Centerfield

But Edwards is marginally prettier than Kerry's gut....

Interesting story. I feel more negitive now about both, although I think the promise Kerry asked of Edwards was lame. If they lost, it would be primarily because of Kerry. So Edwards shouldn't run in 2008? Gore's pick had bigger implications for the Democrats. I would love to hear the back chatter on that one.

It's ironic to hear John Kerry state that he regrets having chosen John Edwards as his running mate. I suspect many Democrats feel the same way abou having selected him as their presidential candidate. Certainly, Kerry had much more to do with the Democrats' loss in 2004 than did Edwards.

Also, if Robert Shrum is to be believed, then this article doesn't paint Edwards as being very principled with regards to his vote in favor of the Iraq War Resolution. Apparently Edwards knew in his heart that going to war with Iraq was wrong but decided to support the resolution anyway for purely political reasons. I'm not naive enough to believe that political calculation aren't routinely involved in the decision over whether to support a particular piece of legislation, but if there's one decision that should be considered without regards to political reason, it should be the decision to go to war.

Edwards is a bit of a "Johnny come lately" in his opposition to the Iraq War. I certainly don't remember him speaking out against the war during the 2004 campaign. His change of heart is certainly more believable than that of Hillary Clinton, whose sudden epiphany that the war was a bad idea conveniently came just weeks after the Democrats took over both houses of congress.

Still, much of Edward's "Golden Boy" luster is lost. His defense of his voting to authorize the war did not strike me as all that credible when he was on Meet the Press back in February, and his economically populist "Two Americas" theme is growing stale. It's kind of hard to paint a "doom and gloom" perspective of American prosperity given that the economy is doing reasonably well and unemployment is about as low as it has ever been.

It's comical to hear Kerry complain that he ought to have gone with his gut. Not because it's very typical of the second-guessing a loser inevitably indulges in(which it is), but because Kerry is such a crown prince of the realm of the finger in the wind. I don't feel he knows his own gut.

IMO, Edwards lacks a fundamental gravitas, and I don't view him as a genuine player for that reason. He comes across as whiny, and I also think he has a little bit of a Carteresque vibe that comes across on a visceral level and will turn folks away. That's entirely unfair, and ought not to matter, but I think the lilt in the voice and the haircut lead some folks to feel like dismissing him out of hand. And I find that his populism has a faux stank to it.

I agree with the assessment that the article was fascinating. I'm not even a political junkie and I thought so. Maybe I would become a political junkie if I were pointed toward more of this kind of reading. The funeral home story was bi7zare, not so much because of what Edwards did, but because of his re-telling the story the way he did. Creepy.

Kerry is right. Had he picked Gephardt, he would have won Missouri and Ohio. I said it then, John Edwards cost him the election.

I don't think the economic issue is stale. The middle class is struggling in this country for a variety of reasons. The numbers for employment don't reflect the actual condition of people's lives; inequality is growing by leaps and bounds, layoffs are increasing and jobs are being exported. I'm not necessarily a John Edwards-style "populist" and I think a lot of the rhetoric is overstated, but I disagree that this is not a cogent issue.

I thought Edwards was a lot more impressive than Kerry, at least in the debates in 2004, but I agree that his "Johnny-come-lately" move to the left is disturbing. However, given the fact that Hilary and Obama have pretty much staked out the center, I think there needs to be someone in the race to the left.