ralph’s right

Posted on June 24, 2004 by Lessig

Edwards would be a wonderful choice.

This entry was posted in presidential politics. Bookmark the permalink.

26 Responses to ralph’s right

  1. Xofis says:
    June 25, 2004 at 12:28 pm

    Abusive malpractice lawyer, content-free and fluffy.

  2. Nate says:
    June 25, 2004 at 4:11 pm

    ROFL! Is that what right-wing propaganda has sunk to, hit-and-run non-sequitor insults and lies?

  3. J.B. Nicholson-Owens says:
    June 25, 2004 at 9:57 pm

    Is Edwards pro-war? It would be odd to have an anti-war VP candidate running with a pro-war Presidential candidate. Such a distinction might serve to alert people that they’re being pushed into a false dichotomy on the war. The majority of the registered public might choose to not vote or demand more than the two arms of the business party participate in the upcoming televised debates.

  4. KirbyMeister says:
    June 26, 2004 at 3:38 am

    I hate the Democrats and the Republicans, they both are stupid. (except for the ones that arent in a political position. my parents are republican coters and I have a couple friends partial to the Dems…)

  5. Reid Kleckner says:
    June 26, 2004 at 9:38 am

    I really wish people would calm down about Ralph Nader. I’m sick of hearing slurs on the Green party because of the 2004 election. The elections are broken; that’s why we have this problem. I wouldn’t vote for Nader, but everyone should have a right to run for president. It should not be limited to this two party system. IRV is the solution.

    Edwards is a very strong speaker and would be an excellent choice if their platforms match up.

  6. Anonymous says:
    June 27, 2004 at 12:54 am

    Nate: Uh, no, I’m voting Kerry. Dean’s a much better candidate.

    Abusive malpractice lawyer,

    By waiting 90 more minutes to perform a breech delivery, rather than immediately performing a Caesarean section, Mr. Edwards said, the doctor permanently damaged the girl’s brain. “She speaks to you through me,” the lawyer went on in his closing argument. “And I have to tell you right now � I didn’t plan to talk about this � right now I feel her. I feel her presence. She’s inside me, and she’s talking to you.” […] But in the 1980’s, scientists began to challenge the premise that medical care during delivery had much to do with cerebral palsy. Studies concluded that 10 percent or fewer of cases could be traced to an oxygen shortage at birth. The vast majority of children who developed cerebral palsy were damaged long before labor, the studies found.

    Content-free and fluffy.

    But Edwards is not a particularly sharp candidate. He is a slick speaker but lacks the crackle and candor of Dean’s plain talk. Indeed, Edwards gives the same speech, platitude for platitude, every time. He doesn’t talk about foreign policy, and he rarely answers questions from the audience.

  7. Erica G says:
    June 28, 2004 at 2:16 pm

    Replying off-topic to Reid, IRV isn’t really the best solution. Ranked voting is, but IRV as a method of tabulating ranked votes has a lot of flaws. The Condorcet method is, IMHO, the best solution, both democratically and practically. See:

    http://www.electionmethods.org/IRVproblems.htm
    http://www.electionmethods.org/evaluation.htm

    (with thanks to a fellow blogger who just earlier today pointed me to these links)

  8. Nate says:
    June 28, 2004 at 6:04 pm

    I withdraw my comment based on your response.

  9. Rob says:
    June 29, 2004 at 8:58 am

    A Kerry-Dean ticket would be a sure loser. The media would have a field day with two “Northeastern Liberals” trying to run in the South. Edwards is a great speaker I agree (he was great at the Texas State Democratic Convention earlier this month), and he wouldn’t be a bad choice.

    But while Kerry’s being blatant about pandering to the Southern vote (which he’s almost forced to do), why not just pick a Floridian like Bob Graham? A respected Democrat and Senate colleague, maybe Graham could help deliver Florida. That’s the one that matters, isn’t it?

  10. Tiparillo says:
    June 29, 2004 at 10:42 am

    As long as it isn’t Gephardt any VP choice will do. I was a Edwards supporter in the primary, so obviously I wuold like that choice. But I don’t think the VP selction is going to be the thing that makes or breaks this election.

  11. juanma says:
    June 29, 2004 at 2:02 pm

    congratulations you have the best blog, beacouse it is the first in the google search list

    im from argentina and i like this blog

    i search in de google with “blog” key word for see the first blog and …now…im here 😉
    bye

  12. Bludgeon says:
    June 30, 2004 at 1:14 pm

    Oh, right Xofis….nice cherry-picking from one NY Times article, which you should have more accurately summarized as “Edwards: Hard Working Lawyer for the Little People”. Instead, you pulled “abusive” out of your ass.

    Then we’re supposed to believe Edwards is “content free and fluffy” because….because based on one quote from an editorial by Joe Klein.

    Next up from Xofis: “John Kerry is a Traitor”, with confirmatory material from Ann Coulter.

  13. Xofis says:
    June 30, 2004 at 6:09 pm

    �Edwards: Hard Working Lawyer for the Little People�

    He made $20M off a questionable malpractice niche where 90% of cases are not the doctor’s fault. He did so by shamelessly mugging to juries’ emotions. His campaign speeches were the usual fully-rehearsed script, and when he got off script he was very uncomfortable with actual issues. This guy’s a hardworking, stylish lightweight, I prefer my candidates strong on policy.

    Your ad hominem speaks volumes about your preferences on policy vs. style.

  14. Xofis says:
    June 30, 2004 at 7:34 pm

    To elaborate, Edwards is a poster child for tort reform. His legal specialty is the reason why there are so many medically unnecessary C-sections, because doctors are afraid of being sued.

    On depth, Kerry, Dean and several others stand in sharp contrast to Edwards, they deeply understand policy. Edwards is a first-time senator. When you get him off-script, he stumbles, it’s not apparent that he has deeply-held intellectual opinions beyond mouthing populist platitudes.

  15. Danny says:
    July 1, 2004 at 7:29 pm

    “Edwards is a first time Senator.”

    You should hope in life to achieve as much. He;s the first person in a long time to make convincing, moving arguments for using public resource to address the challenges that poor working clasee people face.

    Disagree with the man if you wish, but do not diminish or disregard his service.

  16. Strider says:
    July 2, 2004 at 5:45 am

    Kerry should just snatch up a popular governer and be done with it. (No, not that one.)

  17. Michael says:
    July 2, 2004 at 11:01 am

    Those who think that Edwards is soft on policy have obviously never heard the man speak on a detailed commerce issue the Senate floor.

  18. JLT says:
    July 3, 2004 at 11:37 am

    Edwards has no history. He doesn’t have the experience needed to run the oval office in the case Kerry is gone.

  19. Morgaine Swann says:
    July 3, 2004 at 3:28 pm

    I can live with almost anyone except Gephardt. Edwards is personable and he’s Southern, which will help Kerry everywhere but the Coasts. My first choice would be Kucinich, but I know that won’t happen. My second choice would be Gavin Newsome, who has no experience, but he does have the only pair of cojones in politics today. He’s the next best thing to a Kennedy. I love Dean, but he lost me when he melted down after the first primary and fired Joe Trippi. The press would eat him alive. I hear Joe Biden is on the short list, and he’d be a good choice, too. I liked his comments to Rumsfeld at the congressional hearing the other day.

  20. Ximenes says:
    July 4, 2004 at 8:00 pm

    Hi! How are you?
    Is your life good?
    After I speak more here, by se you later. 🙂

  21. William Wilson says:
    July 4, 2004 at 9:19 pm

    Edwards’ “lack” of experience should not disqualify him from consideration as a VP candidate.

    The present occupant of the White House was governor of Texas for only a few years, and Texas has one of the weakest governorships in the nation.

    Of course, the VP pick really doesn’t matter much. If it did, George H.W. Bush would have lost to Michael Dukakis (who, you will recall, selected Lloyd Bentsen, a Senator from Texas).

  22. Rob says:
    July 5, 2004 at 7:53 am

    While we’re talking of VP qualifications, let’s not forget Dan Quayle. OK, maybe we should forget him.

    I heard on Morning Edition today that the short list includes Edwards, the governor of Iowa (who?), and one other guy whose name I’ve forgotten. I can’t imagine why the Iowa governor would be on the list other than he delivered Kerry the primary and saved his candidacy. Which I guess is a valid enough reason, though I wish we wouldn’t pick our VPs based on that kind of motive. Cynically though, it wouldn’t surprise me.

    It won’t be Biden because of the plagiarism issue. As though cribbing speeches from someone you agree with automatically invalidates your policy positions. Grumble.

  23. Rob says:
    July 5, 2004 at 7:56 am

    Also, Biden is from an electorally-irrelevant state. Apologies to all the Delawarians reading this.

  24. Huber says:
    July 6, 2004 at 1:18 am

    Ralph�s wrong.

  25. Xofis says:
    July 6, 2004 at 5:59 am

    So it is Edwards. He’s far more charismatic, and less evil, than Cheney, I’ll give him that. I do wonder whether he’d have done what Cheney did when Dubya froze on 9/11, had the balls to issue the shootdown order unilaterally. That was the correct action at the time, given Dubya’s weaknesses.

  26. Jarl says:
    July 6, 2004 at 6:41 am

    “According to several Democratic sources, Edwards interrupted his family vacation at Walt Disney World last Thursday to come to Washington for a private meeting with Kerry.”
    I bet he was asking Mickey how to keep a straight grin 24/7.

Leave a Reply