Should Gephardt and Edwards resign?

[ButterflyBlood]

Poll question: Should Gephardt and Edwards resign?

I think Gephardt definately should. He's never showing up to vote anyway and since he's not going to run for reelection there's no point in keeping him. We should be able to keep his seat in the special election so having him there now just means the people of his district have no representation.

Edwards I'm leaning towards doing so. It would probably be beneficial for him to resign and let NC's Democratic governor appoint Bowles so he can have the advantage of incumbancy. Also even though Gephardt hasn't been as bad as Gephardt or even Kerry at missing votes, he doesn't have a great attendence record either. However the upside to having him is that now he'll vote solidly liberal since he doesn't have to worry about reelection, while Bowles would be more moderate.

[redeye]

1. Gephardt should...

...because of his me-tooism and the Repub-lite tactics that failed in 2002.

[GainesT1958]

2. I'm concerned about Gephardt's House seat, but...

Ironically, I think we've got the Senate seat in this state in good hands. Though it's not automatic for a gubernatorial appointment in N.C. (state law requires the exec. committee of the party of the departed office-holder to nominate a successor, who would then be seated until the next general election), in this case Gov. Mike Easley WOULD have a say since Edwards is also a Democrat. Either Erskine Bowles, Dan Blue, or former gov. Jim Hunt would be the obvious, and likely, choices. Such an appointment would give any of them the automatic "lift" of incumbency, plus a favorable voting record on which to run next year. Personally, I think it would be ideal if Easley appointed Jim Hunt, and Hunt decided he WOULD run (not likely at this point). That would pre-empt a primary battle, as Hunt is almost universally popular among N.C. Dems of all stripes. If Gov. Easley appointed either Bowles or Blue, the other (and the others' supporters) may be angered by that appointment, hurting the new incumbent's chances--as well as Easley, who will be up for re-election next year as well. At the least, the appointment by Easley of Gov. Hunt to the vacant seat could serve as a successful "place-holder" for either Bowles or Blue.

B-)

[Pltcl_jnky]

4. No worries

i dont think there would be any worries about Gebhardt's house seat the Missouri Republicans dont really have anyone worth anything to take that seat.

Plus, though i do not support him, I think he would earn some points with voters by stating that he wants to lead and his whole focus is on winning the nomination and therefore he cannot be a leader for the people of the Missouri 3rd Congressional District so therefor he is resigning to put his full force behind his run for the presidency

[Robroy]

6. At the debate the other night..

I liked Gephardt's two word summary of the Bush presidency; A Miserable Failure. No flinching, no hesitation, just looked straight ahead and rightly called this administration a 'miserable failure'.

[IndianaGreen]

3. Neither

I think Edwards is making a mistake by not running for reelection. His Presidential campaign is going nowhere.

[AP]

5. Edwards can resign after he gets the nomination.

Right?

[ButterflyBlood]

7. Since he's not going to run for reelection anyway

it might just be better to replace him with a Democrat who'd be able to spend more time on his duties instead of the campaign.