Anti-Climacus

LINK: Killer Grease: loves puppies, slightly more ambivalent about John Edwards. As a one-time fan of the former Democratic Golden Boy (he sort of lost his mind once he lost the Dem primary in 2004, I think, and he was pretty terrible in all the contexts I saw him during the campaign), I think KGrease is spot-on:

"He has no relevant experience, and his time in the Senate gave absolutely no indication of either knowledge of or aptitude for foreign policy questions. Right now, Edwards is a one trick pony: Two Americas, Two Americas, etc. That's why he has the "One America Committee," to emphasize the two Americas theme. IF there were a Dem administration in the White House, he could get appointed to some kind of committee, or task force. But Bush is not going to help, so all Edwards can do is this aggressive "offensive of caring", where he makes appearances and expresses the fact that he really cares about foreign policy. (I'm joking. Some more jokes on Edwards)

Hillary has no more foreign policy experience than Edwards does, but she lived in the White House. She visited foreign dignitaries, presidents. She has flown on Air Force One. And, unlike Edwards, Hillary did things in the Senate the right way: she acted like a senator. She served on committees, did reports, and kept a low profile building experience and respect. Edwards acted like his hair was on fire, and never participated in the Senate as a Senator in any important way."

Edwards, when he's on, has pretty much the perfect style (and, unlike several other Democratic politicians we can name, seems to be a sincerely good person, so a lot of his 'caring about people' shtick comes off less as shtick and more as, well, caring about people), but he's always been pretty content-free. Even if you look at his "two americas" trope, it's real force seems to lie not in the idea itself but what it alludes to, which Edwards can leave for everyone to fill in for themselves. The Dems will be in a bad way if they nominate him.

I also tend to suspect that Hillary has more chances electorally than most people assume. Though, as Brendan Nyhan points out frequently (for example here), there's nothing particularly impressive about her win in the Senate in New York, she, I think, did an excellent job managing expectations of her (I expect nothing less from a Clinton), and subverted her desire to try and run in 2004 to keep on, well, being a decent Senator. She's clearly thinking strategically, and has been for a long time, so it's maybe not best to discount her quite yet.