The media loves the pick because they like Edwards more than Kerry anyway. Watch the media ignore Edward's shortcomings (as they are doing with Kerry) and make him look like the best thing since sliced bread.

It just occurred to me why Edwards is a great pick-- he'll be running all the post election lawsuits. Suing themselves into the White House almost worked for the Dems the last time...

I don't think that Edwards really helps Kerry much at all, not even to win North Carolina.

Condi's gonna flatten him in the VP debate.

Makes me think of the late and much lamented Warren Zevon who wrote in his magnum opus "Werewolves of London:"

Well, I saw Lon Chaney walking with the Queen
Doing the Werewolves of London
I saw Lon Chaney, Jr. walking with the Queen
Doing the Werewolves of London
I saw a werewolf drinking a pina colada at Trader Vic's
His hair was perfect
Werewolves of London
Draw blood

AML:

He bowed out of the Senate race because he wouldn't win.

OJ - I agree re Edwards and NC but if you listen to the pundits Edwards is going to help Kerry sweep the South and easily defeat Bush.

oj: 'blue collar cred'? Kinda undercut by making your first public response from the steps of your Georgetown mansion, no? Methinks the Kerry campaign ought to start learning a bit about photo ops and backdrops.

AWW:

If I listened to the pundits I wouldn't have a website to compulsively, even obsessively, contradict them.

Given the hostility Kerry reportedly has towards Edwards, based on the fact he wouldn't bow down ... er, bow out of the primary race earlier than he did, it's interesting to look at the previous two instances where a presidemtial nominee took as his running mate a former primary opponent who he supposedly didn't like.

In both cases -- Kennedy with LBJ in 1960 and Bush with Reagan in 1980 -- the VP pick was not only supposed to help with a weak area (Texas and the south for JFK; Texas and the northeast with Bush), but the VP candidate was also supposed to add some political weight to the campaign. Johnson gave Kennedy some political insider experience in dealing with Congress, while Bush was to do the same for Reagan in the foreign policy field. But neither outshone the nominee in terms of charisms

Edwards on the other hand is being picked precisely because of that, in order to offset Kerry's bland personality. Given Kerry's ego, it's hard to see him not wanting Edwards to tone it down a little bit if his new VP pick starts drawing more fans on the campaign trail from Democrats than he does. Mondale had a similar problem after he tabbed Ferraro in 1984; at least Gore had the good sense to choose a VP nominee who was duller than he was in the 2000 election.

Kerry has probably spent the last 4 months dreading this day - having to choose Edwards.

Edwards has spent the last 4 months ensuring that he would be the one - look at all his fund-raising (and the negative Web chatter about Gephardt).

While they won't fight in public, it will be interesting to watch Edwards position himself just so (as to not be a mannequin). However, another feeble performance like his March appearance on Meet The Press, and he will be laughed at.

As for debate, Cheney needs only to ask Edwards why he was afraid to run for re-election. And follow-up by asking him who Yihtzak Rabin was.

NRO had a link to a Republican National Committee release on "Who is John Edwards". The first half of the release are qoutes disparing Edwards (i.e. no experience, knows nothing, etc) from, you guessed it, John Kerry. Should definitely be a GOP ad.

Somehow people have got the idea that this positions Edwards for a run for Prez in '008 should they lose this year. But is that really the case? Let's look at the company he'll be keeping-- Lieberman was a dud, Kemp, Bensten and Ferraro disappeared, Muskie self destructed, and the less said of Eagleton and Shriver the better. Only Dole managed to survive, and that took him 20 years for his try at the top. The only time I can think of a losing VP candidate actually going on to the top job was FDR, and it took him 12 years.

jim:

Have you seen the reports that Kerry actually wanted Bob Graham but the selection people told him it was too problematic and that Mrs. Kerry loathes Edwards?

Yes - but Graham was too weird, plus his moment as a 'respected' Senator probably passed about 5 years ago. I can't imagine anyone really 'liking' Edwards - he is too prepared for that sort of thing, and Teresa surely knows that Edwards makes her husband look fussy and, well, continental.

I suspect Kerry thought Graham would bring what Cheney gave Bush: solidity and experience (and no competing ego). Fat chance. Graham showed himself in the primaries, and it wasn't good.

I heard last night that Edwards has missed more votes in the Senate this year than anyone, except the Frenchman himself. Time for the ad with the bloodhounds, except they should show them tracking all over Georgetown, going past the $4 million homes, looking for the men who want to govern but never vote.

hmmm

Seems as if Edwards is going on the 04 ticket with better credentials than Bush did on the 00 ticket.

weird.

John Edwards governed a state the size of most countries?

Yes and Edwards was a senator who was on the intelligence commitee. He's also running as VP and not president.

This whole issue is pretty petty if you ask me.

Petty? The qualifications of someone to be president and the nominee's judgment in choosing him is petty? What's important? His botox treatments?

im going to give reluctantly the american people some credit, when its time to vote i hope they will see through these two phonies, edwads and kerry.i am not the brightest guy on the planet but give me a break.i could do a better job at running this country then these two imposters..