Posted on 10/13/2004 10:53:24 AM PDT by ncfool
Need help to support the position that Edwards was not popular at home in NC and could not have even had won his senate primary had he run again for re-election in NC. A couple of folks are saying he would have been the favorite to have won. Can somebody direct me to a poll or two showing that he would have lost in the NC primary had he ran again.
He would have gotten thru the primary quite easily, I do think He would have lost the general but I am not sure Burr
could have beat him statewide. Sue Myrick would have took him to the woodshed.
No one would have dreamed of challenging him in the Democratic primary, least of all Bowles. He would have faced a tough race for reelection against a Republican but his own party was not the problem for him.
Hmmm..... I guess I'm glad I am not a Democrat. Talk about a den of thieves...
Darn, I was hoping to be able to slam dunk that Dim witted democrap who I was debating with.
Even the Charlotte Observer can't bring itself to support Mr. Edwards. First they publish an article from their Washington DC Bureau wherein they address the fact that Mr. Edwards won't release his attendance records on closed-door Senate Intelligence Committee Meetings (Sorry, I didn't save the link and now it's been removed). Then, two days later on 9/24/04, the following appeared as the lead on the Opinion page.
The Charlotte Observer 9/24/04:
What gives?
Edwards touts empty record on Intelligence Committee
North Carolina's John Edwards is a quick study, no question.
That quality made him a whiz in the courtroom as a trial attorney. It helped put him in the U.S. Senate his first try at public office. And it played a prominent role in making that first-term senator the Democratic nominee for vice president.
Yet this man who has proven himself so quick has touted a record that is transparent.
Mr. Edwards' grounding to serve as vice president has drawn questions from the beginning of this campaign. He had been in Washington only five years when he announced his own presidential bid. Before that, as a citizen, he hardly even voted. He must convince Americans he is well-prepared to lead even without seasoning.
Given that, Mr. Edwards and the Kerry-Edwards campaign like to cite his membership on the Senate Intelligence Committee since 2001 to counter suggestions that he has too little foreign policy experience.
Mr. Edwards mentioned it during his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention. Kerry and his campaign staff cited it time and again after Mr. Edwards was picked as running mate.
Yet when a vice presidential candidate touts his record as evidence of his ability, that record better stand up. This one does not.
Mr. Edwards was an active member of the Senate Intelligence Committee early on. But his seat has been mostly empty since 2003. Most recently, on Tuesday, he missed a committee vote on the nomination of Rep. Porter Goss, R-Fla., as the next CIA director.
What gives, Mr. Edwards?
Many of your fellow North Carolinians share and admire your egalitarian background. They agree with the political views you have carried into an influential spotlight: better access to education, equality of opportunity, smarter trade policy. Seasoning aside, they want to believe your sudden dash for the White House comes from devotion to these issues, not ambition.
It's one thing to say you're exceptionally intelligent and a quick study -- both of which are true -- then let those qualities stand on their own as Americans assess your foreign policy ability.
It's another to tout a flaccid committee record as grounding and not expect people to see through it.
What gives?
You, of all people, should know the Tar Heel motto, Esse Quam Videri. It means "To be, rather than to seem."
Mr. Edwards, your exaggeration about your committee membership doesn't live up to North Carolina's creed. Nor does it clear the threshhold of leadership for the nation's second highest office.
http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/opinion/9746587.htm
IMHO, Mr. Edwards does not represent the traditional values of many North Carolinians. His internal numbers must have been so bad, that he determined to not run for reelection as a Senator contemporaneously as Lieberman did. Enjoy the Charlotte Observer post, we don't see common sense from them too often.
http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/opinion/9746587.htm
A Letter from the Editors of The Charlotte Observer on 9/24/04 slamming Mr. Edwards for his dismal attentdance at meetings of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
I don't think he has a lot of support here. Why did he forego running for another Senate term contemporaneously with his Presidential run? He had to know that he had absolutely NO chance of getting the nod from his party, let alone winning the election. Edwards' giving up on retaining his Senate seat speaks volumes.
Perhaps if Edwards had accomplished anything in the Senate we could evaluate the question.
sorry for the double post, it said it rejected my first one!
Perhaps we could evaluate the question if Edwards had accomplished anything in the Senate.
It's hard to oust an incumbent and Edwards would have had the
bankroll and backing that there was probably a better than
50/50chance he would have been re-elected. This state id=s pretty well split now and Edwards probably has 45% support at any time and with big money 5 more percent is attainablr.
I don't think Richard Burr could have beat him.
Thanks Infogeekmom, This helps me out. I also was trying to find the one link where Edwards said it was more important to be out on the stump working the campaign then it was to be in DC voting.
Freepers are the best...............
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.