John Edwards and John Kerry did great at JJ dinner

[JI7]

my friend who is a supporter of john edwards told me she thought edwards and kerry were the best at the jefforson,jackson dinner event.(although she thought edwards did best).she wasn't there but saw it on tv. i didn't watch it myself, but it seems they will rerun it a few times, including right now and i might try to watch them. and she said hillary was great also. she said hillary really wants a democrat to win presidency in 2004.

[Zomby Woof]

1. agreed

I am not ready to support Edwards or Kerry, but either would make a far better president than Dean.

[Ficus]

2. my observations

I think Dennis really did the best. He drew lots of applause for a lot of folks who weren't his supporters, and I also liked his revival sort of style last night. He really brought the most energy to the stage.

Kerry was also WAY better than Ive ever seen him. He really captured a lot more of the energy there than I had thought. Gep was the biggest letdown by far.

[sandnsea]

3. Dennis was so damn sweet

He did really well and I think he gained a new respect from the crowd and it can't be easy to win over an Iowa crowd with a 'peacenik' message. Power to the People, it was just so cool because it was a whole different feel then 'you've got the power' madness. I loved it. Okay, I'll admit it, I cried.

[blm]

4. I'm glad more people see the trueness of Dennis Kucinich

and the sincerity of his longheld Democratic values. He is a real American patriot in my book.

[sujan]

6. so why is he failing to get any broad support?

He is an incompetent candidate.

[JI7]

8. lack of media attention

.

[sujan]

13. because he doesn't interest anybody?

[JI7]

14. uh ?

how can you find that out unless the media does give attention to them ?

[sujan]

17. uh?

Dean did it, didn't he?

You excite the base, get the word out. Everyone listens.

Forget about media, where is his grassroot support? Last time I checked he had raised less money than Larouche.

It's funny since we have the internet why should kucinich look for favors from the media.

The way he runs his campaign, I doubt this man can be a leader. Just another Al Sharpton.

[blm]

22. The media prefers to showcase Dean.

Because they obey their corporate masters. That's your answer.

[WindRavenX]

5. Kerry/Edwards would be insane

That's the best campaign I think I could imagine.
Edwards seems like a really warm, sweet guy. Coupled with Kerry's public speaking skills...ohhh yeah! Bush is going down!

[chimpymustgo]

7. Did you see after the dinner, when Kerry and Edwards took a photo

together - arms raised to victory. It was a "moment". Couldn't help but think: "that is the ticket."

Still early...miles to go before we sleep.

[WindRavenX]

9. No, I didn't

But from what I hear, Edwards really looks up to Kerry. They seem to compliment each other well. Edwards gives the mature, deliberate Kerry a little more jump and life.
It's a long way to go, but I think this is the ticket to beat, IMHO.

[blm]

23. Back in 2002, Kerry took Edwards

to vet organizations to introduce him to that constituency. That's when I first became aware that the DNC had a Kerry-Edwards ticket in mind. Alterman said last spring that the DNC was grooming Clark just in case there was any faltering. We'll see what happens, but the country can't go wrong with any of those three combined.

[Bombtrack]

11. In that order, it's a moronic idea

Edwards/Kerry would be a good ticket, but if Kerry gets the nom, it would be imbecilic to put Edwards on as his veep, over Graham.

It would be 2 rich white guys named John, who have no clear advantage at any of the swing red states. Edwards on the top of the ticket has an advantage in Florida, NC, TN, AR, WV, VA, and maybe GA. But Kerry would not come close to winning one southern state except Florida, and only Graham could win it for him. Also, Landrieu could perhaps win LA for Kerry, him being Catholic, but that's a real long shot.

[WindRavenX]

12. I respectfully disagree

Edwards can take the whole south (with a few exceptions) with Kerry. Edwards has much more moderate appeal than does Graham, and that is what really wins southern votes. This is true, I believe, even if Edwards is the running mate. Kerry will not be a running mate, he's the big dog in the show and Edwards is still very young, too young, to be on his own.
The wealth of Edwards will not be a problem. He is very popular in the south. Just having his name on the ticket would be a huge draw for the Democrats in the south.
IMHO.

[Bombtrack]

15. I don't think you've learned enough about national elections

First of all, Edwards is 50, and he'll be 51 by November 04, older than 14 presidents were when they were elected.

Saying that Edwards would win the entire south is rediculous. Texas, Oklahoma, Alabama, Missippi, and South Carolina would stay in the GOP column even if Bush was caught banging Condoleeza Rice

You are probably right that Kerry would not take the vp spot in all liklihood, although Clark or Graham would make as good vp's for Edwards.

[WindRavenX]

16. Regarding Edwards..

I seem to recall he hasn't been in politics all that long- isn't he still a junior senator? :shrug: Age doesn't matter, but his experience does, and I think he doesn't have quite enough experience to get through the media's scrutiny.
Yeah, taking the south is ridiculous, but then again, I think that Graham wouldn't make that much of a difference over Edwards.
I think that we're both in agreement that a southerner needs to be on the ticket. Who it is, though, is debatable.

[JI7]

18. edwards is senior senator now since helms left

and elizabeth dole is the jr senator. i don't have a problem with his age, especially since he is older right now than bill clinton was when clinton actually became president. bill clinton was 46 when he got into office, edwards is 50, if elected he would be around 52 when he gets into office.

[Bombtrack]

19. No he's a senior senator

and when it comes to Florida, which is the only southern state I beleive Kerry could come close in, Graham would help over Edwards

[shindig]

20. dean did very well, too

One thing that made me happy was to see everyone pumped up, united and AWAKE. This campaign has that 1992 feel to it. In 2000 we were in lacadaisical, "just let someone else take care of it" mode. Once our candidate is nominated this time around, I am convinced that everyone in the party is going to pull together and WORK to beat Bush.

Should either Clark or Dean get the nomination, and once the Bush smear campaign goes into high gear, both Clark and Dean will be armed and ready to fight back hard in the general election this time around. I am starting to worry less about the republican smear campaign, actually. I expect that this time we will have a rapid response team in place, as we did in 1992. Of course, I worry about the media giving us a fair shake. But I suspect that if Bush relies too heavily on smear, which, as we know, had been working quite well ever since 2000, this time it might very well backfire on him, being seen for what it really is, as transparent, shallow, and desperate.

Finally, I must say that I am a big Clark supporter. All of my candidate funding money goes to him. However, I would be lying to say that I was not impressed with Dean's performance in Iowa last night. They were all terrific last night. We should be proud that these people represent our party. But I see why Dean's supporters are with him. He has a really good message. And he delivered it well last night. And I am now convinced of how broad his support really is. People like Robschul82, for example, who posts on this board, is a fair and impressive person, a credit to Dean. If he is an indication of a typical Dean supporter, then Dean is very lucky.

Finally, for the sake of unity, I have found myself wishing that there really could be a way for Clark and Dean to somehow get together, sooner rather than later. Maybe it is just a pipe dream, because if Clark survives, by actually doing well in South Carolina, a Dean/Clark war could break out. That would be a damn shame!

I hope that doesn't happen. Because we don't want so much damage to be done in a Clark/Dean war that it becomes more difficult to unite after it is over. The Gore/Bradley wars were very extremely damaging in 2000.

We can't forget that once this thing is settled, we will beat Bush only because we remain united. If the Iowa dinner last night is any indication, I think we will be. We have to be. We have to beat Bush!

[newyawker99]

21. Hi shindig!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Monte Carlo]

10. Does anyone have a link to a transcript or video?

I'd like to know what was said.

[MessiahRp]

24. There's a link

http://www.c-span.org/videoarchives.asp?CatCodePairs=,

To watch it on the C-SPAN site, but I don't know how to DL the video from their site. A Javascript link pops it up. Anyone know how to go around the java and save the file to your PC?

Rp