Obama/Edwards 2008?

I propose that we have an Obama/Edwards ticket for the 2008 race. First of all, John Edwards can appeal to some of the same working class voters that Hillary Clinton did without engaging in the same kind of divisive tactics that Hillary did throughout her campaign.

John Edwards ran a positive, uplifting campaign that sought to address the problems of rural poverty. In a lot of states, lieutenant governors serve as advocates for the elderly. John Edwards can play the same sort of role as Obama's vice president -- advocate for unions and working class people and make sure that their voices are heard at the table.  

Edwards would help electorally -- the polls show that an Obama/Edwards ticket does substantially better than Obama alone or Obama and any other person. But on the other hand, an Obama/Clinton ticket would never work because they are polar opposites. Obama represents change, while Hillary Clinton represents more of the same. Obama brought in people who were committed to his message of change while Hillary Clinton brought in the same old DLC crowd who lost us control of Congress.

Both Edwards and Clinton ran by trying to appeal to the union, working class vote in the party. Yet they are two polar opposites -- Clinton's idea of a working class person is a lobbyist. That shows that she is totally out of touch with Middle America and can't relate to the average person and their struggles, for all her pandering and for all her appealing to their worst instincts. On the other hand, John Edwards actually was one of us -- grew up in a small town, and was the son of a mill worker. He is a living small-town success story who wants to give all of us the same kinds of opportunities that he was lucky to get. Consequently, as late as the West Virginia primary, Edwards was getting as much as 15-20% of the vote in some rural areas of that state.

There is a fundamental trust issue that is involved here -- why should we trust Hillary when we know that she lied to us about Tuzla? This is no different than running a business -- do you pick the guy who blows you away with his resume and interview, yet when you check his references, they unanimously tell you he is good at anything he does yet is not totally honest? Let me put it another way -- do right and wrong matter anymore? If not, then what are we doing protesting Bush's lies about Iraq and the lies of the right? Isn't our goal to do more for the truth than the right is willing to do for a lie? If that is the case, then we should reject people like Hillary who have a proven track record for dishonesty and pick someone like Edwards who would be an asset for the ticket come November.

And on top of that, Obama and Edwards, while they did not totally agree on the issues, ran with the same kind of progressive populism that appeals to the base. Obama was an urban populist, appealing to the issues of urban voters. Edwards is a rural populist, appealing to the issues that concern rural voters. The two would compliment each other nicely, with Edwards filling in for Obama's weakness in some rural parts of the country and vice-versa.

And Obama and Edwards share the same kind of philosophy -- one committed to change as symbolized by their refusal to take any kind of money from lobbyists -- whom Hillary thinks are just working-class people. They share the same vision of moving beyond the divisions of Vietnam, the Civil Rights era, the 1990's, and the Bush era to create a new America that provides equal opportunity to all.

And Edwards brings something else to the table -- he could well serve as the role as conscience of the Obama administration. Everyone acknowledged that he had a key role in driving the debate this cycle -- for instance, it became acceptable to talk about universal healthcare again thanks to his advocacy. In the same way, he could help keep everyone else on task, serving as a living reminder of what is important and what is superfluous.

Everyone in both parties agrees that government has failed. One typical title is Richard Clarke's book, "Your Government Failed You." Only 20% now think we are on the right track. By contrast, Obama and Edwards both share a conviction that the government can be made relevant to all our lives and restore peoples' faiths in the power of the system to change our lives for better. They would call this country to a sense of shared vision and would call us to be patriotic about something that is not war.