OK, so Kerry chooses Edwards. This does not thrill me. What, exactly, is he bringing to this ticket? He is no better informed on any subject than Kerry (so he's not a Cheney to Kerry's Bush). He has no great foreign or domestic experience, or even much experience in politics (the US Senate is his first political job, right?). He supposedly gives a good speech. Big Whoop.
I'll vote against Bush. I'll even almost certainly vote for Kerry, but this choice is not helping me along that road very well.
Posted by baltar at July 6, 2004 10:57 PM | TrackBack | Posted to PoliticsI like it for two reasons.
1) I don't mind if we start making Veeps unimportant again. Or at least less influential than Cheney. As currently designed the DC decision-making structure isn't built to include a super-powerful VPOTUS, and I think that fact has had something to do with Cheney getting out of control at times.
2) He's not Gephardt.
Posted by: armand at July 7, 2004 09:58 AM | PERMALINKYes, but:
1) Cheney is likely something of an anomaly in terms of the amount of power he has. Has any VP had his degree of influence on policy? Anyone Kerry choose (except, likely, McCain) would be irrelevant in a policy sense.
2) This is somewhat like saying "Yes, but at least my sister didn't marry Hitler." Anyone is better than Hitler, but that's a really low standard.
For me, at least, the choice of VP is less about who gets to be VP (excepting Cheney, VP is always an irrelevancy), but more about the kind of person Kerry is. Will he choose someone interesting? Thoughtful? Find someone to compliment his strengths and shore up his weaknesses? Edwards does nothing good for me in terms of his ability to actually help govern, but seems to be choosen entirely on his ability to help win elections. I understand that logic, but I don't have to like it.
Posted by: Baltar at July 7, 2004 10:45 AM | PERMALINK