In hindsight: on the subject of the Vice President

John Edwards did a good job representing the ticket, but strategically I'm not sure he was the wisest choice. This is day after quarterbacking and I'm sure I will be flamed for it, but Edwards didn't really add anything to the ticket. He did his job well and held his own against Cheney. But he didn't deliver a single state to us. Not North Carolina. Not West Virginia. Not Missouri. Not South Carolina. Not Virginia. Not Ohio. Not Florida. Not Iowa.

Part of this, and during the VP selection process I and others pointed this out: Edwards was not all that popular in his own homestate. Too many people felt he spent too much time campaigning for president rather than serving them in the Senate.

Who could have helped the ticket?
Governor Vilsak of Iowa? a former Marine. From a state which we ended up losing in a close one. From a farm state.

Rep. Dick Gephardt of Mo? Many here, including me, were against him, but he is a strong populist with long time labor ties who represented a key swing state. Would he have also helped in Ohio and Iowa more than Edwards?

General Wes Clark? National security was a key issue--would he have bolstered Kerry on this? Would he have delivered Arkansas for Kerry? and perhaps New Mexico?

These three along with Edwards were on Kerry's final list of possible VP nominees. Kerry selected Edwards because Edwards performed better than anybody else in the primaries other than Kerry himself and because polls showed Edwards was the choice of the rank and file.

I can't say if any one of the others would have done a better job campaigning than John Edwards for the ticket, but strategically I think Vilsak, Clark or Gephardt might have been wiser choices.