Reply #43: Again, this this is speculation.

[Nicholas_J]

There is really no advantage in being a senator or a representative when it comes to running for re-election. You have a smaller group of people who you must persuade to vote for you, but you there is no strategic differince in trying top convince them if a candidate has not met the criteria that those he is representing want in their elected official. The idea that a Representative has an easier time than a Senator has no basis in fact, as statistically the number of one term senators and one term representatives is the same. Edwards is noot necessarily a shoe in for 2012 either. Especially if you add Hillary Clinton to the mix, which is rewally the most likely choice after two terms of Kerry. Edwards also has a considerable amount of problems considewring that Edwards could not win one other state in his own geographic region, including states bordering on his own home state. Kerry, a regional outsider, and fairly unknown in the south, beat Edwards handily during the race for the nomination.

Again, looking at the south, Bush has most of this region sewn up with double digit leads in most of the south. Right now Kerry is further ahead of Bush in Arkansas ( a 2.1 percent lead) is 6 points behind Bush in Louisiana, 6 points behind Bush in West Virginia, 5 points behind Bush in North Carolina, states which Edwards will have to have a fair chance of delivering to Kerry in November. Bush is ahead 2 point in Virginia. The fact that Edwards could not beat Kerry in these states has given a good deal of the democratic party leadership a good deal to doubt about Edwards. However looking at Gephardt's state of Missouri, Bush is ahead 8/10ths of a percent.
The most recent polls place Kerry 6 points ahead of Bush in Ohio, but the polls for this state have been fluctuating back and forth between Kerry and Bush and polls based on possible running mates have Gephardt being the one running mate who boosts Kerry's overall lead in this state more than Edwards or anyone else, and this is a mere one percent boost. Just enough to give the state to Kerry, along with his own Missouri. The same has been found in WIsconsin and Michigan.Gephardt as a running mate increases Kerry chances in Michigan significantly due to the fact that Gephardt is the candidate who the United Auto Workers have strongly suggested that Kerry select. The U.A.W. will be a very big factor in Michigan. Pennsylvania is another state where Gephardt is seen to provide a significant advantage for Kerry. Edwards has to provide a boost for Kerry of five or more points in the Southern states that Bush does not have double digit leads in. As noted, Bush has almost all of the South locked up, while Kerry has the populous Northeast, and the more industrialized Midwest/Great Lakes states. All indications are that Gephardt has a better chance of boosting Kerry in this area enough to secure the region for Kerry. Nothing other than speculation that Edward did well in Wisconsin indicates that Edwards can do much for securing states for Kerry.

It is not 2012 that is an issue. The primary factor in selecting a running mate is someone who can replace Kerry should some unexpected tragedy occur. Not in 2012, but in the 8 years preceding it. Looking at how Edwards did in the south against someone from outside the region is a good indicator that Edwards would not be the candidate to try to win in 2012, VP or no. A VP does not always win after 8 years sitting in that office.

Another problem for Edwards is that Andy Stern, wants him. Stern threw a major monkey wrench into this camapign by deciding to endorse Dean even though Dean was by and large not the choice of the majjority of rank and file union members. It also causef AFSCME to have to do the same, decide to back Dean rather than the choice of AFSCME rank and file member (this was Gephardt).

While Kerry met with Edwards secretly a day or so ago, He met with Gephardt a wek ago. And rather than meet Gephardt in Washinton, Kerry went out to meet Gephardt out in Missouri.

History is also against the selection of Edwards as running mate. IN virtually every election the running mate had the exact opposite characteristics that those who support Edwards tout as the bet reasons for selecting him. No running mate has ever been selected for Charisma, Personality, Vision, or Popularity. In fact the opposite characteristics have most often been the qualities sourtg in the VP. That an a lot of experience in Washington. I am afraid that the idea of thinking about 2012 does not really work wel into the decision process, and in fact, even if worled into the mix, the campaign of 2002-2003 may work very strongly against Edwards.