Reply #10: Edwards only political experience

[Nicholas_J]

Is as a Washington Insider.

And his experience there is nominal. He has a record of voting in the Senate. It is not significantly different than Kerry's. ANd Edwards is ignoring most of the Super Tusday states, leaving seven out of ten of these states firmly in Kerry's pockets, most important, California, where he is beginning to be endorsed by Sacrtamento papers.

Even strong Super Tuesday showing may not save Edwards
By JASON LEFFERTS
, Sun Staff

The one-on-one battle between senators John Edwards and John Kerry for the Democratic presidential nomination may change the dynamic of the race, but it may not change the standings.

The 10-state delegate feast of the March 2 Super Tuesday is the focus of both Edwards of North Carolina and Kerry of Massachusetts, and they are looking at the 1,500-plus delegates with different strategies and different goals.

For Kerry, a dominating performance across the map could essentially end the primary season and allow him to focus on the general election against President George W. Bush. As he has in other multi-state primary dates, Kerry will likely throw resources and advertising into every state.


http://www.lowellsun.com/Stories/0,1413,105~4746~1972783,00.html

Today, the Sacramento Bee endorsed Kerry noting the differnces between Edwards and Kerry come down to experence and not much else:

Kerry is the choice
His record distinguishes him for Democrats

February 22, 2004

Sacramento Bee
Editorial



Primary voters choosing a Democratic candidate for president on the March 2 ballot face the sort of decision that has become commonplace in American politics. Ten names appear on the ballot, but the actual choice is between John Kerry and John Edwards - which is to say between a candidate whose long experience in public life has exposed his strengths and flaws and one who brings a compellingly fresh face to politics.

In this instance, it is not easy to decide.

Edwards, a first-term senator from North Carolina, is the surprise of the primary season. He has proved to be a formidable campaigner. He has displayed all the skills that made him a successful trial lawyer. He is quick on his feet and able to communicate with and empathize with ordinary people. He has been remarkably disciplined in his campaign, sticking with his strategy and his message. If he remains untested in the crucible of national politics, he also remains unscathed by months of exposure to voters across the country.

Kerry, by contrast, is a known quantity thanks to 20 years as a senator from Massachusetts, and in his campaign he has exhibited much that long has been known about him. He is more apt to be ponderous than spontaneous, more likely to dwell on the nuances of a subject than to utter the sort of glib answers that grab headlines and the attention of voters. Like anyone in the Senate for two decades, he is no stranger to interest-group politics and the art of compromise.

Beyond these issues of style and experience, not a great deal separates the candidates. (A recent exception might be Edwards' seeming conversion to a more protectionist trade policy. A close reading of the two candidates' positions, though, reveals this to be more of a difference in emphasis and communication style than of substance.) How, then, are Democratic voters to choose?

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/clips/news_2004_0222c.html