I could not disagree more. My father-in-law lives in Little Rock...in Battleground State, Arkansas. The margins are thin there. It's very close there. He is a conservative...I can't imagine he'd vote for Kerry, but he called last night to say how appealing Edwards is, "at least on the surface." He doesn't come across abrasive...he has a slow southern charm. None of the arrogance that Gore carried with him...the rolling eyes...the sighs...etc. He has none of that in him. He comes across as a likeable guy, even if you don't agree with hiim. The last time a southern democrat came off that way he was elected president. Edwards adds a positive to this ticket down south that Kerry couldn't have gotten from anyone else.
If they are smart, Kerry will primarily stick to national security issues and let edwards be the point man for the domestic/economic issues. I think Edwards can articulate the economic stuff in a way that none of the other three national candidates can and that will connect with a good number of voters.
Well Drudge is trying his hardest to smear them now. I'll wait for Faos to start up a thread about it.
I think Drudge is just jealous. He never gets guys as cute as Edwards. If I had to guess a conservative poster that would start a thread about that...well, I'll let everyone else speculate...
Edwards is a slimy trial lawyer who has padded his pockets on the misfortunes of others. Once the GOP pounds that sufficiently, no Southerner worth his salt will like that man. I wouldn't call him a likeable guy, especially with his guilt-driven "two Americas" speeches full of class envy bunk.
You can say what you want but the announcement did not cause the "big bounce" the party could have hoped for. http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews839.html Even Gore's Lieberman announcement made a bigger splash. This is not good news for you people.
you don't like him because you don't agree with him. i mean on a personal level. the first impression you get from the guy is that he's genuine...that he actually believes what he's talking about. that seems awfully rare in politics today. are doctors slimy when they pad their pockets on the misfortunes of others?? do you think the others whom edwards represented feel he took advantage of them?? do you think corporations ought not bear the burden of their mistakes? by the way...another southerner rode to the white house on that "class envy bunk." twice.
Actually, the first impression I get from him is that he is trying to manipulate people with his fake tan and phony smile. When that's done, he just might sue McDonald's for billions for making people fat.
I know you've got your marching orders from Karl Rove, but this statement is divorced from reality. I don't know how much you know about trial lawyers, mass torts, or forum shopping or anything like that, (i imagine you do have a conception of them involving the word "evil" though), but: 1. most/all of the premier plaintiffs trial lawyers in med mal, mass torts, etc in the Country, Fred Baron, Ron Motley, Joe Rice, Ronnie Scruggs, etc, are from the South. 2. most of their lawsuits are filed in the South, particularly Mississipi, but also Texas, Alabama, Florida, South Carolina and Louisiana. Tort Litigation in Mississipi is one of the states principal industries (pascagoula county, in particular is a plaintiffs bar paradise) 3. most of these guys win huge jury verdicts, in the South; jury verdicts that are awarded by juries of 12 southerners, who are more than willing to redistribute millions from insurance companies, hmos, manufactureres, etc. to their fellow southerners and their attorneys. While the reasons for this are many, and socioeconomic as well as political, I don't need to get into that. However, what I do know, that your thesis, that once it gets pounded home to southerners that Edwards is a trial lawyer they will hate them, is patently ridiculous. Trial lawyers and massive jury verdicts (against all us "producers", as you'd put it) are among the chief exports of the South, and they're attributable, in no small part, to that "class envy bunk", as you put it, though it's not "bunk" when you're on the losing end of a 200 million dollar verdict.
Pollster John Zogby: “This is not a big bounce electorate. Let me repeat again: we are a nation that is split down the middle, polarized and hardened. What happened in the past 48 hours is that Undecideds are back down to the 5%-7% range. Kerry’s announcement of Edwards as his running mate brought some of those who defected into the undecided camp in June back into the fold. At the same time, it seems to have also re-energized Bush supporters. Where we are today is probably where we are going to be through much of the summer, if not through most of this campaign. http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews839.html
CBS Poll... the interesting thing is that most Americans are glad Edwards is on the ticket... ____________ CBS Poll: Voters Like VP Choice NEW YORK, July 7, 2004 John Kerry’s naming of North Carolina Senator John Edwards as the Democrat’s running mate met with a positive response yesterday, slightly improving the standing of the Democratic ticket, and also improving the image of John Kerry among voters. A majority of all voters, and seven in ten Democrats, say they are glad that Edwards was chosen. Only one in ten think Kerry should have named someone else. By more than two to one, voters think Edwards has the right experience to be a good vice president, though many are not sure he has enough experience to be a good president. CHOOSING EDWARDS There is little doubt that the choice of John Edwards was a popular one. Most voters said they were glad Edwards was chosen, and few would have picked anyone else. A minority admitted that it really didn’t matter who the vice presidential candidate was. EDWARDS AS KERRY’S RUNNING MATE Glad Edwards was chosen All Voters 52% Democrats 69% Wish Kerry picked someone else All voters 11% Democrats 9% Didn't matter/no opinion All voters 37% Democrats 22% The general good feeling about the Edwards nomination exceeds the positive reaction towards two former vice presidential nominees about whom this question was asked. In 2000, 45 percent of all registered voters said they were glad that Al Gore chose Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman; in 1988, only 33 percent said they were glad that George H.W. Bush named Dan Quayle. When asked specifically about the Edwards choice, there was a significant level of satisfaction -- both within the Democratic Party and outside it. Nearly three in four registered voters said they were satisfied (one in five was enthusiastic about the choice). As for Democrats, 90 percent were satisfied. Very few voters admitted they were angry about the choice. FEELING ABOUT CHOICE OF EDWARDS All Voters Enthusiastic 19% Satisfied 53% Dissatisfied 12% Angry 1% Democrats Enthusiastic 25% Satisfied 65% Dissatisfied 4% Angry - Most Democratic delegates were also happy with the choice. In interviews with 736 delegates to the Democratic Convention, all of whom were interviewed by CBS New and "The New York Times" before July 6, 405 had volunteered Edwards’ name as their first choice for Vice President. Another 92 named him as their second choice. No other name was mentioned as a first choice by more than 44 delegates. WILL THE CHOICE MATTER? Few voters ever admit that a vice presidential choice will change their vote. Only 16 percent of registered voters say the vice presidential candidates will have a great deal of influence on their vote this year. Eight in ten say they will vote mostly on the presidential choices. IMPORTANCE OF VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES Will have influence on vote 16% Will make choice mostly on president 81% When asked specifically about this choice, again most voters (84 percent) say it won’t affect their vote. But those who do are more likely to say the choice of Edwards will make them more likely to vote for Kerry than say it will make them less likely to do so. That is also the case for independent voters -- the ones who might be most affected and the ones most likely to still be making up their minds. EDWARDS’ IMPACT ON YOUR VOTE All Voters Makes no difference 84% More likely to vote for Kerry 10% Less likely to vote for Kerry 3% Independents Makes no difference 83% More likely to vote for Kerry 10% Less likely to vote for Kerry 4% And that slight change is reflected in the overall horserace numbers. A week ago, the race was effectively tied, with Kerry receiving 45 percent of registered voter support, and Bush 44 percent. Now, with the full tickets, these same respondents give Kerry and Edwards a five-point edge over the Republican ticket. PRESIDENTIAL CHOICE Now Kerry/Edwards 49% Bush/Cheney 44% June Kerry/Edwards 45% Bush/Cheney 44% REFLECTION ON THE CANDIDATES At the moment, Edwards enjoys far more favorable assessments than does his opponent, Vice President Dick Cheney. But there are still many voters who have no image of the Senator. VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE IMAGES Cheney Favorable 27% Not favorable 47% No opinion 26% Edwards Favorable 38% Not favorable 9% No opinion 53% Vice President Cheney has been under attack lately, and in the last few weeks, his image has declined somewhat. In late June more of this sample’s voters had an unfavorable opinion of the Vice President than had a favorable one, by a margin of 23 percent to 37 percent. But in the re-interviews, unfavorable opinion rose by 10 points. Favorable evaluations increased by only four points in the sample. While Edwards’ favorable ratings exceed his unfavorable ones by four to one, he is still unknown to a majority of registered voters. On the night after Kerry picked him, 53 percent expressed no opinion of Edwards. Naming a vice presidential candidate can affect perceptions of a presidential candidate, too. And this poll suggests some improvement for Kerry. In the last poll, unfavorable opinions outnumbered favorable ones for Kerry. These same respondents, interviewed Tuesday night, now see the Senator more favorably than not, though by a narrow margin. There are fewer voters expressing no opinion. KERRY’S IMAGE (among same respondents) Favorable Now 37% June 32% Not favorable Now 34% June 35% No opinion Now 29% June 33% In the same period, there was little change in opinions of President Bush. THE QUESTION OF EXPERIENCE Voters clearly differentiate between the experience needed to be a good vice president and the experience needed to be president. Edwards has the former, but voters are not sure he has the latter. By more than two to one, voters say Edwards has the right experience to be a good vice president. Republicans aren’t sure that’s true, but Independents and Democrats overwhelmingly agree he does. DOES EDWARDS HAVE RIGHT EXPERIENCE TO BE GOOD VP? Yes 50% No 21% In 2000, 54 percent said Joe Lieberman had the right experience to be a good vice president, while 61 percent felt that way about Cheney. But there is more doubt about whether Edwards has enough experience to be a good president. 37 percent say he does, while 41 percent say he does not. There is the expected partisan gap on this question: by more than two to one, Republicans say he does not, by nearly two to one, Democrats say he does. Independent voters, who will decide this election, are evenly divided. DOES EDWARDS HAVE ENOUGH EXPERIENCE TO BE GOOD PRESIDENT? Yes 37% No 41% Vice presidential candidates can certainly survive poor marks on this question. In 1988, Democratic candidate Lloyd Bentsen was viewed as having enough experience to be president -- and by a nearly two to one margin. By more than two to one, voters thought Republican Dan Quayle did not. But Quayle and his presidential running mate, George H.W. Bush, easily won that election. THE VP ANNOUNCEMENT: RECENT HISTORY Vice presidents have generated mixed public reactions, at least when it comes to winning votes for their ticket. The typical goal is for the vice presidents to carry his or her own state in the fall campaign. But other times there has been the additional goal of adding excitement to a ticket. For example, Geraldine Ferraro's nomination as the Democratic candidate for vice president in 1984 brought a high level of interest. But according to the CBS News/New York Times 1984 exit poll, she may have brought less than a point overall for the Democratic ticket, which lost resoundingly to Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush. It's difficult to measure the immediate impact of the vice presidential choice on the ticket’s standing in the horserace. Often, the selection of the vice presidential nominee comes during or immediately before a party's nominating convention, which also usually gives a boost to the ticket, so sorting out how much of a change is due to the vice presidential choice and how much to other aspects of the convention period is difficult. For example, in 1992, prior to the Democratic convention, George H. W. Bush led Bill Clinton 36 percent to 32 percent while Perot was at 26 percent. After the convention, Gore's nomination, and Perot's temporary withdrawal from the contest, Clinton had a 23-point lead over Bush. The 2000 election saw smaller changes. The selection of Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman by Al Gore narrowed the gap between Gore and George W. Bush from 15 points to 10 points. The immediate reaction to Bush's naming of Dick Cheney as his running mate had no discernible impact on support for Bush. The full impact of the naming of Edwards may not be known until after the Democratic convention. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This poll was conducted among a nationwide random sample of 462 registered voters interviewed July 6, 2004. These respondents had originally been interviewed by CBS News and "The New York Times" June 23-27, 2004. The error due to sampling could be plus or minus five percentage points for results based on the entire sample. The sampling error on individual change is much smaller. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/07/opinion/polls/main627915.shtml
Hilarious how bama and T_J act as if they personally know Edwards. Here are two things that might be interesting to all parties. 1. Frist, usually a Republican who takes his marching orders, greeted the Edwards news with praise. Having worked with Edwards in the Senate, Frist commended his morality, passion and accomplishments. He candidly said, in short, that Edwards is simply a good genuine man. And these guys disagree about most issues in the Senate. Frist's comment did not of course receive the media play that the attack/smear machine did yesterday. 2. A very close friend of mine is a defense lawyer in North Carolina. He's known Edwards for many years and knows his family. He has told me to my face that Edwards is straight up the real deal, a sincere and genuine human being who has his heart in the right place. Solid second-hand information for you (as opposed to cut and pastes from endentured Rove drones), that I've posted here before. These conversations with my friend started a few years ago when we were wondering if Edwards would run. Add to these anecdotes facts that people cannot dispute. Edwards did not piggyback on any family fortune. He has been very successful. He is highly intelligent.
Let me answer your childish little insults parcel by parcel. For one, that very class envy that you so talk about among Southerners would sour them on Edwards, because he's made millions off the suffering of others. It's his job to cash in on this "jackpot justice" phenomena and hype up junk science to emotionally sway jurists to stick it to producers needlessly. Madmax, there is a huge difference between compensation and simply trying to drive companies and individuals under. That's why I'm a strong supporter of tort reform. And no Sam, I'm not proud of that legacy. I'm tired of seeing companies destroyed over what a consider frivilous lawsuits based on lies. Oh, and dumbass, there is NO Pascagoula County. Pascagoula, MS, home of the Chevron Oil Refinery where my dad worked for 26-plus years, is in Jackson County. So I guess it is really hard for a non-existent county to lead the nation in such a category, eh? Guess you really did your homework there. link
It's so funny that only the GOP take "marching orders" according to those almighty, all knowing leftist bedwetters when in fact, the DNC sends out their little talking points memos to all the news organizations, which are later repeated as fact. Like that whole thing of "gravitas." It spread throughout the media like wildfire and had its roots in a memo sent to all the media by the DNC. So who's blindly goose stepping now? When I see any of the leftist empty suits blabbering on TV, they shout the same exact talking points fresh off their daily DNC rap sheet. I don't like Edwards because: A. He's anti-economic freedom (never met a tax cut he liked), pro-bigger govt. and a fervent internationalist in foreign policy B. He's a slimy trial lawyer who trumped up junk science on Caesarian sections to make millions of dollars all while contributing to the very rising health care costs he claims he wants to help you and I out with! I don't give a damn how the imcompetent GOP feels about him, but I know this.... he's not a tremendous choice. I love how the liberals here are having orgasms at his coronation. In a few weeks, no one will give a damn who the hell Edwards is.
Wow, bama, that was rather uncalled for -- "dumbass"? "childish little insults"? HOw is it a "childish little insult" to observe that Mississsippi, and many parts of the rural south, are plaintiff's lawyer meccas? It's not exactly a contentious point among most attorneys that I know; do you know differently? (FYI, Jefferson County, MS is the worst in the country -- I had one in Jackson County once that was no fun too; anyway, Dickie Scruggs is from Pascagoula and made his fortune there, which is why I was there) What is your expertise in this area? I admit that I mistakenly confused the name of Pascagoula, city, the seat of Jackson County, and where the County Courthouse is, with the name of the County. Is that your sole bone of contention here? If so I concede. I was only there once. In fact, I think I also misnomered Richard Scruggs as Ronnie Scruggs. Anything else you want to critique me on, proper pronunciation of Pascagoula in Cherokee, maybe? But anyway, I'm going to say that I know a sh-tload more about mass torts, jury trials, and the like than you do, in the same way that you know more about the difference between an AR-15 and an M-16 than I do. And other than screaming at me about confusing the name of a county seat and a county, do you have anything else to contest the point I made? i.e. that the South, and Southerners in general, produce an extraordinary amount of trial lawyers and jury verdicts, based in large part around the "class envy", which is sold to them by rich guys like Scruggs, Rice, Motley, etc, that you dismissed as bunk? No, I didn't think so.
conceding a point is not admitting defeat. admitting that you are wrong takes guts, something i've never seen you display.
so bama, if I can sift through your reply to me, it goes like this: * you do not care about Frist's surprisingly candid and heartfelt comments about Edwards. That's okay, I guess. But your official rebuttal is "I don't care," unless I'm missing something. Frist works with the guy, and you do not work with the guy, but you do not care about first-hand information. * your response to my personal information on Edwards and his sincerity was to restate that he is a "slimy trial lawyer" based on, I guess, the fact that you don't like lawyers, particularly lawyers who are good at their jobs and make lots of money. That's okay too, I guess, but it's not much of an argument. I thought you liked it when people made lots of money? As for marching orders, okay. I don't really pay attention to the DNC, and I believe you if you say you don't pay attention to Rove, but I'll say that it *seems* like you pay attention to him. Your repeated attacks on all things democratic sometimes sound like a bullet-point list produced by the GOP. maybe you feel the same way about my posts. But I don't pile on every single thing. I pick and choose the arenas of criticism that seem valid to me, and I have even argued the conservative angle on occasion.
