John Edwards for President  

Posted by Jessica in , , ,

I really really really love John Edwards. I wasn't always a big supporter of his candidacy, but as I started thinking more and more about it, I realized he would be my top choice for the Dem nomination. Why, you ask?

I believe he is the most electable Democrat in the field so far. I think running as Kerry's VP was both good and bad. Bad in that many people didn't like Kerry (I loved him). But good in that he has a lot more name recognition and has been tried and tested on the campaign trail.

We know that Republicans will go after his career as a "trial lawyer." I happen to think the world has a place for trial lawyers and I have had nothing but good experiences with them. Yes, some of them are certainly "ambulance chasers", but many have good intentions and are there to help the little guy. The other negative with Edwards is his lack of experience. Having been a lawyer and then a Senator, he has no executive experience and correct me if I am wrong, but he has no experience with foreign policy, except what he did as a Senator.

I don't think foreign policy experience is a necessary litmus test. Not when we don't know who would run as his VP (maybe Clark or even Richardson-either of these would make up for his lack of experience in the aforementioned areas). So, his two biggest weaknesses are things that he can easily overcome.

The thing about Edwards is how attractive he is to Republicans and Independents. I have 3 really close friends of mine who are strong Republicans. Upon talking to them about the '08 race, they have all said the only Democrat they would vote for is Edwards. Now I know it is early and it is anecdotal at best, but I think they are at least somewhat representative of a larger group.

Edwards is charismatic, good looking, and has a great accent. Democrats from New York, Mass., and other northeast states, I don't believe, are electable at this point in time. We need Democrats to run from other areas of the US. This is also a good thing for Obama because he is from the midwest and doesn't appear to be so elitist (don't get me started on how I think the term "elitist" is incorrectly used by Repubs).

Edwards also has a populist platform on which he is running. I think most people would agree that poverty is an issue that must be addressed. Maybe I am not paying attention, but can someone tell me what Obama and Hillary's platforms are? Besides the fact that they are Democrats?

I love how Edwards isn't afraid to say what might not be so popular. Obama and Hillary provided NO leadership on the recent vote to continue funding the war. Obama missed the vote of no-confidence for Gonzales. The vote in and of itself isn't a huge deal, but I think it is symbolic and somewhat important.

I remember reading how Hillary and Obama spent six figures on polling. This early in the game, you aren't polling for numbers, you are polling for messages. Edwards spent nothing. Does that mean that Obama and Hillary are tailoring their message based on polling and Edwards is, gasp, saying what he actually believes!? Heaven forbid we should vote for a candidate who actually doesn't say what his pollsters tell him to say but says what he/she actually believes in.

Edwards is the only candidate that can beat any of the Repubs running. He is our best shot at the White House and he has my full support.


Post a Comment