Edwards may or may not be the nominee in '08, but he'll be excellent bar..

[AP]

...over which the nominee will have to clear if the nominee is someone other than Edwards.

Edwards -- if he runs, which is a big IF -- will set the frame for a debate the outcome of which will be a set of ideas and arguments that are Democratic strengths: jobs, race, class, poverty and middle class opportunity.

The other candidates will have to take on these issues squarely if they want to be the nominee, and I think that's a great thing. If other candidates want to convince Americans that terror and fear is more important, go for it. I don't think they'll succeed, and I'll be glad to see that issue addressed and settled in the primaries.

Another thing to keep in mind is that one of the reasons Edwards ran at all this year is because he knew that he was an excellent antithesis to Bush. Everything about him contrasted with Bush in a way that highlighted what an ass Bush was.

Granted, we won't know who the Republican nominee is in advance, but I highly doubt Edwards will run again if his persona is not appropriate for the historical moment. However, I believe that class an opportunity are going to be a HUGE issue in 2008 -- even bigger than this year. Which will make Edwards perfect if not as a candidate, than as the person the eventual nominee will have to take down first.

I hope people realize how advantageous it is for Democrats to have Edwards as that person.

In fact I sense that a lot of the hating on Edwards (if not the product of complete ignorance) is because people without the Democratic party's best interests in mind know in their heart that what I'm saying is true.

[derbstyron]

1. I supported Edwards in the primary.

And he was one of the things that swayed me for Kerry.
I didn't think Kerry was "electable" and I thought Edwards helped in that matter. He seemed obviously missing from the campaign for a stretch of time.

And he obviously wanted to fight on for the Ohio vote where Kerry didn't. Behind the scenes friction (they had been rumored to not like each other at first) or just setting himself up for 2008?

Gonna be tough though. He's got nothing and he'll be out of the public eye for four years. The desire for "payback" didn't help Gore much 4 years laters.

It seems you get one shot, blow it and that's it.

[liberalhistorian]

13. Electable? Really?

Edwards couldn't even deliver his own state of North Carolina, for God's sake! Kerry was far more electable than Edwards, Edwards would have done much worse.

[spooky3]

17. how many times did the campaign send him to either Carolina, or to

Virginia?

They chose to have him spend most of his time in the rural Midwest. And that may have kept Kerry as close as he was.

If you're unhappy about North Carolina, you should raise your concern with the campaign decision makers' choice of how to use Edwards.

[derbstyron]

20. Exactly

IMO this campaign was BADLY run (until about the last six-eight weeks). The misuse of Edwards is one of those irritations. The only place I consistently saw Edwards was in FL and this state is really not a part of the south as people traditionally think of it.
It's a mixture. Used to be anyway. :(

[Snivi Yllom]

31. Edwards was unable to speak up for himself ?

He was unable to tell Cahill this is bullshit, let me stump where I can help? Edwards himself agreed with the decision to campaign where he did.

FYI, reports in the papers today said Edwards wanted to fight on during the big campaign powwow yesterday morning and not concede. Edwards is quite capable of expressing himself.

[AP]

32. Did they keep fighting?

Maybe Edwareds also said that he wanted to campaign more in Miss, Ark and NC.

[Squeech]

33. Uh, remember this?

Al Gore couldn't deliver Tennessee either.

[JI7]

2. great points

when Kerry picked Edwards he didn't just pick someone who can help him with a certain group of voters or to balance the ticket geographically. he picked someone who was a good candidate overall in itself including for president.

[JohnKleeb]

3. Edwards doesnt deserve to get hell because of ignorant people

He's a good man, I really think he was the right choice for VP. Best to luck to him in whatever he does, I really wish he could be VP though :(.

[JI7]

4. me too

i love Kerry and i love Edwards. they were a great team. they got a huge turnout including large turnout of younger voters. but all those anti gay measures on ballots helped get the turnout of right wingers also, and in republican leaning states like ohio it was a lot of help to republicans.

the republicans put those anti gay measures on the ballots in the first place as a strategy to increase turnout of their voters.

[JohnKleeb]

8. yep you got that right

I am just disappointed Kerry wont be president, he would made a great one.

[PurityOfEssence]

5. There's a tiresome and perverse dislike of prettiness among intellectuals

The assumption is that anyone good-looking is obviously an airhead and doesn't really deserve his/her success. Couple this with the feeling that by going with telegenic personalities one is somehow cheating, and we paint ourselves into a classic corner of self-defeat. Too many on the left want to win because of the correctness of their cause and the sense of their arguments, whereas the right knows the score: win, period.

Sadly, the base on the right seems to want it more, and that's something I have a hard time coming to grips with.

This election was the triumph of hatred: exit polling confirms that the number one issue was the desire to subjugate homosexuals; it's not a good day for the country. We've shown ourselves to be more motivated by bigotry and desire to demonize "different" people than anything else. (But I digress...)

As a longtime fan of JRE, I wish him well, and I'm sure we've not seen the last of him. Whether he's the next nominee or not is a very open question. We're going to get Hillary shoved down our throats like there's no tomorrow, and that just depresses me.

[derbstyron]

6. With regard to Hillary: I hope not. She can't win FL or any other South

[JI7]

7. i think he might be referring to the media pushing it

just like they did for 2004 where they kept pushing stories about how hillary will run up to the days of actual voting.

[PurityOfEssence]

9. It's not just the media; many individuals will do it too.

Just like the endless calls for Gore on this board, there will be many who will want her for various reasons.

If we're going to go with a lightning-rod type of risky candidate, I'd want one who's more liberal and less encumbered with baggage.

[Democat]

10. I like Edwards but...

I don't see him winning the presidency anytime soon after this mess.

He needs to get back into the government and get some more experience and experience in foreign policy.

[theboss]

11. Edwards is going to get the blame

In two weeks, the Conventional Wisdom is going to be that Kerry should have gone with Gephardt. Just watch.

It's not fair, but it will happen.

[Robeson]

22. I think he should have gone with Gephardt, but...

...I said that before he picked Edwards. Thats not to blame Edwards, because this was Kerry's decision to make. And Edwards may have a great political future.

But, Edwards brought nothing on the electoral map to our side, and Gephardt could have brought us electoral votes. He very well could have brought us his state, which was close, and he would have helped to close Union ranks. A large percentage of Union votes went to Bush in Ohio. Gephardt would have help to keep them in line, simply because of Union loyalty to him.

I don't blame Edwards. I blame Kerry. And this one decision may very well have cost him the election.

[AP]

24. If it is, it's because they Repubs are trying to undermine a candidate...

...with an excellent chance of winning in 08.

[spooky3]

12. I'm not sure that he would want to run again in any race.

If I were he, I would be privately cynical, and probably heartsick, for a long time about this experience. I'm sure he'll reflect deeply about what he wants to do with his remaining years.

For someone who has many desirable options to political life, he is to be greatly admired for going full throttle.

Let's not forget that lies carried the day. As Edwards said, the facts were on the Kerry-Edwards side. Is he going to be willing to stoop to that level in order to win? Or will it take our sliding into a horrible disaster affecting most Americans more than they perceive the current ones do, in order for any Democrat to prevail?

I tend to think of political reality as a pendulum. Things had swung badly off course in the 60s and it took a near revolution and a swing in the opposite direction for us to regain our course. The pendulum was swinging in the 80s too. It will swing again.

[Skwmom]

15. Do you really believe that Edwards would worry about what level

he had to stoop to? My God, the Democrats are as blind as the Bush supporters.

[Skwmom]

14. If Edwards is the bar, how low is the Democratic party willing to go?

Edwards is a phony, smarmy self-serving jerk. Edwards could care less if his "persona is appropriate for the historical moment." It's all about Edwards.

I heard a lot of negative Kerry comments but that was nothing compared to the comments about Edwards).

Do you really believe this b.s. you write or are you paid by the word? Edwards can talk his "Two Americas" canned speech until the cows come home. Not enough voters believe the phony smuck.

I just love this part - "Another thing to keep in mind is that one of the reasons Edwards ran at all this year is because he knew that he was an excellent antithesis to Bush. Everything about him contrasted with Bush in a way that highlighted what an ass Bush was." Kerry/Edwards made Bush look good to his disillusioned supporters. Edwards does remind me of Bush though - ever notice how he has the same dumb stupid look on his face when he is in front of a crowd?

[AP]

25. Welcome back.

Missed your winning personality and pearls of wisdom.

[PopSixSquish]

27. Welcome Back, Did You Bring Your Little Friends With You?

or is this a solo flight?

[Julien Sorel]

16. Edwards has more charisma in his thumb than

Lieberman does in his entire body. Edwards was able, coming from almost nowhere, to end up the last man standing against Kerry in the primaries. Lieberman was plucked out of obscurity by Gore for his strong stances on moral issues. Yet Lieberman was leading the polls at the beginning of the primary season, because he had name recognition from 2000.

Add strong name recognition to Edwards' demonstrated gifts as a politician, and you have a powerful candidate. Edwards is in a good position for 2008.

It's easy enough to keep in the public eye when you're out of office. You write op-ed pieces, you do fundraisers and help with organization. Reagan did a radio program and public speaking engagements. Edwards will find a way to stay around if he wants to.

[Keirsey]

18. We need Edwards

leading the fight against tort reform.

Bush* wants tort reform, and if that means what he did in Texas, then you know consumers, workers, and citizens in general, are going to get screwed.

If you don't know, then read Bushwacked.

[John_H]

19. Can someone tell me what edwards is going to do for the next 4 yrs. to

stay in the public eye and build a constituancy? If anyone thinks hillary et. al. are going to let him become DNC chair, might I interest you in some Jeb-certified land bordering the everglades?

[candy331]

21. People, People get real Edwards is history and well should be so

I will say again and again the Dems better clean house because it will only get worse, 06 will show you even more losses in the house.

[AP]

23. Lincoln lost a senate race, spent four years practicing law and making

anti-slavery speeches, and then won the presidency. Ten years before losing that race, he was a one-term congressman.

[liberalhistorian]

26. Yes, that's absolutely true,

the problem is it can't be done that way anymore, not in this time. You lose even once and the media never lets you or anyone else forget it and you're stuck with it.

[AP]

28. Lieberman did not fail to get the nomination because he tried and lost...

He failed to get the nomination because he was the worst candidate. He was an early favorite and failed to build on that.

Gore didn't run not because the media gave him his chance and he lost. He did not get the nomination for two reasons: (1) the media destroyed him in 2000 and he couldn't redeem himself from that, and (2) because he and his wife wrote two picture-books about family, he went arround the country for two weeks, then did opinion polling and found that even after a two-week publicity blitz, people were more excited about the other candidates running for president. Had he written two books with more text than photos about the middle class squeeze, encroaching fascism, and the role Iraq and the tax code play in that, he might have polled a little better.

The media has not destroyed Edwards. In fact, I think it didn't cover him enough in 2004. I think there are lots of people out there who still have some more to learn about Edwards. And I also think Edwards has ideas about America that will take hold once he uses the podium to express them that 2004 has given him.

[Snivi Yllom]

29. Oh come one. Edwards lost NC by 13 points

Kerry would have done MUCH better with someone like Gephardt who could have related to the rural voters.

[AP]

30. Reread my post.

[Dukakis88]

34. We need BRAND NEW people...

Running these people -- Edwards, Hillary Clinton, etc. -- makes it too easy for the GOP. They have their reams of files and tactics in place on how to smear and distort the views and records of these people. It just makes me tired to think of having to listen to that shit again.

We need new people with new ideas who can tear new assholes in the GOP.

[AP]

35. We need to capitalize on the investments we've made in good people.

I don't want to abandon the good things that have been created. I want to build upon them.