Choosing John Edwards
The selection of John Edwards as the running mate for John Kerry was to be expected. I have mixed feelings. There is much to be
said in favor of Edwards pro-labor stand and his view of two Americas. He was
the first candidate to speak forcefully about the problem of worker
displacement. We could also talk about
his attractiveness as a candidate and his ability to rally a crowd,
considerable assets in the attempt to overthrow a president many consider a
disaster.
Edwards serves to sidetrack Hillary Clinton. If Kerry loses
by anything but a landslide, Edwards
would be the first choice in the next election. If Kerry wins, then Edwards, as
vice-president, inherits the nomination. I am not ready to decide whether losing
Hillary is a good or bad thing. It is a fact.
I am concerned about his youth and inexperience. There are
many who can take on large responsibilities at
young age, but we have had two presidents in succession who suffered and
caused us to suffer their grave immaturity.
Clinton was so talented that he was by and large was an effective
president, but his personal failures nearly destroyed his presidency and doomed
us to George Bush. Bush, a failure at
all his personal business dealings, has been effective only in acting as a
schoolyard bully in the face of extraordinary adversity.
I can’t see much indication that the vice-presidential
choice can win an election, although there is a lot of credit given to Lyndon
Johnson in the 1960 election. Surely the wrong choice can lose an election as
was probably the case with the McGovern campaign in 72.
Melvyn Polatchek
6:28:31 AM 
|
