Reading stories about
Bush's new stump speech points out possible reasons why Kerry (should he capture the nomination) would be unlikely to choose Edwards as his VP.
To no one's surprise, Bush will make "homeland security" a primary issue in the campaign. But how does this relate to Kerry and who he picks for VP?
(more)
Kerry and his team have proven that they will leave nothing to chance. They went after Dean in every way possible and are likely to do the same to Edwards in the remaining primaries (should Edwards become even close to a threat).
While their tactics may seem brutal in a Dem vs. Dem primary contest, those same tactics will be welcome come the general election versus Bush and Company.
That said, the attitude of the Kerry camp has been to leave no vulnerabilities exposed and to create no new vulnerabilities moving forward. It is a conservative campaign strategy that has served the candidate well to date.
And that is precisely why -- when combined with the Bush camp's desire to make the election about homeland security -- Edwards will not be chosen as VP.
Edwards is an inexperienced, one-term Senator. Yes, he was on the Intelligence Committee, but he has little or no foreign policy or military experience. And with Bush certain to pound away with a message of fear about homeland security, there is no way the Kerry team will allow the vulnerability of an inexperienced VP choice to provide an opening for Rove.
In addition, Kerry's own medical history (cancer) is almost certain to become part of an underhanded, slimeball whisperfest by Rove. In that case, the VP choice becomes even more critical, as questions of Kerry's long term health are floated by the masters of the filthy campaign slime.
Look for Kerry to choose an experienced, older hand as his VP. Maybe Sam Nunn.
But I believe Edwards is out of the question.
Anyone else with thoughts on this topic?