Don’t agree with all his positions, but he handled himself very, very well in the interview with Tim Russert on Sunday. He’s smart and he’s pretty. If he doesn’t step on his own tail he could well be the next President of the United States.
How do you balance out his running but not winning the last time?
I’m a big fan of his and I’d love nothing more than to see him go all the way. But I worry about his electability. He didn’t help Kerry any that I could see and he still looks just too polished like a TV preacher or something. I do think he learned a lot the last time around and he interviews as well as anyone else out there. If Hillary stumbles as I hope and Obamamania ebbs, then he’s in good position to take it.
If Kerry hadn’t run such an inept campaign he probably would’ve won. I wouldn’t blame Edwards for that, but I still think he’d be a terrible choice for the Democrats. I think someone like McCain or Giuliani would slaughter him in the general election.
Speaking as an outsider, Edwards is one of the most obviously phony politicians I’ve ever seen. Sorry, I’m sure he holds some interesting positions, but I’ve never seen a major Presidential candidate who seemed hollower. Bill Clinton, who I thought was hysterically phony, was ten times more sincere, and I don’t credit Edwards with being as bright as Clinton.
I agree. His ‘Two Americas’ populism is hard to swallow, coming from a guy who just built the most expensive home in his state. His perfect teeth, $500 haircuts, and $2000 suits just don’t mix well with a message that the rich have too much and it’s time to give more to the poor. And it’s doubly grating to listen to a message about how we all need to conserve and be better stewards of the environment while he lives in a 20,000 square foot home on a huge plot cut out of the pristine wilderness.
Edwards would make a great used car salesman, if he were selling used Rolls Royces.
Well, let’s examing your position. You thought Clinton was very phony. But you came to understand that he wasn’t. But you think Edwards is phony, so you reject him. I don’t understand your logic. Unless you think Clinton was ultimately a phony.
Why do you not credit Edwards with being as bright as Clinton? Or do you mean “not as politically astute?”
Triply when you realize he paid for that house from his share of absolutely ridiculous punitive damage awards that saw him doing everything from “channeling” a brain damaged girl to referring to his own dead son to be sure to emotionalize the jury. (One of the few views I share with John Grisham and John Stossel are their low opinion of tort tsars; that alone would keep me from voting for Edwards in a primary.)
When did I say I thought he wasn’t phony?
Perception is reality when it comes to elections. Edwards seems like a used car salesman (or a trial lawyer, actually), and thus he is. I’m really rooting for the Dems on this one, but Edwards has always seemed something of an empty suit. About as sincere as Sen Clinton and not nearly as smart.
If you read the rest of my post, I allow as how you may never have thought that Clinton was phony. So now, I assume from you comment that you think Clinton was ultimately phony. Oh well.
Any answer as to why you think Edwards is dumber than Clinton?
Seems like this is all I’m gonna do tonight. 
Why was Clinton insincere and why was Clinton smarter than Edwards?
His house is actually about 10,400 sq. ft., according to http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:7PhspDFRdIwJ:carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html%3Fid%3D3848+"john+edwards"+home&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us
How many sq. ft. is GW’s house?
Because I see no reason to assume Edwards is as bright as Clinton. Clinton, whatever his faults, is unusually intelligent, even more so than most successful politicians. It’s possible Edwards is as bright and astute, but I see no reason as of yet to believe so, especially given that he’s even phonier.
You seem to be asking people to defend their impressions of Edwards. Maybe you work for his campaign, I don’t know, but HE LOOKS AND SOUNDS PHONY. What else do you want to hear, Sam? Surely you’ve met a car salesman, haven’t you? That’s what John Edwards is like; when he says things it often sounds as if he’s acting a part, that he does not really believe what he’s saying.
Do you have anything to add to the discussion or are you just going to challenge everyone else’s opinion with “Why do you think X”?
Since all you’ve added to the debate is your impression of how he appears to you, I think my comments are allowable in this fora. I didn’t realize this was “IMHO.”
I have no ax to grind. I have no position about Edwards at this point.
This is a seriously sick and twisted world. On another thread, people are debating the merits of Dr. Gene Scott, who, despite his apparent lunacy, managed to suck enough money out of people to set up churches and tv shows that perpetuate ad infinitum. The would take a lot of people.
And then there’s a smart, articulate, interesting man who has done some very good work in his life and people don’t want to vote for him because ‘he looks like a used-car salesman’? Un. Be. Lieve. Able.
Seriously.
Clinton got into trouble when he campaigned against rich people who avoid taxes, when it turned out that he and his wife used every loophole possible to minimize their own taxes. It smacked of hypocrisy, and voters tend to not like hypocrites. But Clinton could at least point to his humble beginnings, and at no point before he became president could he be described as ‘rich’.
Edwards, on the other hand, is the poster boy for conspicuous consumption. He is EXACTLY the kind of person he claims to be against. I mean, come on… A 29,000 sq ft home, complete with full sized swimming pool, basketball court, squash court, two stages, two large garages, and a four story observation tower? What is he, the King of Orange County? He claims to want everyone to cut back on energy consumption, and yet he personally burns more energy in his home than 20 standard houses combined. He claims to want to protect the environment, but he cut down 102 acres of forest to build his mansion. And he’s not finished yet. He’s cleared away much more space than he’s already built on, but his campaign won’t say what other buildings are planned. He’s also got another 2,800 sq ft house in an oceanside gated community near Wilmington.
John Edwards has ZERO moral authority to preach the message he’s preaching. He is the worst kind of hypocrite - one who is willing to use the heavy hand of government to force others to do what he’s unwilling to do himself.
The house is only one of the buildings. You didn’t count the 15,000 sq foot recreation building adjoining the house, which has the swimming pool, racket courts, a huge lounge, two bedrooms, and a kitchen. Or the 2,200 square feet of heated buildings that exist for no reason other than to prevent him from having to actually step outside while going from the house to the rec center. All told, the developed, heated space is 28,200 square feet.
This guy probably has the environmental footprint of my entire neighborhood. If he told me I had to cut back on the meager amount of energy -I- use for the good of society, I’d sneer in his face.
I’ve got nothing against big houses. I’ve got something against a guy who has the biggest house in Orange county telling everyone else that they have to make ‘sacrifices’ for the planet. You first, Johnny Boy.
Mind you, there’s a golden opportunity here for him. All he has to do is sell the big house, give the money to the world wildlife fund or Greenpeace or Habitat for Humanity, and move into a modest home in a nice neighborhood. Hell, he can even have, say, 5,000 square feet in a gated community, to give him protection and give him space for a big office and an assistant or two. Then he’d have all the credibility in the world to ask other people to make sacrifices.
Think that will happen?
I’m going to vote for whoever the Dem candidate is in '08, but I sure hope that it isn’t Edwards. When people say that Edwards seems phony, they don’t (it seems to me) mean, “He’s really great in essence, but I hate his presentation.”
They mean (it seems to me) that the essence really isn’t there but he talks a good talk. Personally, I don’t think the essence is there AND I can’t stand his manner, look, and way of speaking.
And, yes, the man is unspeakably rich, and, although he earned his wealth through means that were probably ethical, they’re not particularly inspiring, either. I mean, he’s not an entrepreneur that added something new to the economy or whatnot, he’s a trial lawyer.
Whoo-hoo.
I think he’s got a snowball’s chance in Hell of becoming President. I never found his “two America’s schtick” to be particularly original, I never found his oratory to be particularly polished, and he seemed like a total lightweight next to Darth Cheney in the VP debate.
In the last several years he’s not even been in the Senate, he’s been a professional presidential candidate. He’s got no particularly interesting creds, no particularly interesting ideas, and fucking Hi Opal for that matter.
His candidacy? DOA.