerful to run amok and trample the least of us? surely you must agree that not all corporations have the best of intentions when it comes to peoples' safety and well being. Its ironic but when a rich person hires a team of attorneys to defend their rights its ok..no one ever complains but when a poor person happens to win a settlement against a large corporation then it becomes another example of trial attorneys sucking the lifeblood out of the industry...ie: medical, food et al.
Sure there are frivolous lawsuits out there..just as there most likely are innocent men/women on death row, but I think that these for the most part get weeded out.

As to Edwards I think he will energize the base for the democratic party, frankly I don't think that any choice Kerry would have made could have given the left much in the way of new supporters..including from the ranks of independents.

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by RogueVamp
frankly I don't think that any choice Kerry would have made could have given the left much in the way of new supporters..including from the ranks of independents.

With this point I will agree. Edwards will be able to bring in a lot of $$ from the trial lawyers! Just what we need, a high-level contact for trial attorneys in an administration!

 

[RogueVamp]

better a high level contact with trial attorneys than an administration that is filled with individuals that want us to dominate the rest of the world and not always for the betterment of indigenous populations and at the same time take away individual freedoms to the extent that one needs to be aware of what they say at all time..but that's just me.

 

[Merlin1047]

news: NYT Reports Strained Relations Between Kerry, Edwards
The New York Times is reporting that Kerry and Edwards weren't friendly on the senate:


...[Their unfriendly relations] started when, on Edward's first day, Kerry took down an out of order sign and directed him to a bathroom he knew was broken, "Its a special senators-only bathroom" Kerry told the freshman Edwards.

After flushing, Edwards was drenched by the erupting toilet and had to show up for his first vote with soaked pants. The animosity only grew when Kerry and senior democrats occasionally referred to him as "Sen. Poop Pants".

The Kerry camp downplayed the story, "pranks on the fish are a senate tradition" said a spokesman (referring to newly elected politicians). He insisted that it wasn't their intention to single out Sen. Poop Pants (D- NC) because of his views on trade.
========================================

Kerry made numerous unflattering remarks regarding Edwards during the Primaries. Apparently they kissed and made up.

Guess when you're power-mad you'll kiss up to anybody who can enhance your career.

 

[Merlin1047]

Originally posted by RogueVamp
better a high level contact with trial attorneys than an administration that is filled with individuals that want us to dominate the rest of the world and not always for the betterment of indigenous populations and at the same time take away individual freedoms to the extent that one needs to be aware of what they say at all time..but that's just me.

Just my opinion, but it seems to be that we have lost far more liberties to liberal zealots who demand that we adhere to their politically correct "standards".

And how do you support the accusation that the Bush administration wants to "dominate the rest of the world". I suppose that we're going to colonize Iraq and Afghanistan since both are such lush garden spots.

 

[MtnBiker]

Originally posted by RogueVamp

As to Edwards I think he will energize the base for the democratic party

Shouldn't that be Kerry's roll?

 

[Annie]

Originally posted by MtnBiker
Shouldn't that be Kerry's roll?

What, Kerry should do everything? :

 

[RogueVamp]

"And how do you support the accusation that the Bush administration wants to "dominate the rest of the world". I suppose that we're going to colonize Iraq and Afghanistan since both are such lush garden spots."

well we kinda already have. Allawi is our man and I doubt he will simply disappear when the elections are due to occur, by that time he will have enough power to keep his job or put someone in there that is closely allied with the ambassy there. point being that we will have the final say as to what happens there.. and no no lush garden...just a vast underground black pool.

As to Afghanistan we certainly have to protect the transit route for oil and natural gas exports from Central Asia to the Arabian Sea via the caspian sea oil pipeline routes.

And of course Iran sits between both nations another prize to be had. I'm not a conspirary nut but let's face it if we control the flow of oil throughout the middle east we stand to gain enormously.

 

[insein]

Originally posted by RogueVamp
better a high level contact with trial attorneys than an administration that is filled with individuals that want us to dominate the rest of the world and not always for the betterment of indigenous populations and at the same time take away individual freedoms to the extent that one needs to be aware of what they say at all time..but that's just me.

Beautiful rhetoric but troll of the day awards have been passed out to "One voice". Perhaps maybe you can be a good troll and present some of that elusive evidence that none of you can ever bring to the table.

 

[RogueVamp]

Originally posted by MtnBiker
Shouldn't that be Kerry's roll?

hehe Kerry isn't the most charismatic guy in the shop..Edwards however is, he's got the looks, he's a great orator..and he's got that southern accent which is awsome..I was listening to him during the primaries and the guy just makes you want to listen to him..