Does the phrase "Vice President John Edwards" sound good?

[UrbScotty]

Poll question: Does the phrase "Vice President John Edwards" sound good?

Since most people consider it to be the most likely ticket...

Would you support Edwards for Vice President if Kerry picks him?

[lovedems]

1. Bias towards Clark but would be thrilled with Edwards!

[olddem43]

2. I like Edwards for VP but,

of course, "yellow dog" would sound good next to what we have now.

[funky_bug]

3. Not in my top three, but in my top five

In no particular order (well, some particular order)

Graham/Clark/Cleland
Dean/Edwards

[Tom Rinaldo]

4. Not quite as good as Vice President Clark...

...But plenty good nonetheless. It really is a softball question to ask anyone here if they would support Edwards over Cheney. It actually is almost insulting to Edwards to even ask.

Edited because part of my original reply actually was accidently directed at a different post

[BeyondGeography]

5. Another pro-Edwards Clarkie here

I would take Edwards over Clark straight-up if he could guarantee his home state, but that's apparently doubtful.

What reassures me about Edwards is that voters like him the more they get to know him. He rallied big-time in Iowa, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Virginia and Wisconsin. I also think he'll play well in economically-challenged swing states such as Ohio and Pennsylvania. And he does as much for us in Arkansas as Clark.

It bothers me that NC doesn't come along with him, but Edwards is a great campaigner, and, with Bush's national security numbers coming down, he may make more sense than ever.

[Scoopie]

6. Tennessee won't go with him in the General

I have explained why and don't care to do it again.

Of course, he'll have other problems once Rove gets done with him - but don't listen to me. Some of you here seem to like inexperience.

[BeyondGeography]

9. Edwards is the more experienced politician

And, alas, that counts for something. Clark proved a little fumble-prone with the media, and they'll go after him again. I don't want to relive the whole "Clark and the media," deal from the primaries. It was a total nightmare.

Edwards gets better treatment becuse the media think he's a great communicator. The pundits drool over him. That's worth far more than all the bullshit Rove will throw at him.

As for Tennessee, I agree it would be tough to pull out in the GE, but you miss the point. Voters respond very well to Edwards and, hard as it is for this Clarkie to admit it, Edwards had more staying power down the stretch in the primary season.

[Scoopie]

10. Only because of said media drool

though.
I don't see how anyone can think hearing that son of a mill worker speech a million times makes him a good campaigner.
Clark gave nuance, but the press can't seem to report beyond black and white anymore.

I'd really hate to not be able to vote - or have to write in a vote this year.

[AP]

13. Clinton gave the boy from hope speech a thousand times until eveyone knew

it.

Were you complaing about that one? (Psst, it's part of the reason he won.)

[surfermaw]

42. You got it...drive it home that he is an average, guy

Isn't the average Guy vote the vote that we need?

[Awsi Dooger]

18. Let me explain why: Tennessee tilts 8 percent Republican

Regardless of the VP choice, which is absurdly overrated and over-debated on DU.

In '88, the last election minus Al Gore on our ticket, Tennessee tilted 8.62% more Republican than the national average. The state was 6.12% Republican leaning in '96 and 4.38% towards Republicans in 2000, even with native son Gore atop the ticket. Those numbers are in relation to the nationwide net.

Only in '92, the first cycle in decades with a Tenneseean on the ticket, did our ticket nearly manage it's national average in Tennessee, just .91% Republican. This year, without anyone from Tennessee, I guarantee that 8.62% number from '88 is the most relevant. We have no chance to win Tennessee unless Kerry carries the nationwide popular vote in a landslide, high single digits. Therefore, Tennessee is irrelevant.

[spooky3]

21. good points, good numbers. Thanks.

[surfermaw]

41. Edwards will carry North Carolina

And help bring home the Senate seat to Bowles.

[aquart]

7. "Where are the johns?" I can hear it now.

[magnolia]

27. John is an honorable name.

But...let the repubs make fun of it. We still have BUSH and DICK!

[UTUSN]

8. Sounds Good to Me, But I Hate to Commit n/t

[Auntie Bush]

11. I'd vote for a Kerry/Edwards ticket...but I'd be very UNHAPPY

with Kerry's choice. Opps...I mean the media/Rove's choice.

[oceanbreeze]

28. Kerry/Edwards....

Much rather see....Kerry/Clark....A HEAVY MEDAL TICKET...yes, I am a ClarkDemocrat, and he asked us to support Kerry, which I do, but I have issues with Edwards as VP....I most likely will vote for the ticket, but I will be gagging all the way to the polls...I might have a problem with a possible Pres.Edwards if anything happened to Kerry, but I wouldn't have one problem with a Pres.Clark...
oceanbreeze

[julialnyc]

12. no it scares me

with beheading becoming a common thing no FP experience is unacceptable to me.

I have nothing against Edwards, but it is not his time. He is young and has plenty of time to either work on FP (Ambassador?) or wait till a safer time to run.

[JohnKleeb]

14. sure I'd like that much

[Anarcho-Socialist]

15. I'd be happy with Edwards as Vice Prez

Wes Clark would be good too. I wouldn't mind having either of them on the ticket.

[Linnea]

16. Edwards should have been on Gore's ticket

...it's not the time for him now. What would that say about John Kerry to select someone with no FP experience in the current situation, and someone of whom John Kerry has also remarked ... 'what makes him think he could be president?' Edwards is a good campaigner, not a debater. He is groomed for the media, but not the job. I am sure we are all conditioned to having people in the WH who do not have experience and leadership qualities, but that is part of the problem, isn't it? Edwards would be a disaster. A more handsome and intelligent Quayle, but a light weight none the less.
IMO
Thanks

[Awsi Dooger]

17. Let's see, there are 90+ days of campaigning and ONE VP debate

Even if I accepted your charge that Edwards is a subpar debater, that's tilting the priority pole on its ass, Linnea. Literally hundreds of speeches in battleground states versus one 90 minute Q & A with Icky Dicky. It's obvious DUers are still enraged at Lieberman's polite hands-folded performance and are almost viewing the VP choice in terms of the debate alone.

Likewise, I assert that homeland concerns will outweigh Iraq and elsewhere in every reliable post-election poll.

Nonetheless, welcome to DU :)

[surfermaw]

43. Wasn't that what they said about JFK

It wasn't his time, it was supposed to be Johnsons.

[bklyncowgirl]

19. I'd support a Kerry / Bozo the Clown Ticket at this point

I'd like to see someone with a bit more seasoning myself. Nothing against Edwards, I just don't think that 3/4 of a term in the Senate and no executive experience is a little light for someone who might have to step into the top job at a moment's notice.

I like Graham, Richardson, Clark and even though it's not gonna happen Dean, but will vote for Kerry and work for Kerry no matter who's on the ticket.

[Padraig18]

20. Minor correction: Edwards has been in the Senate 5 1/2 years. n/t

[spooky3]

29. Building a successful business from the ground up IS executive

experience. He ran several law offices and managed other people over 20 years.

The vast majority of people who try to start and manage a real business, as opposed to one that Mommy & Daddy handed them, fail at it. Edwards not only succeeded, he became wealthy based on his own talents.

[GOPBasher]

22. Though I can't decide between Edwards and Clark,

it sounds great anyway. So does VP Clark. So does VP (insert Democrats name). I'm anyone but Bush, all the way.

[lilymidnite]

23. Kerry should pick Bill Clinton ...

for his VP running mate.

[wjsander]

24. That WOULD be cool....

if Clinton could legally serve again. But he can't. Not even as VP. :(

[Auntie Bush]

25. I'd rather have hero/smiley vs dumb/evil ...so what can I say?

Frankly I'm already sick of that son of a mill worker's smile and he isn't even VP. I think the media are just waiting for him to get chosen so they can start ragging on him as being nothing but a one speech smiling lawyer. You will never hear them talk about how knowledgeable his is on the country's problems. The media will know how to get to him and repeatedly ask foreign policy questions which he won't know the answer. I frankly shutter :scared: at the thoughts of him debating Cheney on FP. Edwards is a great debater if he knows the subject but he isn't knowledgeable enough now. Wait another 8 years and I'll be all for him...unless Clark runs.

[surfermaw]

44. Is the statement I am already sick of him

supposed to mean any thing other than the fact he is probably going to beat Clark for the VP seat.

[x_y_no]

26. I wouldn't be thrilled ...

But of course I will support him.

If that's the choice, I hope Clark get another major post like Sec. State.

[Padraig18]

30. 41% "no" ?????????????????

:wtf: is wrong with you people???????

[Darkamber]

32. They want Clark for VP...

I think that is what you are seeing. I just hope that IF Kerry picks Edwards that they will stop the 'anti' Edwards views and support the ticket.

[cosmokramer]

39. I'll vote for the ticket...

...if Edwards is selected, but I won't 'support' it at all. Anyone with foreign policy experience would be better for the ticket than Edwards, and Kerry should be smart enough to know that. If on the freak chance he chooses Edwards, he will still get my vote, but not my $, or my enthusiasm.

[TexasSissy]

31. OTHER: Yes! I'll support him enthusiastically, even tho I don't

know who the VP should be, strategically speaking. I like Edwards lot, and about as much, if not more so, than many of the other choices. I don't know enough about some of them to say that I like Edwards more than than I like them.

[MODemocrat]

33. Edwards or Clark = Win Win

Vice President Edwards sounds very good to my husband and me.

[bitchkitty]

34. Wow, 40% no?

I'd say this poll's been freeped but this is DU, isn't it?

ABB. He could pick Anna Nicole Smith and get my vote.

I hope that you're wrong and that he picks Clark.

[MaryBear]

36. That is still 60% "yes,"

freeped or not. The question is somewhat confusing, and implies devotion to Edwards with a strong yes vote, which I gave him, although I think he is one among several who could do well as VP. For all of the positives listed above, and also because of his campaign style (he takes the high road) I think he would be a breath of fresh air after the toxins that have been oozing out of the WH for the past few years. I also think he is no dummy and is perfectly qualified to be either VP or President, as much as Clark is. Why, in a time of War, must we have a warmonger in the WH? That said, I could also support Clark, if he is chosen by Kerry.

[surfermaw]

45. I like your attitude

That is the attitude we will all have to have if we win in November..Edwards is my choice, but if he dosen't make it, then who ever the VP is... I will be there marking that straight ticket come November.

[IndianaGreen]

35. Edwards's looks are a poor substitute for lack of experience

Of all the names being mentioned as potential VPs, the one with the most experience in domestic and foreign policy is Dick Gephardt. While I don't like Gep, one must consider that if Kerry has a relapse of cancer, we would want someone with a steady hand, experience, and an excellent labor record to be a "heart beat away" if some misfortune were to happen to our President.

People may not vote based on the VP selection, but the VP selection is important when one considers how many times Presidents have become incapacitated while in office in the last century.

Personality wise, Gephardt is a better fit for Kerry on the ticket. Edwards will be miserable as VP, not him personally, but the job itself will feel like a strait jacket for someone like Edwards.

[Comicstripper]

46. I agree with you, IndianaGreen...

on some of your points. I'm not a big Edwards guy, but Gephardt does NOT have much foreign policy experience. He's a Congressman. From Missouri. In the midst of a highly unusual war, I think Clark would do well, as would Richardson and yes, Gephardt. But I don't think he has that much foreign policy experience...

[JI7]

49. Gep DOES have foreign policy experience

he has met with foreign leaders to discuss things such as human rights, labor rights, economic conditions , and many other things. he is also able to debate things like nafta, wto in terms of how it affects other nations and other peoples also. often those who are against it just focus on how it takes away jobs for americans. but gephardt is good at showing how it's also bad for the people who live in places where those jobs are going. how they are treated like crap and given less than they deserve for their work. and how that affects the nation as a whole and therefore national security and our relationship with them. and gep has actually been to these countries also. he was pretty effective in going after kerry for supporting these trade bills but kerry was able to promote himself in a way which appealed to many, including those who may have disagreed with him on some votes.

but this area of trade is one area where gep and kerry have the biggest difference. while they both have the same goals. kerry is more on the side of clinton in being more open on trade issues. gephardt is more of a "protectionist". if kerry does pick gephardt i wonder how they will work this out. it could be one reason he may not pick gephardt since kerry has so fully embraced clinton's policices including welfare reform which gephardt voted against.

[Piperay]

37. Clark's my man but

I like Edwards too and will enthusiastically support him. :bounce:

[Mr.Green93]

38. JFK and John John, too eery

[filterfish]

40. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

edwards puts me to sleep

[Moloch]

47. I think the best place for Edwards is

John Edward's (the TV psychic) co-host. They can channel unborn children together.. I'm really hoping that Kerry will choose someone who is NOT a Bush/war enabler...

[JI7]

48. this has GOT to be a joke, the numbers against is about even with for

those who oppose edwards is about the same as those who support it. even if edwards isn't ones first choice ,or even 2nd 3rd 4th etc, he would be a lot better than dick cheney.

[chimpymustgo]

51. Clearly the clarion call at the Clark blog was sounded.

Hopefully this will be over soon, and people can regain some perspective. We're all Democrats. Right?

[FrenchieCat]

50. It's the Bush War, Stupid....

Needs to be the theme here...picking a Veep should be done not based on what "Sounds" good but what will be good for this country...

http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=7927

The Last Hurdle
John Kerry's biggest problem -- still -- is the national security gap. Here's how he can close it.
By Kenneth S. Baer
Web Exclusive: 06.23.04

Print Friendly | Email Article

In Washington, the only question on anyone's mind is: WWJD -- What Will John Do? Everyone has a theory about whom John Kerry will pick (or should pick) as his running mate, and journalists are scrambling for any angle on the story that they can find.

Last Friday, The Washington Post ran one of the most interesting accounts of where Kerry's thinking may or may not be. While the article was filled with rampant speculation by a panoply of unnamed sources, one observation stuck out. According to the Post: "Friends say Kerry believes he has passed a national security threshold with voters that has freed him to tap a vice presidential candidate who complements him in other ways."

If these "friends" of Kerry were really his friends, they would inform him that, sadly, this is not the case. In fact, the only thing keeping George W. Bush in this race is that John Kerry has not yet met this "national security threshold" with the electorate. Voters still give the President a commanding lead on the questions of who can best protect the nation from terrorists and who is a stronger, more patriotic leader. Fortunately for Kerry, these sentiments say more about the Democratic party -- and voters' lingering doubts about Democrats and defense -- than they do about the candidate. Kerry has enough time to close this national security gap -- and must close it if he hopes to beat Bush this fall.

Despite one question on a recent Washington Post-ABC News poll that showed Kerry with a one-point lead over Bush on the question of "whom do you trust to do a better job of handling the U.S. campaign against terrorism," data within that same poll and in others show that the security gap stubbornly persists.

MUCHO MORE OF THIS ARTICLE AT THE SITE.....

52. Nope. It doesn't sound horrible, it just doesn't sound really "good."

I missed the Edwards boat, I guess. Left me standing on the shore....

Gep - I cringe!
Dean - I love it, but it's hopeless.
Clark - I like, but I still have this big question mark about Clark's political abilities. For example, he's never had to worry about how to provide decent healthcare to seniors or balancing a budget.

My best choice amongst the names I've heard?

Richardson or Graham. Since Richardson has done everything in his power to dodge the offer, Graham sounds like the best choice.

[NNadir]

53. If someone is addressing "Vice President Edwards" it follows

that people will also be addressing "President Kerry."

We all win then.

Edwards is not who I would pick, but if one is inserting the name of a Democrat after the honorific (at least it used to be an honorific) "Vice President," it's music to my ears.