John Edwards chosen by Kerry as VP

[peachgirl]

Originally posted by Bob Slydell
Yes, but admit it -- no matter who Kerry selected, die hard liberals would be saying that this is the guy (or woman, in Hilary's case) that they wanted all along and this is the person who'll put the ticket over the top and into the White House.

It's standard Partisan Politics 101

Not this liberal. While I would have still supported Kerry, I would have been very disappointed had he chose Gephardt or Clinton because I think it would have reduced his chances of winning the election. Both of them carry too much baggage for right wingers to harp on.

You're absolutely right, wvrevy. However, Kerry's choice doesn't need to please the right wing crowd as they're never going to vote for him no matter what he does. His choice needed to appeal to both the Democratic base along with more moderate Dem's and the swing vote. I think Edwards does as good a job of accomplishing that as anyone could.

 

[peachgirl]

, he did choose a career that made him rich by taking advantage of people's suffering.

Oh please! You can say the same thing about doctors, funeral directors and at least a dozen other professions.

Considering the cases he has taken on, I'd say it's more of a case of him choosing a profession that not only made him rich, but also helped ease peoples suffering.

 

[Elwood Blues]

*yawn*

 

[dmadman43]

I think we can now all take comfort in the fact that Hillary will likely NEVER be elected President of the US.

However the election turns out, Edwards is now the heir apparent of the Democratic party. If Kerry wins and serves two terms it will be virtually impossible for Billary to challenge Edwards in 2012. If Edwards wins in 2012 and serves two terms then Billary would likely be much too old to run.

If Kerry loses, then Edwards is the guy in 2008. Hillary MIGHT have a chance, but unlikely given Edwards ambition and momentum in the Democratic party

 

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by peachgirl
Oh please! You can say the same thing about doctors, funeral directors and at least a dozen other professions.

Considering the cases he has taken on, I'd say it's more of a case of him choosing a profession that not only made him rich, but also helped ease peoples suffering.

I've not know doctors or funeral directors to take 40% of jury awards that the lawyer supposed "fought for" to get these "wronged" victims. Nor have I known doctors or funeral directors to sue people for damages.

Interesting quote from here: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/31/p...fb3eb4e4f1&ei=5070&pagewanted=print&position=

Over time, Mr. Edwards became quite selective about cases. Liability had to be clear, his competitors and opponents say, and the potential award had to be large.

"He took only those cases that were catastrophic, that would really capture a jury's imagination," Mr. Wells, a defense lawyer, said. "He paints himself as a person who was serving the interests of the downtrodden, the widows and the little children. Actually, he was after the cases with the highest verdict potential. John would probably admit that on cross-examination."

Can we now stop with the class envy arguments from the Dems? Given that the Dems have a ticket with a net personal worth of over $1 Billion dollars combined?

http://www.startribune.com/stories/587/4848689.html

 

[caitycaity]

i'm glad it's edwards; i voted for him in the primary, and one of my good friends was pretty high up on his campaign, so if kerry wins, no doubt he will end up with a nice job in the veep's office.

 

[Cinderellafifi]

I am very happy with this choice. I cannot wait for a Kerry/Edwards White House!!

 

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by caitycaity
i'm glad it's edwards; i voted for him in the primary, and one of my good friends was pretty high up on his campaign, so if kerry wins, no doubt he will end up with a nice job in the veep's office.

Doing what? Planning the intinerary for state funerals?

 

[palmtreegirl]

Originally posted by peachgirl
Not this liberal. While I would have still supported Kerry, I would have been very disappointed had he chose Gephardt or Clinton because I think it would have reduced his chances of winning the election. Both of them carry too much baggage for right wingers to harp on.

You're absolutely right, wvrevy. However, Kerry's choice doesn't need to please the right wing crowd as they're never going to vote for him no matter what he does. His choice needed to appeal to both the Democratic base along with more moderate Dem's and the swing vote. I think Edwards does as good a job of accomplishing that as anyone could.

I'm one of those swing voters and I'm very pleased with Kerry's choice of Edwards, I really like him a lot. I voted for Bush last election but I'll be voting Kerry/Edwards this time.

As far as all the negative crap being posted I'll just stick to a big old *Yawn* as my response. Everytime I see a new negative Bush ad it just seems so desperate to me, I like his positive ones much better.

It's definitely been much more interesting watching this election from our new state of PA because it's being considered a swing state.

 

[Galahad]

Originally posted by palmtreegirl
I'm one of those swing voters and I'm very pleased with Kerry's choice of Edwards, I really like him a lot. I voted for Bush last election but I'll be voting Kerry/Edwards this time.

As far as all the negative crap being posted I'll just stick to a big old *Yawn* as my response. Everytime I see a new negative Bush ad it just seems so desperate to me, I like his positive ones much better.

It's definitely been much more interesting watching this election from our new state of PA because it's being considered a swing state.

Are you voting for Kerry or for Edwards? Would you have voted for Kerry had he chosen somebody else? Is there somebody he could have chosen that would have caused you to not vote for him?

 

[palmtreegirl]

Originally posted by Galahad
Are you voting for Kerry or for Edwards? Would you have voted for Kerry had he chosen somebody else? Is there somebody he could have chosen that would have caused you to not vote for him?

I was planning on voting for Kerry, I don't think there's anyone he could've chosen that would've changed my mind. Although I would'nt have been thrilled with H. Clinton as a choice.

Now if Bush dropped Cheney and added John McCain as VP I'd be majorly conflicted because I really love McCain. I'd definitely rethink my vote if that was the case.

 

[Microcell]

Originally posted by bcvillastwo
Earlier wvrevy made the following comment,

.

If memory serves me, one of the biggest failures in business who eventually became President was honest Abe Lincoln. As I recall he was a failure at a number of things before becoming President. Yet, it seems to me that he is nearly univerally felt to be one of our greatest presidents.

Oh, wait, wasn't Thomas Jefferson a failure at business. If memory serves me when he passed on to his reward he was extremely in debt. He may have been noted for many things but he was a sad, sad failure at business and managaing his own money.

I'm sure there are other examples of Presidents who have been failures at business.

Harry Truman

I am curious as to what stand in particular of his do those of you who support Edwards are happy about? His opposition to Gay Marriage? Giving 10 billion more to homeland security?

As a Republican I would say that his stand on Partial Birth Abortion is particularly disturbing. There is also his support of Affirmative Action instead of personal responsibility. I guess he is better than Hillary, I will give him that.

 

[peachgirl]

I've not know doctors or funeral directors to take 40% of jury awards that the lawyer supposed "fought for" to get these "wronged" victims. Nor have I known doctors or funeral directors to sue people for damages.

Your comment was that he got rich off other's suffering...so do doctors. If people didn't get sick, doctors would go broke. I've never heard of a person who didn't suffer due to illness. Hospitals routinely let people die who can't cough up the bucks. Doctors refuse patients who can't pay at the time of service. Taking 1/3 of a settlement pales in contrast.

Interesting quote from here: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/31/p...print&position=

Even more interesting quotes from your link:

"I was more than just their lawyer," Mr. Edwards said of his clients in a recent essay in Newsweek. "I cared about them. Their cause was my cause."

"I took very seriously our responsibility to determine if our cases were merited," Mr. Edwards said. "Before I ever accepted a brain-injured child case, we would spend months investigating it."

Parents Felt He Cared.....
Something more than Mr. Edwards's reputation attracted David and Sandy Lakey of Raleigh, N.C., the parents of a young girl injured in a swimming pool. The Lakeys say all the lawyers they interviewed except Mr. Edwards wanted one-third of any award, which one of them predicted would not exceed $1.5 million. Mr. Edwards offered to take a smaller percentage, unless the award reached unexpected heights.

Another interesting article regarding his senate race...http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0110.green.html.

The Faircloth campaign spent $2 million in the last three weeks of the campaign on television ads that ultimately backlashed. "Their negative stuff worked, Faircloth's stuff worked against him," a Faircloth aide concedes.

By sheer virtue of his skill as a lawyer, Edwards had been able to avoid taking the kinds of cases the public detests. During the campaign, opponents tried unsuccessfully to criticize him for turning away 35 to 40 cases for each one he accepted. But such was the demand for his service that it was impossible to accommodate everyone. Even so, a close friend and fellow attorney says that, before running for Senate, Edwards had a team of doctors and nurses privately screen his record to make sure that no case he'd brought to trial could be considered frivolous: "When they got significantly into [their review], they decided he'd never come close to violating the standard."

 

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by palmtreegirl
I was planning on voting for Kerry, I don't think there's anyone he could've chosen that would've changed my mind. Although I would'nt have been thrilled with H. Clinton as a choice.

Now if Bush dropped Cheney and added John McCain as VP I'd be majorly conflicted because I really love McCain. I'd definitely rethink my vote if that was the case.

If Bush chose McCain I'd probably have to move to France.

 

[Bichon Barb]

Originally posted by Aristocath
The only thing that makes me sad about Kerry's choice of Edwards is that next January, Bush will be back in Texas full time!

Well maybe it won't be that bad Aristocath. Doesn't Bush vacation most of the year anyway?

 

[palmtreegirl]

Originally posted by dmadman43
If Bush chose McCain I'd probably have to move to France.

Why? I think it could win Bush the election if he did because a lot of us *swing voters* love the guy.

 

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by peachgirl
Your comment was that he got rich off other's suffering...so do doctors. If people didn't get sick, doctors would go broke. I've never heard of a person who didn't suffer due to illness. Hospitals routinely let people die who can't cough up the bucks. Doctors refuse patients who can't pay at the time of service. Taking 1/3 of a settlement pales in contrast.




Even more interesting quotes from your link:








Another interesting article regarding his senate race...http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0110.green.html.

I won't deny he told the victims what he thought they wanted to hear in the hopes of getting the suit and thus 40% of the jury awards. I never said he wasn't a great ambulance chaser.

 

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by palmtreegirl
Why? I think it could win Bush the election if he did because a lot of us *swing voters* love the guy.

In my opinion McCain has not the temprement for higher office. Granted making him VP would get him out of the limelight, which might actually be a good thing in the long run. I just think McCain is not polished enough to lead.

 

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by Bichon Barb
Well maybe it won't be that bad Aristocath. Doesn't Bush vacation most of the year anyway?

oh yea, that's a good one! Of course, as you well know, a President never technically vacations. (I mean, why do we see so many remarks from the President when he is in Crawford? Why does he often host foreign dignitaries?)

 

[peachgirl]

I won't deny he told the victims what he thought they wanted to hear in the hopes of getting the suit and thus 40% of the jury awards.

Tossing insults is easy, but the facts are that he didn't have to convince anyone with lies to "get" the cases. As you know if you read the article, he had more cases than he could handle and only accepted a tiny fraction of the cases he was offered.

As I said before, I hope the powers that be in the Republican party do just what they did in his Senate race. It didn't work then and it won't work now.

The more right wingers concentrate on the fact that Edwards is a lawyer the more I know they don't have a single valid complaint to use against him. Kerry's choice is looking better and better!