As I recently remarked, in ready for an Edwards/Obama ticket.

He definitely has better hair than Hillary.

As a moderate Republican, I'm supporting Edwards. (though i can't vote for him in the primary) I really like his populist stance.

Also, in a Presidential Race I will vote for Edwards and Obama over McCain. But I will vote for McCain over Hilary Clinton.

Because if I'm going to choose a pro-war President, I might as well choose one that has actually been to war.

I was for him before I was against him. I'm gonna hold out hope for Obama.

After the 2004 Republican Convention, McCain is dead to me.

I don't think someone whose core platform was "Two Americas" is the one to unite a divided country. That's all we need - four years of hyper-amplified class warfare.

And speaking of Kerry, did anyone notice who was sitting next to him at the SOTU last night? Someone should start a caption contest...

That's all we need - four years of hyper-amplified class warfare.

You're right -- especially after eight years of sneaky class warfare.

Last time, I was hoping for an Edwards-Kerry ticket, instead of the flipped version of that.

Edwards is a never will be. Not even as good as a has been.

Jim Webb will be President. My guys will be remakably stupid if they do not nominate him for '08.

I thought Edwards was the most promising candidate in 2004... I'd have easily supported him against Bush had he taken the nomination.

This time around, it depends entirely on who the Republicans put up. As Democratic contenders go, I think Edwards would be OK, but I'd rather see a moderate Western governor instead.

I was a McCain booster early in 2000... I wasn't too bothered by his "reconciliation" with the Bushies in 2004... but I'm very disappointed in his more recent catering to the religious right. It makes some sense in practical terms, but it has certainly tarnished his "maverick" reputation (which many moderates, I believe, found so attractive in the first place).

It's a bit early yet, but so far it looks like 2008 may be another hard decision over the lesser of two.... lessers.

Jim Webb will be President.

Boy, he sure looked like one last night. I would have voted for that guy.

When I clerked for a law firm in Raleigh, North Carolina, after my first year of law school, John Edwards was such a well-respected attorney that firms would (quietly and unofficially) send their associates to court just to watch him work. He was legendary for his insight into jury dynamics and his preparation for trial. Just imagine - a President who knows how to work with people and does the homework necessary to get the job done! How refreshing that would be!

"Last time, I was hoping for an Edwards-Kerry ticket, instead of the flipped version of that."

And to think some of Jack's "progressive" detractors dare question his lefty cred.

Libertarianly Yours,

Joe

Sorry to see Kerry out, as I think he would have made a great president. Given the gaffe, he probably had almost no chance to win the primary, so it was probably a wise choice.

Not excited about Edwards, but would be happy to see him (or any other democratic candidate) win the general. I'm waiting to see who can build excitement, and hoping Al Gore will change his mind.

Hysterical to see "Al Gore" and "...build exitement..." in the same sentence.

And to think some of Jack's "progressive" detractors dare question his lefty cred.

They're upset because Jack is proof you can be progessive, rational, and logical at the same time.

Class warfare: the longer we wait to have it out, the worse it will be. I think we're entitled to a Democratic candidate who will represent the interests of people, not money. Edwards, Obama and Webb all have that potential. But what's that thing on top of Webb's head?

as long as the Dems are the moderate wing of the Republican party, all these names trotted out.. Edwards,Clinton,Obama etc. will capture as much imagination as Kerry did;49.9%

Give me a Dem who isn't afraid of being a Dem.- one who isn't a cheerleader for Nafta/Gatt/WTO policies..one who knows that there are more of US then there are of Them.. and starts looking after the interests of the decimated working class instead of bastar... er,I mean Masters.

Kucinich is the only Dem I see that meets that standard, I expect its gonna be a long winter for the working guy..

At this point, I'm withholding judgment.

McCain is absolutely out, as far as I'm concerned. I'm not sure that any Repugnantcan could garner my vote. Whereas, several Demoncrats are worth watching, and listening to.

Allan L -

"...that thing..." on Webb's head -- looks like brains, and the smoke from a wking brain, IMHO.

and Joe a --

Sugges you get a copy of Webb's speach and read it. Webb's points about income dispariy, wafes, etc, sound like the sae things Kucinic is saying, but are coming from somebody a ;ot more electable than Kucinich ....or Edwards....

You can see Webb (and his smoking brains) give the speech on on YouTube. It's good. I think Edwards also has the capacity to be a candidate of the people. I think Obama does, too. Kucinich has the right positions on things, but no traction. Working for him is, I'm sorry to say, wasted time and effort.

Kucinich has the right positions on things, but no traction. Working for him is, I'm sorry to say, wasted time and effort.

No, No, No.

If you really believe in Dennis Kucinich's message, I heartily encourage you to work tirelessly for him. Sacrifice your free time, your income, your children and your sanity for him. Who cares about "traction"? This is about principle!

As Tower of Power put it, oh so many years ago...

Knock Yourself Out!

After watching a recent interview of Edwards, I made a contribution to his campaign. I am as frugal as they come, so parting with cash tells you where I stand. Let's see what happens.

I am betting a case of Stella Artosis that the Republicans keep control of the White House in 2008!!

Just another shiny shoed ambulance chaser. Both parties have better.

If your planning a revolution/class warfare strategy, a wealthy P/I lawyer who looks like a Ken doll wouldn't be my first choice. You need somebody that looks like Jack Nicholson in "Hoffa".

Limbaugh calls him the Breck Girl for a reason. Before they were running mates, John Kerry had this to say about John Edwards:

"In the Senate four years -- and that is the full extent of public life -- no international experience, no military experience, you can imagine what the advertising is going to be next year."

Edwards - you mean the socialist? It's not his fault, ALL the democratic candidates want to turn us into the United Socialist States of America. The republican candidates want ... well, I don't know, none of them have done squat to capture a hint of interest to me. Still waiting for a contender, Obama, Edwards and Hillary drive me into negative feelings.

Should be a not-so-interesting race.

AAA: Like so many, you use the term "socialist" in a way that implies strong negative meaning. What do you think it means?

Like so many, you use the term "socialist" in a way that implies strong negative meaning.

If its used as an economic model, I think it does imply a negative meaning. Thats not what this country is about.

"Just another shiny shoed ambulance chaser."

The Presidency is too important for us to let inane stereotypes limit the field of candidates. Lincoln was a lawyer - so was Nixon. The greatness of the one and the shortcomings of the other had nothing to do with their chosen profession.

I'm glad Kerry's bowed out; we don't need another Skull-and-Bones candidate.

I think Edwards would make a fine VP on the Gore ticket. ;-) But Gore/Clark would be even better, probably.

Oh, and it's a bit disingenuous to accuse Edwards of class warfare. It's the moneyed corporate elite that have been waging class warfare on us for years, and winning big the last six. High time to turn that around.

The "moneyed corporate elite" have been waging class warfare? Is that wrong - you don't seem to say. It sounds as if you consider it a legitimate tool to help achieve "big win(s)" if the "poor individual schmucks" or their altruistic defenders (like Edwards) employ it.

Disingenuous, huh?

Not really disingenuous -- just a little Robin Hoodish. A reasonable response to six years of reaching into the pockets of the poor and working people to fatten the rich.

What Allan said. :-)

"...inane stereotypes...". Okay, okay the shiny shoe part's a little inane maybe, but the stereotype is accurate - Edwards chased the ambulance, caught the gold ring and now he has enough money to run for President.

So, what's the politically correct term for an ambulance chasing limousine liberal?

"Ambulance chaser" is the inane stereotype unfairly applied. John Edwards is no Lionel Hutz. An "ambulance chaser" - and there are lawyers who fit this bill - practices law for profit, without scruple or conscience. If Edwards was a money-loving ambulance chaser, why would he abandon his lucrative practice for political office? So he can run for President (low salary) in the hope that he could someday get a book deal that would pay him less than he would make in a big lawsuit? Makes no sense.

Maybe, just maybe, Edwards decided to use the financial security he earned through his hard work to go into public service 'cause, you know, he wants to serve. Just a thought.

And he's not a Jackie Chiles either. But your interpretation is, I believe, a bit strict. For many folks who are not of the JD persuasion, an ambulance chaser would include those lawyers who enrich themselves to an exorbitant degree through personal injury suits.

I just have trouble accepting the idea that there was any reasonable relationship between the amount that he was awarded and the effort he expended in winning the Big Settlement? Any idea what his hourly rate turned out be? Whatever, I'm sure he sincerely believes that the good he can do with those tens of millions is of a far greater benefit to society than had most of it gone to the clients who he asserted were actually injured.

Good thing he was a lawyer and not a corporate CEO or he'd qualify for Webb's list.

I am interested in seeing if the Congress can really running things from the center, which would firm up my decision to leave the GOP for good, and then maybe I would b interested, but not in Edwards. Jim Webb, or maybe I can forgive Bill Richardson for the whole Los Alamos thing, but not Edwards or Clinton.

Without turning this thread drastically off-topic into attorney fees and economic justice, let me just say this. Edwards made a pile of money practicing law under our system. There's no evidence I have seen that Edwards was anything other than a successful, ethical attorney. The fact that he is using his financial success to go into public service is something that should be honored - it would have been very easy for him to keep his old job and shoot for further Big Money.

When Babe Ruth was challenged because he earned more money than the President, Ruth shrugged, "I had a better year than he did." Edwards' income from his law practice was earned above-board, by rules he did not make. Think Ted Kennedy wants to justify every nickle Papa Joe got when he built the Kennedy empire?

America has its issues - I'm not convinced that these issues result from having a J.D. in the White House on occasion.

The fact that he is using his financial success to go into public service is something that should be honored - it would have been very easy for him to keep his old job and shoot for further Big Money.

Oh, dont worry. The "big money" will come if he gets the nomination. He cant win without it. And then he will do the bidding of people he owes big, just like every other politician that has held the office.

So he's an attorney. BFD. Even if he's an "ambulance chaser", we'll be better off than we are with the current bunch of "oil bidnessmen", who are bigger crooks and sleazier than the slimest attorney who ever walked the earth.

Also...We're better off with him administering the laws than making new ones in the Senate.

It's amazing to see commenters go off on incidental qualities (legal education, "excitement", and -- I did it myself -- hairpieces borrowed from Trent Lott). Nancy Pelosi wasn't in the majority for 24 hours before the sniping started on her. Like, were we happier with Dennis Hastert?
It might be good to try to keep some perspective. For example, if people were persuaded that our big issue--bigger than terrorism, bigger than Iraq, bigger than the Middle East in general, bigger than the deficit--is global warming, then Gore would be the obvious best choice.

Let's see.

Southern gentleman, uber sensitive, great sincerity when the cameras are rolling, always looking out for the poor. Sound familiar ?

A rich man in a poor man's clothes.

Never shy to roll out the darling family for a photo opt. Hey, how does my hair look?

Hope we can get past all this pretty-boy s*** and find out what he will do if elected.

We are looking for a Commander in Chief, not someone to replace Bob Barker.

I'm hoping Bill Richardson gains traction.

We are looking for a Commander in Chief, not someone to replace Bob Barker.

Actually, we are looking for someone to replace a chimp.

If you believe that man can make a difference regarding global warming (strange how the South Pole is gaining in ice mass while the North Pole is losing - but we don't want to concern ourselves with facts here) - then Gore MIGHT be a good choice. Of course the fact that our economy would be thrown back to pre-1900 stuff ... again, ignore facts that we don't like.

A terrorist will/can cut off my head immediately or set off a bomb killing thousands. If I stop driving my car it might or might not keep the earth from increasing 0.5 degrees in 50 years. We all have choices, at least for now.

Man of the people.

Beacon of progressive values.

Environmentally aware.

Doesn't really care.

http://www.carolinajournal.com/

"A terrorist will/can cut off my head immediately"

Are you sure it hasn't already happened?

Ho-hum. No place to land a Gulfstream. No heliport. No Tram.

Quite a spread for a guy who's unemployed...I bet he could park a couple dozen Toyota Prius in his garages. As long as we're living in "Two Americas", I prefer living in his. The guest room room suits me just fine, Senator.

I can't imagine living in 28,000 square feet! 2,800 square feet would be an upgrade for us. What are customary contigency fees in North Carolina?

Just imagine what his electricity bill is going to be in August. I hope they've got a big coal mine nearby, or perhaps it's all powered by wind energy?

Maybe he's planning a horse paddock in that large clear cut on the North End.
Either that or the worlds most boring 9 hole course in North Carolina.

Did somebody say clear cut?

Yeah John Edwards! Haven't we had enough lawyers in the White House. He is nothing more than an ambulance chaser!

sorry,

now I get it

-digital dweeb