Wednesday, July 07, 2004
50,456,002 < 50,999,897
I'm happy that Kerry picked Edwards -- sometimes the most obvious choice is the most obvious choice for a reason. Edwards is a good campaigner with a fresh face, the media likes him, AND he's a Southerner.
That said, I wonder how much of an effect the VP candidate has on the race. There's a lot of variables, especially in a race as close as this one will be. Do you pick the guy with the most national appeal or someone that can deliver you a key state? Gephart might have brought MO, but then again he was in the House not the Senate so his state-wide appeal was an unknown commodity. And he's even more boring than Kerry ... having to sit through four more months of him going on and on about his father's milk run might have put Bush over the top.
Edwards will be good. The Cheney/Edwards debate will be a highlight. I worry that Cheney's foreign policy gravitas will make Edwards slick talk about two Americas look small and petty. I read in the NYT yesterday that Kerry was a champion debater when he was at Yale ... well in any case he can't do any worse than Gore did. I think that it will be harder than it looks to credibly criticize Bush on the Iraq war, especially since Bush can always shoot off the old, "Then why did you vote for it." Of course that's not a really great argument -- but it will be an effective rhetorical tool. AND if Bush manages to sneak in a, "There you go again," I might just vote for him based on the size of his balls alone.
I am 1-1 in bold predictions. I was wrong about Edwards winning the nomination, but I was right in 2000 when I said it would come down to Florida.
I predict that Kerry will win the popular vote by more than Gore. That's all I got.
By the way, if anyone wants to start a movement to abolish the Electoral College, I'm in.
|
That said, I wonder how much of an effect the VP candidate has on the race. There's a lot of variables, especially in a race as close as this one will be. Do you pick the guy with the most national appeal or someone that can deliver you a key state? Gephart might have brought MO, but then again he was in the House not the Senate so his state-wide appeal was an unknown commodity. And he's even more boring than Kerry ... having to sit through four more months of him going on and on about his father's milk run might have put Bush over the top.
Edwards will be good. The Cheney/Edwards debate will be a highlight. I worry that Cheney's foreign policy gravitas will make Edwards slick talk about two Americas look small and petty. I read in the NYT yesterday that Kerry was a champion debater when he was at Yale ... well in any case he can't do any worse than Gore did. I think that it will be harder than it looks to credibly criticize Bush on the Iraq war, especially since Bush can always shoot off the old, "Then why did you vote for it." Of course that's not a really great argument -- but it will be an effective rhetorical tool. AND if Bush manages to sneak in a, "There you go again," I might just vote for him based on the size of his balls alone.
I am 1-1 in bold predictions. I was wrong about Edwards winning the nomination, but I was right in 2000 when I said it would come down to Florida.
I predict that Kerry will win the popular vote by more than Gore. That's all I got.
By the way, if anyone wants to start a movement to abolish the Electoral College, I'm in.
|
