I still have some mixed feelings about John Edwards on the Dem ticket, but it’s interesting to see that a number of Senate Dems are stepping up to boost his prospects.<\/p>\n
As The Hill reported<\/a> today:<\/p>\n “Why not John Edwards?” asked Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), when asked about the party’s vice presidential nominee. “He’s done a great job. [He] campaigned across the country. He has a good relationship with Kerry. He can appeal to border states.”<\/p>\n Sen. Fritz Hollings (D-S.C.) concurred: “He’d be good on the ticket, particularly in South Carolina.” It will be tough for Democrats to carry South Carolina, Hollings conceded, but Edwards “could carry it as good as anybody.<\/p>\n “He’s made a name for himself; there isn’t any question about that. He could go in private practice or be in the Cabinet in some important post.”<\/p>\n Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) said: “I think Edwards would be an important asset in a Cabinet post. He’s got a winning way. John Edwards left with such class and such a positive aura that I think he’s good for us.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Each of these three may have some influence with Kerry after having served with him for many years. We’ll see if this encouragement has an effect.<\/p>\n And speaking of VP speculation, I’ve noticed that a few outlets have done some polls<\/a> on this. This strikes me as a little silly. Fox News asked a similar question about a week later, asking people to choose among Clark, Clinton, Edwards, Gephardt, and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson. Again, Edwards was the clear favorite.<\/p>\n
\n
\nThe University of Connecticut conducted a national poll about a month ago, asking Dem respondents to choose a running mate among Wesley Clark, Hillary Clinton, Howard Dean, John Edwards, Dick Gephardt, and Joseph Lieberman. Edwards garnered the most support, with 34%. Hillary was second, Clark third.<\/p>\n