Via various sources I see that Daniel Drezner thinks that Senator Edwards may be more in the running for the Democratic nomination than many give him credit for. He also points to a TNR article by Michelle Cottle called "The Case for John Edwards" that paints an impressive picture of the Senator's economic ideas.
And, unlike most high-promising pols, Edwards also explains how he intends to pay for his proposals, listing a range of cost-saving and income-generating measures that include opening more government procurement to competitive bidding, reducing subsidies for major oil and agricultural concerns, shrinking non-security-related federal agencies over the next decade, and repealing specific elements of the Bush tax cuts. It's true that some of Edwards's cost-saving plans may be difficult to achieve--is he really going to abolish the Office of Thrift Supervision and reduce other federal agencies by 10 percent per year for ten years?--but the specificity with which he lays them out allows one to judge them on the merits. Contrast this with the vague platitudes offered by his rivals.I've gotta say, I like those proposals, particularly when contrasted with President Bush's proliferate spending.
I should note that I was on the Edwards bandwagon in May, 2003, although that was long before Howard Dean surfed to the top of the pack and Wesley Clark entered the race.
Speaking as a current constituent of the senior Senator from North Carolina, let me just say that Senator Edwards can be as specific as he likes to be in his proposals, since he'll only attempt to carry them out as long as they are popular. Let the political winds shift direction, and those positions will be replaced just as quickly.
It's been interesting having only one Senator representing our state for the better part of the last two and a half years. It wouldn't surprise me to discover that Pretty Boy John has spent more time in your home state during that time than he has in the state he ostensibly represents.