John Edwards reminds me of JFK leading up to 1960

[WI_DEM]

In 1956 Adlai Stevenson allowed the Democratic Convention select his vice presidential candidate. Several contenders sought the nomination including Estes Kefauver (Stevenson's major opponent for the '56 nomination), Hubert Humprhrey, Al Gore, Sr. and John F. Kennedy.

Kennedy actually did very well on the balloting and led the first couple (I think) but Kefauver was the most organized since he had actually run for president and won some primaries. In the end it was Kefauver, but JFK made a huge impression at the '56 convention and emerged from it as the front runner for the '60 Democratic nomination after Stevenson's loss.

In 2004 Edwards made a good impression both as a presidential nominee and then as John Kerry's running mate. His intelligence, good looks and down home appeal made him alot of fans and that is why I think he will be a major player in 2008. He also has a good issue that he is devoting time and attention to--poverty--not one of those "sexy" issues that many candidates care about.

He is generally well liked, according to a recent Gallup poll he is the most acceptable candidate of all the Democrats looking for a run at the WH in '08--71% of Democrats said that Edwards would be an acceptable nominee (compared to 69% for Hillary, 68% for Gore, and 59% for Kerry). He also has kept up his network of support in Iowa (where he placed second in '04) and added to it and a recent Iowa poll gives him the lead among caucus goers in that states.

I think in a race where potentially we could have McCain or Guiliani as the GOP nominee (and don't kid yourself they could be nominated)we need somebody who can reach out to Independents and I think Edwards has the capacity to do this.

I have not made up my mind 100% on who I will support but Edwards is in my top three--the others being Gore and Clark (almost certainly Gore if he runs), but I do think that Edwards will be seriously looked at if he does run.

[smoogatz]

1. funny--he reminds me a little of "Potsie" on "Happy Days."

But I'm sure that's just me.

[wicket]

11. OUCH!

:P

[chimpymustgo]

27. John and Elizabeth Edwards bring hope and healing. We need them.

I see more RFK - but there is a sunny optimism combined with gritty determination to get things done...to coax America back toward its ideals.

[Clark2008]

18. OK - I was going to ask what war Edwards served in and

how much diplomatic creds he possesses...

But, I like yours better!

:rofl:

[WI_DEM]

21. I admire Gen. Clark's military service but I don't believe having

been in the service is necessarily a requirement for the presidency. Many young people today lead productive lives and help others without serving in the military. I like Clark and might even support him in '08 if he decides to run, but too many of his supporters push his military credentials as if that is the only thing that counts. We learned all too well with Kerry in '04 that it isn't what you did 30 years ago but what you plan to do now--today. Of course Gen. Clark was a career military man who devoted many years to his country and should be honored as such, but to dismiss John Edwards as a "Potsie" is also ludicrous.

[Clark2008]

23. Clark was still in the military three years ago - not 30.

But, that aside, I simply don't think Edwards has the resume to be president. This is not 1992 and national security, foreign policy and diplomacy will be the top issues of 2008. Democrats already beat Republicans on issues of poverty and civil rights, so Edwards brings nothing special to the table.

And, I don't push Clark's military creds as much as I push his diplomacy creds - and the fact that he's actually been a Head of State and knows a thing or two about economics.

The "Potsie" comment was not mine, but I did find it funny. Potsie was a good kid - a nice guy - a guy with a good heart, but not presidential material.

P.S. Your senator is another favorite of mine, btw.

[SPKrazy]

24. I Too Like Clark

I was talking about him with an active military person and they said: (paraphrase) "you know he got fired from the Army"

[WI_DEM]

25. Yes, I know that Clark was in the service which is why I said

that the military was his career and should be honored. But that aside one still doesn't have to be a career politician or a military man to be an effective president.

[Bryan Buchan]

2. I wasn't alive in 1960 but...

...I just saw him speak last week, and he is so full of hope, optimisim, and courage. I so hope he runs in the presidential primary. He has also reversed his position on the death penalty which is why I did not support him in the last presidential primary.

[RamboLiberal]

3. Actually Edwards reminds me of RFK in '68

RFK too had seen the poverty and civil rights and was a populist candidate that I think would've won the nomination and probably the presidency. I will always wonder as I did about his brother JFK how different the country would've been then and now if they hadn't been assasinated!

I hope I will never again see the hope of an JFK, RFK, MLK, or Paul Wellstone cut down in their prime.

[AspenRose]

10. Yep.

More like RFK to me

[Reckon]

4. Nice post -- I agree, Edwards is top 3...nt

[Sammy Pepys]

5. Maybe in terms of charisma...

...but when you look at the resumes there's no comparison. Not slamming on Edwards, just giving Kennedy credit where credit is due.

[WI_DEM]

6. Funny but in '60 Kennedy was looked upon as lacking experience

and too much of a playboy by many rivals. Yes he had been in public office since 1946 but his house and Senate terms were generally judged to be inconsequential. Teddy Kennedy of all the Kennedy brothers made a much bigger impact in the Senate than either JFK or Bobby (of course Bob was there only 3.5 years).

[mdmc]

13. He has Southern Charm

but I never thought of him as charismatic.

[saltpoint]

7. Yes -- a strong case could be made, no question. Can I add one

notion?

I think Edwards is all you say he is, and in some ways better positioned than JFK to win first-ballot support, but he is made stronger still when Elizabeth is with him. Or rather, the two of them together represent a serious uptick in the connection they make with audiences.

There is a compelling decency to them, as if their charisma rises not from their political celebrity or physical personality but from the way they are with each other.

Just my take. But I sense it when the two of them are together.

I think Edwards is the favorite of many county and state Dem operatives.

[WI_DEM]

17. Elizabeth and his family are also a great asset

[saltpoint]

28. In addition to the great relief most of us felt when news came that

Elizabeth's health was strong and that she was now cancer free, I think having accomplished, bright, fair women in the spotlight is a tremendous national advantage.

Teresa Heinz strikes me as utterly fearless. To cite just one incident, she got right in the face of that Scaife reporter and cleaned his clock with a sentence or two. He probably wee-weed his britches and ran home to change. And she didn't do it for sport or power or position. She did it because ultraconservative members of the press and media were shilling for Bush on every corner. She did it out of loyalty to her husband and loyalty to her principles.

Elizabeth Edwards, on these very boards one night, asked us to show kindness and mercy to Laura Ingraham, whose political views I'm sure EE finds repellent. It was a gesture of very high citizenship. If mercy is one of the only good ideas, as Kurt Vonnegut has written, how much better we are as a nation if people capable of truly representing it are in the national eye.

I've looked fairly closely at the Bush administration for 6 damn years and am yet to find anyone in EE's or Teresa's league.

[Clark2008]

19. And we know how great the picks of those Dem operatives have

been over the past few years.

:eyes:

Sorry - I just don't see the hope or optimism or anything. I see fluff and an opportunistic politician.

And, I'm Southern.

[saltpoint]

26. You get to see what you want.

The polls right now suggest that you aren't seeing what is actually happening.

Clark has his work cut out for him. He enjoyed some succes in 04 but his credentials didn't eclipse other Dems' credentials enough to sway voters his way toward the nomination. Or toward the ticket.

He faces an even larger and more politically experienced and diverse field in 08. We'll see how he does but at the moment John Edwards enjoys persuasive support across the country where Clark does not.

[Ghost in the Machine]

8. He'll have my vote if he is the nominee...

[hedgehog]

9. Hey - in my area something like 50% of the people are on some

kind of public assistance. I'd be shocked and amazed if any of my kids ends up finding a job around here. For me, poverty in America is THE issue. Go Edwards!

[kohodog]

12. So far, edwards appears to be the only Dem with a vision for the country.

His recent speech was really good, on poverty, healthcare, our image abroad. He asked "Who do we want to be as a nation in twynty years?" (not an exact quote).

I heard Biden for a few minutes on CSPAN this weekend and he was basically running down the Bush administration. While there is everything to speak out against when it comes to W, I liked Edwards forward thinking lots more than Biden's backward looking list of complaints. I think he deserves serious consideration and his leaving the Sentate to work on poverty has help
This from a Herbert article in the NYT.

http://oneamericacommittee.com/news/headlines/nyt20060622/

[hamerfan]

14. Edwards has my support!

Anything I can do to help him along I will do. Unlike some other Democratic hopefuls, Edwards can connect with the "regular" people, and that is a BIG step towards getting elected by the general population.
dumpbush

[kohodog]

15. I want to vote for someone with a vision, not an anti-whats going on.

Right now it's Edwards, with Gore not far behind. If Greenland slides off the shelf political parties won't matter much. Gore can bring an positive environmental agenda and all the economic health that shifting to clean technologies will bring.

[Clark2008]

22. Uh... no.

Looking ahead 100 years, the United States will be defined by our environment, both our physical environment and our legal, Constitutional environment. America needs to remain the most desirable country in the world, attracting talent and investment with the best physical and institutional environment in the world. But achieving our goals in these areas means we need to begin now. Environmentally, it means that we must do more to protect our natural resources, enabling us to extend their economic value indefinitely through wise natural resource extraction policies that protect the beauty and diversity of our American ecosystems - our seacoasts, mountains, wetlands, rain forests, alpine meadows, original timberlands and open prairies. We must balance carefully the short- term needs for commercial exploitation with longer-term respect for the natural gifts our country has received. We may also have to assist market-driven adjustments in urban and rural populations, as we did in the 19th Century with the Homestead Act.

Institutionally, our Constitution remains the wellspring of American freedom and prosperity. We must retain a pluralistic democracy, with institutional checks and balances that reflect the will of the majority while safeguarding the rights of the minority. We will seek to maximize the opportunities for private gain, consistent with concern for the public good. And the Clark administration will institute a culture of transparency and accountability, in which we set the world standard for good government. As new areas of concern arise - in the areas of intellectual property, bioethics, and other civil areas - we will assure continued access to the courts, as well as to the other branches of government, and a vibrant competitive media that informs our people and enables their effective participation in civic life. And even more importantly, we will assure in meeting the near term challenges of the day - whether they be terrorism or something else - that, we don't compromise the freedoms and rights which are the very essence of the America we are protecting.

If we are to remain competitive we will have to do more to develop our "human potential." To put it in a more familiar way, we should help every American to "be all he or she can be." For some this means only providing a framework of opportunities - for others it means more direct assistance in areas such as education, health care, and retirement security. And these are thirty year challenges - educating young people from preschool until they are at their most productive, helping adults transition from job to job and profession to profession during their adult lives; promoting physical vigor and good health through public health measures, improved diagnostics, preventive health, and continuing health care to extend longevity and productivity to our natural limits; and strengthening retirement security, simply because it is right; first for our society to assure that all its members who have contributed throughout their lifetimes are assured a minimal standard of living, and secondly to free the American worker and family to concentrate on the challenges of today. Such long-term challenges must be addressed right away, with a new urgency.

We have a solid foundation for meeting these challenges in many of the principles and programs already present today. They need not be enumerated here, except to argue for giving them the necessary priorities and resources. We can never ensure that every one has the same education, or health care, or retirement security, nor would we want to do so. But all Americans are better off when we ensure that each American will have fundamental educational skills and access to further educational development throughout their lives; that each American will have access to the diagnostic, preventive and acute health care and medicines needed for productive life, as well as some basic level of financial security in his or her retirement.


http://clark04.com/vision/

Sorry. I just don't believe Edwards is the ONLY Democrat with a vision.

[kohodog]

30. Thanks, I hadn't seen that

I'll keep Clark on my watch list. Edwards and the "new" (without handlers) Gore communicate more passion to me, but we'll see who rises to the top. I haven't made any decisions yet.

[Dees]

16. John and Wes......n/t

[MoseyWalker]

20. Great post!

though I have my doubts about Edwards because of his chumminess with the CFR, He says all the right things, and his family has sure been through some troubling times.

[hedgehog]

31. Yet up thread someone criticized Edwards for not having

foreign policy experience!

[cbear70]

29. I agree

I would love to see Edwards run with Clark.