All things being equal, I'll take Edwards

[x-g.o.p.er]

Kerry and Edwards have very little difference on the issues, so now we get to that nebulous term “electability”. Many people say that Kerry is far more electable because of two things: he is a veteran and has vast amount of legislative experience.

I say that both of those things are very over-rated. I was a big Kerry fan initially, but after watching both Kerry and Edwards these last weeks, I think Edwards is far more electable than Kerry. He is eloquent, charismatic, delivers his message in a very positive and uplifting way, and I feel like he understands what it is to be in the ever-dwindling middle-class, because he came from humble beginnings. Kerry is a good man who would be a far better president than Bush, but he is not inspiring in the least bit. Edwards also opens up the south for us, which will make the path to the White House easier than if we had to write it off. And with Kerry, I think we would have to write it off. And as far as Kerry being a veteran, I think as many veterans are as put off by what he did after Vietnam than those who don’t care one way or the other. I personally think it took a lot of guts and I admire him for it.

Most people who pick Kerry over Edwards say he has absolutely no experience whatsoever, and will get chewed up by the Bush spin machine. I seem to remember that the main concern people had of a charismatic, southern governor in 1992 was his lack of experience……

[rhino47]

1. Kick

:kick:
I agree with you.I also think that Edwards appeals to independent voters and moderate republicans.Some in here think that appealing to republicans is detrimental .In a general election it could mean a difference between a win or a lose.You have hit the nail on the head that he is uplifting and personable.

[THUNDER HANDS]

2. the biggest difference between Kerry and Edwards

Is that Kerry is a better candidate to run against an incumbant and Edwards is a better candidate to run in an open general election.

[disenfranchised]

11. Why?

[Drifter]

3. There is no substitue for experience ...

AWOL has shown us this.

I'm not comparing Edwards to AWOL, but neither of them have much more than a fraction of the experience that Kerry has. And, yes experience is extremely important.

I am currently supporting Kerry, but I have been intrigued and proud of all the Democratic candidates (past and present).

Cheers
Drifter

[Skittles]

4. his lack of military experience bothers me

military experience didn't matter in previous elecitons but will with this one.

[arewethereyet]

16. his military experience will be negated by his voting record

15 or 20 years of voted vs 4 months in VietNam, medals and all say far more negative than positive in this area and Kerry knows it or he would not have tried to turn Chambliss' remarks into what they were not.

[AP]

5. The most interesting thing about this post is that it seems to capture

100% accurately the theme of Edwards's campaign.

Think of a campaign as a radio broadcast.

A test of a good campaign is whether the message that is being sent out from the station is the same one that is being picked up by radios around the country like you.

You just wrote EXACTLY the message Edwards is trying send to voters. It shows that's he is an amazingly competent and precise intrument for delivering the Democratic message.

I have this same experience when I talk to people live. For the people who are tuned in, they're picking up the signal, and it's crystal clear. For people who aren't picking up the signal, the problem is almost always that they haven't tuned in to the right frequency yet.

Getting people to tune into the right frequency is the easy part -- most people who vote take the trouble to tune in to the right frequency before election day (and the internet makes it easier).

The hard part is to make sure that people can transcribe the message and reproduce it. That's the part that Edwards is doing remarkably well.

[woofless]

6. I disagree. The two points you mention in your first paragraph

are not over-rated. They are fact. Personally, I am becoming weary of Sen. Edwards' constant chiming "I know people who have lived through factory closings. I lived there, I am one of them." Well, so are we all. This "just one of the boys, I am just like you" thing just doesn't play with me. I want someone who knows how to fight and what he is fighting for. Sen Kerry fits that bill in spades.

[x-g.o.p.er]

12. I disagree with your disagreement

You don't think a trial lawyer knows how to fight? Sorry, but I do, and with his experience of being in a family that struggled to make ends meet, he would fight harder for the middle class than Kerry would. Kerry just seems...aloof and disinterested sometimes, like he doesn't really give two hoots about the middle class. It seems like he's saying the right things not because he believes them, but because he has to to get votes. But hey, that's just my perception.

[AP]

14. I doubt any other candidate had millions of dollars riding totally on

their own work effort the way Edwards did as a lawyer.

If he got lazy, or put his work off to the last minute, it could have made the difference between getting justice for his client and his cleint getting NOTHING.

I wonder how hard that makes you think about what you're doing?

Does any other candidate have experience like that?

[WI_DEM]

7. me too

of the two leading candidates I think Edwards has a better chance to win and is talking about issues that matter.

[blm]

8. I'm still inspired by Eric Burdon and uncomfortable with Clay Aiken.

I do recognize that Aiken is talented and can inspire others.

[Carolina]

9. agree

:kick:

[citizen snips]

10. Edwards can get most of the independent votes.

Which is critical if we want to take back the WH.

[katieforeman]

13. Couldn't agree with you more.

Also Bob Dole was a war hero. Max Cleland was a war hero. John McCain was a war hero.

Reagan made training films during WWII. Clinton never served. They won twice.

Kerry is a good man and would be a good President. However, I don't think he would be a very popular President which means he may not be able to accomplish as much as Edwards. I think Edwards is also the most likely of the two to get a second term.

[mmonk]

15. yes, take him please

;-)