Kerry adopts Edwards' ideas

If this isn't a sure sign, I don't know what is...

http://washingtontimes.com/national/20040617-114936-2128r.htm

Kerry adopts Edwards' ideas


By Charles Hurt
THE WASHINGTON TIMES


DETROIT — Democrat John Kerry might not be quite ready to pick Sen. John Edwards as his presidential running mate, but he's already picking apart the North Carolina senator's populist nomination campaign and using parts of it as his own.
Mr. Kerry is talking about optimism, keeping children close to home, the rising costs of college tuition and stopping the flow of jobs overseas — all staples of Mr. Edwards' stump speech during the Democratic primary season.

Phrases from Mr. Kerry's recent speeches are nearly identical to those of Mr. Edwards' from earlier this year.
Although Mr. Kerry refuses to talk about the process for selecting a running mate, he and his staff seem to enjoy all the speculation and buzz about who it will be. "I read with amusement about aides who don't know what they're talking about with respect to my schedule because I haven't made a decision," the candidate said in Detroit yesterday.

:thumbsup:

"A rising tide is supposed to lift all boats, not just those of the captains"

could be very effective!

which was clear throughout the primaries, especially from GOP sources like the Washington Times. It's another reason I think it'd be a mistake for him to be on the ticket.

As for college costs, job outsourcing, optimism, etc., did Kerry only recently start talking about these things? Nice try from Charles Hurt.

Democratic Voters across America prefer him by 20-30 points over any other VP, though I'm sure certain pockets of supporters will continue to deny it.

Last time I had my DNA checked, I was one of the "people."

There are polls for everyone - don't pick and choose your favorite, and assign them and them alone as a reflection of "the people."

I'm beginning to realize that the Republicans are masters in marketing.

they really should develop a case study of the 2004 election and title it "An Election Primary: How to Avoid Being Played for a Fool by the Republican Manipulation Machine."

They want Edwards because Kerry/Edwards is the only combo that beats Bush/Cheney, that makes alot of sense.:eyes:

They want Edwards so they can blow the campaign out of the water by showing his picture and asking, "Would you trust our national security to THIS man?"

Sorry. The media whores, the RNC, the Drudge-types, Karl Rove, et al have never laid a finger on Edwards -- not during the primaries, and not during the VP selection process. That skews public perception, but it also shows quite clearly that they *want* him on the ticket because he is so weak on foreign policy, national security, military and defense strategy, etc.

as for clark, well there is multitudes of stuff, from his GOP past, praising Bush, voting Reagan.

When they don't have "stuff," they make it up -- such as the misquotes and editing jobs they did on Clark's testimony. There's plenty of "stuff" like that they could do to Edwards -- tons of courtroom transcripts alone -- but they chose not to touch it.

They went after the strongest candidates first, and left the weakest ones alone. I think it makes sense as a strategy, and I think it was predictable who they'd attack and who they'd prop up.

Despite that fact that reasonable responses have been made in regards to Clark's comments, someone who has courted McCain and talked with Zinni isn't afraid of a little bi-partisianship banter.

Of course the Democrats will say "they've never done this before." How could we have possibly anticipated this line of attack?

Let me think. Hmmm.. We live in a time where national security is a very critical issue, the VP is a heart beat away from serving as commander-in-chief...

and then destroyed him with such ease (because they sure didn't want it to get down to a Clark/Dean primary race).

he blew a huge 35 point lead to Kerry BEFORE the scream, he was the one who overwhelmed and pissed off Iowa voters with all the perfect stormers. He was the one who wasted 40 mil, the media didn't do that.

They proclaimed him the Likely Nominee, and set about attacking anything possible, pulling out words from that newsday or from years ago. They can do that to ANYbody, and they chose NOT to do it to Edwards.

The media had MONTHS to demonize Dean... they just waited until it mattered.

Now who is being delusional? If you think "Dean destroyed Dean" you weren't paying attention.

issues. Wrong. Clark talked about these issues in such a way that I knew I wasn't just hearing another slick political b.s. speech.

with issues you've never heard or cared about.

is nothing to make light of. While Edwards was playing "son of a mill worker," going to college to become a personal injury attorney and investing millions of dollars in blind trusts, Clark was defending the country with his flesh and blood.

Your distaste of Clark shows a sorry lack of respect for the work he did. I'm sure a Rhodes Scholar with degrees in PoliSci and Economics knows a little something about how this country should have been run the last four years.

for how they took care of the needs of the soldiers under their command. He had to meet their needs for schooling, health, housing, etc. This couple was truly loved (I had the fortune to meet soldiers that served under Clark's command).

Clark wanted to go into Rwanda and prevent the butcher of 800,000 innocent men, women and children (who were hacked to death). He put his career on the line to stop the ethnic cleansing in Bosnia. This speaks volumes about the kind of man Wes Clark is. I can look at Wes Clark's life and what he has done and KNOW that he cares about the people of this country and those who are less fortunate (which he talked about in his speeches. He's not just another slick politician feeding me a line of b.s.

It's really not a good idea to preach a populist message if the messenger can't hold up under scrutiny.

The Wesley Clark we're talking about is the guy who gave a Democratic radio address last month. For a person you say doesn't care about Democratic issues, he sure is donating a lot of time to help Kerry and promote the values of the Democratic party.

because he hired a bunch of people from edwards' primary campaign. including at least one speech writer.

Tuition, jobs... did I miss something, or weren't these all key issues with everyones stumps?

As for optimism, he has to tackle Bush and Co's new "Kerry the Pessimist" message.

kerry had discussed these isses himself before as have many others. but the phrases are common to the ones edwards used because he hired his speech writer.

Between Edwards and Kerry, they have to be in sync, delivering the same message if they're going to be campaigning together, it looks like Kerry is already starting.

The Kerry people are probably prepping Edwards right now with some of JK's material.

This is ordinary Democratic platform stuff -- Edwards does not hold the patent. You can match this to almost every single primary candidate, including the nominee himself. You people are a riot. :eyes: The Washington Times.

On CSPAN the NH Public Radio reporter gave an interview on the campaign in January. She said that one of the most notable things about Edwards is that from the first day he went to NH for house parties he was delivering the same exact message about class and opportunity and education and the tax code that he was delivering that day.

She said he has been remarkable consistent. She said all the other candidates test their ideas, and change them. She said Edwards knew who he was from the beginning and what he was was exactly what people wanted to hear this year.

ideas........and Clark is the out there speaking for the Kerry campaign on security issues....on TV, over and over.....