September 7, 2004
WHAT DID I SIGN ON FOR?:
Edwards Stays on the Sunny Side of the Street (Dotty Lynch, Beth Lester, Clothilde Ewing, Lauren Glasser and Allen Alter, 9-3-04, CBS News)
Sources tell CBS News that Democratic vice presidential candidate John Edwards was apparently taken aback by the hot Kerry rhetoric.
Just in case you thought losing the support of the Democratic Senate Leader was the low point, now the vice presidential candidate is scared of him. Posted by Orrin Judd at September 7, 2004 7:08 AM
Another reason Edwards was a bad VP pick (besides the no experience, trial lawyer background) was that his reputation was as a nice guy. Becoming the traditional VP attack dog doesn't suit him (see Dem primary where he didn't attack much) and if he tried he would look foolish. Then again Kerry has moveon, Michael Moore, and unsubstantiated rumours in books (Kitty Kelly) to do his attack work.
Posted by: AWW at September 7, 2004 8:21 AMEdwards was the only Democrat to even mildly criticize Kerry in the primaries - he had to know what kind of snob he was getting into bed with.
Of course, if he keeps leaking stories like this, he will be well positioned to say (on Nov. 3) "I look forward to a positive debate on the issues with President Bush. The negative Republican attacks of the past year will not help govern this nation".
Posted by: jim hamlen at September 7, 2004 8:39 AMThink he's scared now? Wait 'till Edwards is on the stage with Kerry during his concession speech, and "Vietnam" is the only word the senator is able to make come out of his mouth.
Posted by: John at September 7, 2004 8:54 AMAWW
You're right that Edward's seem almost passive. Don't forget that Republicans were stuck with a "nice guy" VP in Kemp. Fortunately Cheney can do the deed when necessary.
Big dang help Kemp was. All he ever did was talk about how great John Kennedy was. (like 1994 never happened, gee whiz Jack we are the majority now, try praising a Republican occasionally) That plus Bob Dole saying "well I could have just as easily been a Democrat".
Posted by: h-man at September 7, 2004 9:15 AMh-man:
Didn't Dole's numbers go up once Kemp joined?
"According to numbers crunched at the time by Charles Cook of the respected Cook Political Report, the Kemp pick had more bounce than "flubber." With younger voters aged 18 to 29, Dole jumped nearly 30 points after the convention. In the west he closed a 28-point deficit to a 2-point deficit. Among households making more than $50,000 a year, Dole moved from 13 points behind to 13 points ahead. Again, how much of the gain was from the convention and how much of it was from Kemp alone? We don't know, but it's fair to say Bob Dole was feeling pretty good with Kemp at his side coming out of the convention."
http://www.nationalreview.com/goldberg/goldberg200407161019.asp
Posted by: M Ali Choudhury at September 7, 2004 10:32 AMAnother reason Cheney was a brilliant choice. Any VP that is looking ahead 1 or 2 elections can't be much help to the current nominee.
Posted by: Buttercup at September 7, 2004 10:32 AMAli:
Dole's Mark Helprin influenced speech was one of the two good ones he's ever given--the other written entirely by Helprin.
Posted by: oj at September 7, 2004 10:44 AMSpeaking of attack dogs, anyone heard from the Otterhound Teddy lately.
Posted by: genecis at September 7, 2004 10:58 AMAli
Okay I won't argue that Kemp didn't help the ticket, but the subject was "nice guy" VP's and Kemp seemed overly nice for a person like myself (who hasn't ordinarily been described as a "nice guy")
Posted by: h-man at September 7, 2004 12:26 PM