My reason for not being behind Edwards

[frustrated_lefty]

He's young. He's a good man, but he's young. My wife and I fully expect to see a President Edwards in 2012 or 2016, and we'll both vote for him if he continues like he is.

If you're behind Edwards, please explain how you get around this liability?

[QC]

1. He looks very young, but isn't he 50 or so?

[PurityOfEssence]

2. He's four years older than JFK ever got to be

Think of what an elder statesman Edwards will be after two terms; he'll be 59.

TR was younger, and he was the last half-decent Republican President.

Edwards is more than seasoned; he's been fighting big corporations for years and winning. He's incredibly gifted at making connections with people, and he can bridge many of the divides in this country.

The age argument is just ridiculous.

[w13rd0]

3. The age argument is ridiculous...

...because it's his APPARENT age they have a problem with. The guy keeps in shape or something. I'd easily mistake him for being in his late 30s or early 40s.

[Minstrel Boy]

6. wow, I thought he was younger than me

I guess then, if I was American, I'd be presidential material.

I owe it all to not keeping in shape.

[SadEagle]

4. He is *50*?

He looked like mid-30s to me. I guess that explains why people think he is exceptionally good-looking ;-)

[Bombtrack]

9. He'll be 51 on June 10th

we have the same birthday

[AP]

13. He's two years older than Clinton was in '91. Look how old Bill looks now.

Edwards will be older than that when he's three years out of his second term.

[last_texas_dem]

5. I believe Edwards is 50

So he's actually older than both JFK and Bill Clinton when they were first elected to the Presidency. But yes, he is young for a candidate, and is also hampered to a degree by the fact that he looks very young. However, I think he has other assets that offset that, so don't think it should hurt him too much should he get the nomination. I understand where you're coming from, though.

[frustrated_lefty]

8. He does have assets,

I'd be happy to see him in office.

[frustrated_lefty]

7. I'm not slamming the guy

My wife peeks in when I watch politics, she refuses to do it herself. Her take is "he needs more seasoning." I kind of agree with her. Edwards has much promise, I just don't think this is the election for him.

[AP]

14. Sometimes the more "seasonging" you have in politics, the more compromised

you are.

I think the fact this guy takes no PAC/DC lobbyist $, and that he owes his political fortunes to nobody but the voters, is the PERFECT antidote to the Bush administration which is a marriage of policitis and speciall interests.

So, I encourage you and your wife to reconsider what it means for Edwards not to be 'seasoned' and cooked in the oven of DC politics.

I think it's probably going to be worth a significant amount of personal wealth for you that a guy with the seasoning Edwards has will be representing your interests.

[oasis]

10. A "Hillary proof" ticket would be Kerry/Edwards or Clark/Edwards.

Edwards would be a big help in the south and cement a win in 2004.

IMO, many Hillary haters, GOP and Dem, would re-elect a ticket with a emerging star like Edwards, just to deny Sen. Clinton a future the presidency.

Edit to add: As much as I adore Hillary and would relish her being president in the future, I must forsake her for what I believe would be a winning formula for 2004/2008.

[dfong63]

11. my reason: he voted for the IWR and the patriot act...

... plus he has had little time in office.

[bearfartinthewoods]

12. well since your resevations have been addressed, welcome

to the Edwards camp!

just remember, this time of the year, when clinton ran for the first time, the leaders were tsongas and hart. clinton was polling at about 3%.iirc.

[arewethereyet]

15. He is not as young as you seem to think

His looks lend that impression. He is older than Clinton when he first ran. He graduated college in 73. Couldn't find his specific age on the website and I can't recall but I was 21 when I graduated in 77 and I'm 49.

Its not a liability, its an asset. Youthful, good looking, poised, charismatic, knowledgable and with a plan he can articulate at any level of detail with any audience. Sounds a little like JFK to be, a little like RJC or even JEC. Not bad company.

[Lefta Dissenter]

16. I said in another thread

that he really needs to just add a little grey to his hair, and he'd be running better in the polls!

AP, that's really a wonderful picture you have there of Edwards.

As far as the Patriot Act, if that's a litmus test, you'd better write in Russ Feingold, since he was the ONLY Senator to vote against Patriot Act I. The vote was 98 - 1, I believe.

And for the IWR, I know that's been discussed to death, so I'm only going to reiterate that, except for anyone who makes it their main campaign issue by choice, I will accept just about any position that any of the candidates took at that point (well, except for a couple of them). It was an extremely difficult and painful decision for each and every one of the people who had to vote on it, as well as those who were just formulating their views at the time. Little did anyone know that these decisions were based on lies being told to the world by the administration, so the struggle is understandable.

AND, yes, a Clark/Edwards ticket is something I've been thinking about for a while. Both Clark and Edwards have made SUCH a point of staying above the trash that is being flung within the Dem. Party. I don't know enough about Edwards' positions on all of the issues to say that's my VP, set in stone, but I have really enjoyed listening to him, and he seems like a bright, sincere, honorable man. I liked the way he interacted with regular human-folk when I saw him on one of the Road to the White House shows, and I've liked him in the debates, as well.

Now that I've received two phone calls while trying to write this, it's probably out-dated in the conversation by now, so I will hit POST