It's Edwards!

[Agathon]

@ Imran.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Bush... debates... 2000. That's all you have to say.

What, that Gore killed himself in the debate and shot off his own feet? If Gore actually had ANY sense, the debates would not have ended up the way they did. Cheney is not going to make the same blunders.

Edwards is NOT stupid, and his quite successful career as a lawyer is proof enough of that.

You do realize that there are rocket scientists out there who, when you take them out of their element, are really quite dumb. Just because he's a successful lawyer doesn't mean he ain't stupid in other things.

I do find it ironic that Imran is arguing the innate stupidity of a lawyer.

If Edwards is stupid it means all lawyers are . I guess this is why they have us take logic classes in school, so much of the outside world never uses it .

Besides, he's a trial lawyer, an ambulance chaser, if you will .

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Bush... debates... 2000. That's all you have to say.

What, that Gore killed himself in the debate and shot off his own feet? If Gore actually had ANY sense, the debates would not have ended up the way they did. Cheney is not going to make the same blunders.

Gore was only half the story. Bush held himself in the debates competently, if not spectacularly. He was obviously coached a great deal, and with the low expectations he had to meet, his merely not making a blunder was enough to ease doubts about him and for his campaign to trumpet his performances as great triumphs.

You do realize that there are rocket scientists out there who, when you take them out of their element, are really quite dumb. Just because he's a successful lawyer doesn't mean he ain't stupid in other things.

And you think Edwards is out of his element in this case?

Bush was out of his element in 2000, again, and did just fine, thanks to...lots of coaching and prep work! That's exactly what they'll do for Edwards. And I'll bet Edwards will be better in his debate performance than Bush was in his.

If Edwards is stupid it means all lawyers are

No, but I'm getting the feeling I'm getting to know a stupid lawyer right now.

[Dinner]

Edwards might help in in North Carolina but I doubt Kerry will pick him up any of the swing states. Still, Gephardt would have cost Kerry states so Edwards is a better bet.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Bush held himself in the debates competently, if not spectacularly. He was obviously coached a great deal, and with the low expectations he had to meet, his merely not making a blunder was enough to ease doubts about him and for his campaign to trumpet his performances as great triumphs.

Competant only works if your opponent ****s up royally. Since Gore did do so, Bush was able to skate by. Saying Gore was half the story ignores the full effect of Gore's actions in the debates. If Gore hadn't sighed loudly or approached Bush while speaking (in debate 3), we'd be taking about whether Gore can win reelection.

Bush was out of his element in 2000, again, and did just fine, thanks to...lots of coaching and prep work! That's exactly what they'll do for Edwards. And I'll bet Edwards will be better in his debate performance than Bush was in his.

You keep comparing Bush to Edwards, but you totally fail to compare primary season. Bush did decent enough against McCain (which may have been McCain's fault), while Edwards was GOD AWFUL in the Dem primary. He was ripped apart by just about everyone else on stage. He had no clue about important policy, and I bet he was coached and prepped before that. If he wasn't, then he isn't fit for veep duty anyway.

I'm sure Quayle was prepped and coached too, but once you get out there it is a different story.

The harping on Bush as not being smart totally ignores the fact that he is an ok (ie, competant) debater from back in the Texas days (but still should have been schooled by Gore, who knows better), while Edwards is a crap debater.

[Sava]

I like this choice. I think Edwards is a skilled politician with charisma. People on Poly seem to have forgotten that he won his Senator seat in South Carolina taking on the protege of the retiring Jesse Helms. Edwards went up against the Helms Republican machine in South Carolina and won.

I'm not a fan of the trial lawyer thing, but at least he made his living suing insurance companies and other assorted crooked corporate types. The one good thing about that is that he was suing guys more slimy than trial lawyers.

I can't wait to see him in a debate against Cheney. Edwards was great in the primaries. Considering his lack of credentials as a presidential candidate, his charisma in those debates was what made him a contender. And for people who consider him "stupid", he won lots of cases against insurance company lawyers (some of the most well-funded and competent bunch). Edwards has had great success in life considering his background. I doubt if anyone on Poly can even come close to the success Edwards has had in life. So accusations of "stupid" are baseless and hollow considering the people they are coming from.

BTW, diplomat, I agree with your assessment completely. It's good to see you on base.

[MichaeltheGreat]

I wouldn't care if Kerry picked the Son of Sam, I ain't voting for Bush.

[Sava]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
I wouldn't care if Kerry picked the Son of Sam, I ain't voting for Bush.

[Japher]

I wouldn't care if Kerry picked the Son of Sam, I ain't voting for Bush.

than obstain

Bush 2004
smart enough to know when he lied

[Imran Siddiqui]

People on Poly seem to have forgotten that he won his Senator seat in South Carolina taking on the protege of the retiring Jesse Helms. Edwards went up against the Helms Republican machine in South Carolina and won.

And for people who consider him "stupid", he won lots of cases against insurance company lawyers

The ability to win cases and the ability to be an intelligent politican are not the same thing at all. Just because some ambulance chasers chase them in BMW's doesn't speak to their general intelligence outside of practice.

I doubt if anyone on Poly can even come close to the success Edwards has had in life.

... which means he was successful in business. I think we'd consider Einstein to be smarter than most men who were alive at the time, even though the you had businessmen on Wall Street making 100 times more than he was.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Competant only works if your opponent ****s up royally.

No, it also works if expectactions are low enough to be easily surpassed. Gore's ****up in debate 1 wasn't enough to kill him alone--had Bush had a ****up as well, the dynamic wouldn't have changed all that much (since the polls had tightened by that point anyway).

You keep comparing Bush to Edwards, but you totally fail to compare primary season. Bush did decent enough against McCain (which may have been McCain's fault), while Edwards was GOD AWFUL in the Dem primary. He was ripped apart by just about everyone else on stage. He had no clue about important policy, and I bet he was coached and prepped before that. If he wasn't, then he isn't fit for veep duty anyway.

Okay, now you're making **** up. I watched all the primary debates, and while there was nothing stellar about Edwards, what you're saying here is patently false. Nobody "ripped apart" Edwards in the debates. In fact, because of the fact that he was so exceedingly civil and refused to go negative, he pretty much got the same courtesy from his opponents. The only people who got ripped on in the debates were Dean and Gephardt.

Now, Edwards did make a blunder in regards to the DoMA, which I noted at the time, but what other big mistakes did he make? None that I saw. And not knowing what DoMA said, considering he wasn't in the Senate at that time, isn't that huge of a deal, although it is lamentable.

But other than that, your playing up his debate performances as being far more abysmal than they actually were.

And Bush's primary debate perfomances were at least as bad as the Edwards claims you are making, if not worse. I remember them well, and was constantly struck by how innocuous they were compared to his rivals. But the media didn't seem to care and the GOP had already annointed him, so it didn't matter.

I'm sure Quayle was prepped and coached too, but once you get out there it is a different story.

And Quayle was elected VP in 1988. And in 1992, he did decent enough against Gore in the VP debate. He held his own.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


With a major medical history. And impressive military experience - having had "better things to do," than go to Vietnam, he really sunk his teeth into Panama, then whined at Powell about why Schwarzkopf wasn't "ready to go" into a direct frontal assault with the troop strength in place during December, 1990.

"I've been shot at by professionals. Being shot at by an amateur is no big deal" - USAF Chief of Staff Gen. Larry Welch, after Cheney publicly (and inaccurately) accused him of "freelancing" on Capitol Hill.

Of course, Cheney's experience with government pork and lobbying is real helpful.

Then again, Bush Sr. picked "It's a terrible thing to lose your mind" Danny "I spent the war in Indiana" Quayle.

............. experience in government He sure didnt get on the ticket cos he was popular with the voters.

[Japher]

Edwards got the job only because Kerry was told 'no' by everyone else in the world

[mrmitchell]

WOOHOO

I was hopin' for this jackass.

KERRY/EDWARDS '04

[Imran Siddiqui]

Gore's ****up in debate 1 wasn't enough to kill him alone

In a close election, yes it was. It killed him in the polls. It turned what may have been a clear win inro probably a loss.

Nobody "ripped apart" Edwards in the debates. In fact, because of the fact that he was so exceedingly civil and refused to go negative, he pretty much got the same courtesy from his opponents.

Because it was 'civil' he wasn't ripped apart! That's funny! His ideas were pulled apart and destroyed, by yes in civil discourse, but still ripped apart.

And not knowing what DoMA said, considering he wasn't in the Senate at that time, isn't that huge of a deal, although it is lamentable.

That's like saying you don't know what Roe v. Wade is because you weren't in politics then! DoMA is a HUGE issue and not knowing it displays how utterly out of touch and ignorant he was.

And Quayle was elected VP in 1988. And in 1992, he did decent enough against Gore in the VP debate. He held his own.

Quayle was elected VP because Bush creamed Dukakis. In '92, Gore really knocked him silly. Maybe because it was 'civil' you didn't notice.