Why hasn't John Edwards been more succssful in politics? ?

[aldric13]

Edwards has never come across as anything but a cheap trail lawyer in an expensive suit. The fact is that Edwards is a bottom feeder and cannot convince anyone otherwise.

[hwistlere31]

He was not able to garner enough widespread appeal. Clinton is a Southerner also, but he had a more widespread populist appeal.

[larry]

Because this years election was nothing more than a popularity contest. Out of the democrats i think Edwards had the best platform.
But the majority of voters had no clue on issues.
That said i did vote for Obama because McCain had no clue on the plight of the working class, He even said people that make $200,000 a year were considered middle class?

[kyledyr]

He was successful until his affair became public. He has been very successful until that time... he just did not have a successful run but his fundraising was more than sound --better than most from either party.

But who cares? Your question was not as much of a question as a rant against people who disagree with you... I could care less about your beef with liberals. Your opinion matters little in the scheme of things when you present it as "liberals love a liar" and using words like "the Messiah..." You are only talking to the people who believe what you believe... you have no capability to argue with people who disagree with you so you resort to childish arguments that can't be proven and can't be listened to except to other political children.

[adaya]

I know your a Republican, but please, have a bit of dignity. Your question, like most Republican questions, is vague, non-falisifiable and non-factual in nature. No one really knows why Edwards is not more popular.

You then assert that the Democrats 'look down on southerners' as a possible explanation for an impossible subject but do not offer any reason for thinking so. Also in typical Republican fashion.

Perhaps one day, when you can state a reason for believing anything you say I can show you if that reason is credible or not credible. But until then, there is simply no reason to believe anything you say. When I say 'no reason', I don't mean I don't agree with your reason, I mean to say quite literally - YOU GIVE NO REASON. Your not alone. There have been few Republican posts that bother to give any reason for the nonsensical things that they post.

This is the reason why we say that Republicans live in a fantasy world of lies, images, symbols and fake issues.

One thing I will leave you with, is why do Republicans believe in the rule of law except when it pertains to victims of corporate abuse? If a person steals a pizza and is put away for 20 years, that is a good thing because of the rule of law. If a corporation makes a drug that kills thousands, they should get off because applying the rule of law is 'frivolous'.

[sebastiano53]

Can you please ask a question that makes sense?

The guy had a character flaw.

Even Soloman in all his wisdom, was taken down by a woman. Samson the same. The story happens over and over in The Bible.

Women are a source of trouble to many men. I just slap them,
myself

[gillian59]

John Edwards isn't fit career in politics.