Edwards' cool levels debate field

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-05-2004
Edwards' cool levels debate field
206
Tue, 10-05-2004 - 1:56am
Here's the original link: http://www.newsobserver.com/politics/politicians/edwards/story/1699641p-7949529c.html


By ROB CHRISTENSEN, Staff Writer

RALEIGH -- If Vice President Dick Cheney thinks he'll be facing the "Breck Girl" - the epithet Republicans like to pin on John Edwards - he may be in for an unpleasant surprise in their debate Tuesday.

Edwards is a canny fighter who outprepares his opponents, according to lawyers who have faced him in the courtroom. He isn't afraid of more experienced adversaries, has a large bag of rhetorical tricks and connects with audiences.

"If I'm going in a knife fight, and I have my choice, I am taking John Edwards," said Jim Cooney of Charlotte. "John doesn't like to lose."

Cooney ought to know. He dueled with Edwards in 10 cases.

Cooney is one of many Tar Heel lawyers who debated Edwards before a jury during the 1980s and 1990s, when Edwards made his fortune as a trial lawyer before being elected to the U.S. Senate.

Their advice for Cheney: Under no circumstances take Edwards lightly.

Edwards' strengths:

* He prepares thoroughly.

* He connects with his listeners in their language.

* He makes complex arguments easy to understand.

* He takes his opponents seriously.

Edwards made a living off more experienced lawyers who saw his mop-haired choirboy looks, small-town charm and wide grin and took him for a lightweight. That's one reason he rarely lost a courtroom debate.

And in some respects, the Cheney-Edwards debate also would seem a mismatch. Cheney is the very image of experience and authority -- a former White House chief of staff, defense secretary, congressman and corporate CEO.

But former rivals say Edwards has a history of besting people like Cheney: white-haired, "pillar of the community" corporate lawyers, respected doctors and all sorts of experts. He also has a history of taking on large institutions -- hospitals, insurance companies, trucking firms -- and coming out on top.

If Cheney goes after Edwards' inexperience in government, several lawyers said, he'll be walking into a trap.

"He's made a career of going up against the experts, leaders in their fields, whether it's medicine or epidemiology or engineering," Cooney said. "The first time Cheney gives him the lecture -- 'Well, young man' -- it will be interesting to see how he handles that. Various experts have tried it before, and it has not worked very well.

"He is well-experienced in going up against people who are experts and who believe very strongly that they know a lot more than he does."

Made-for-TV style

Intense preparation is Edwards' trademark, and few expect him to be stumped or surprised by a question. Nor can he be rattled easily.

"I would be surprised if he is intimidated by Dick Cheney," said Tex Barrow, a Raleigh lawyer who has faced Edwards. "I have never seen him intimidated by anybody. ... He will be very well-prepared and be very passionate about his positions."

Edwards has never been regarded as a great courtroom orator in the Clarence Darrow mold. His style is more conversational. It is a style that is suited for more intimate settings like the courtroom -- or the TV studio -- than a large hall.

Indeed, some say Edwards' vice presidential acceptance speech in Boston in July was a bit flat.

"In many regards the debate will be a more natural setting. ... It's just his background," Barrow said. "It's one on one. The courtroom is a lot more intimate exchange than a speech to several thousand people."

He also rarely hammers home a point, preferring to lay out the evidence and let the jury come to the conclusion where he led it. His style is to distill the major points, removing the jargon, so that everyone understands his points.

"He'll use 25 years of experience in talking to jurors and look into that television camera ... and make every person in the living room think he is talking to them," said Billy Richardson, a lawyer who has worked with Edwards on cases. "He is secure enough to let them form their own conclusions. That is a powerful technique."

One of his favorite techniques, the lawyers say, is to ask the rhetorical question of the type Ronald Reagan asked in his 1980 debate: Are you better off than you were four years ago?

Nor is Edwards afraid to take someone apart. He just does it with Southern charm and a smile.

"It is not John's style to be mean or sarcastic," said his former law partner, David Kirby. "John has the ability to destroy a witness or a witness' position in a polite manner."

Edwards once dismantled an economist -- testifying for the opposition -- whose sons he had coached in soccer and with whom he had been friendly.

The North Carolina lawyers who have watched Edwards in the courtroom say there is no way that he will take Cheney lightly. They also say that Cheney would be foolish to prepare lightly for Edwards.

"Knowing John," Cooney said, "he has played out all the angles that Cheney could launch and his response to Cheney's attack, and how Cheney will respond to that, and how he would respond to that. He plays four or five moves ahead -- like chess."


Staff writer Rob Christensen can be reached at 820-4532 or robc@newsobserver.com.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-24-2003
Wed, 10-06-2004 - 10:22am
This debate did differ from the one last Thurs. for the fact that yes, Cheney is intelligent and capable of forming coherent sentences.

However, the "winner" of the debate is definitely left to who you favor. There was no clear "winner." Each stated their stance and the other in turn called the other a liar.

NPR did a nice job of reporting this morning what was fact and what was stretched and twisted truth.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-04-2003
Wed, 10-06-2004 - 10:29am
<>

Hardly important but if we want to get silly and light I'll play. He certainly isn't ugly but he's not my type ;o)

Strangely enough, the pretty boys do nothing for me. Intelligence can really get me going (I'm not saying Edwards isn't intelligent but he strikes me as a person that got places in part, on his looks and charm).

I kind of go for the more professorish/bookish types. Tall, lanky with strong features (that may not be regarded as conventionally attractive in themselves). This is a strange confession for me to make here because of all the press about Kerry's so called ugliness (we'll set aside any discussion of whether I agree with him etc...). On looks and how he expresses himself alone, I actually find him sexy. I know a lot of people would say ewwww or snore! But here it is....my confession LOL.

My husband shares a lot of Kerry's physical attributes....I also find myself liking actors like Jeff Goldbloom etc...So I'm weird....what can I say.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Wed, 10-06-2004 - 10:33am
I read the article and still dont see where Cheney said that Iraq was directly linked to 9/11.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-18-2004
Wed, 10-06-2004 - 10:43am

Ok, I am contributing to this off topic-ness, but I cannot help it

Miffy - Co-CL For The Politics Today Board

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-20-2003
Wed, 10-06-2004 - 10:46am
>>Cheney has been in politics for 20 years<<

Cheney’s been in politics a lot longer than 20 years.

I can understand the Bush / Cheney campaign not wanting to draw attention to Dick’s involvement in the spectacular political failures that were the Nixon and Ford Administrations.

Here’s an article on Dick’s political history.

It reveals this interesting factoid:

>>>Should George W. Bush win this election, it will give him the distinction of being the first occupant of the White House to have survived naming Dick Cheney to a post in his administration. The Cheney jinx first manifested itself at the presidential level back in 1969, when Richard Nixon appointed him to his first job in the executive branch. It surfaced again in 1975, when Gerald Ford made Cheney his chief of staff and then -- with Cheney's help -- lost the 1976 election. George H.W. Bush, having named Cheney secretary of defense, was defeated for re-election in 1992. The ever-canny Ronald Reagan was the only Republican president since Eisenhower who managed to serve two full terms. He is also the only one not to have appointed Dick Cheney to office.<<<

The Curse of Dick Cheney

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/_/id/6450422?rnd=1094661464223&has-player=false&

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-22-2003
Wed, 10-06-2004 - 10:55am
>>>found it interesting that Cheney did not use his rebutal time, except to thank Senator Edwards for his kind comments. <<

Yeah it was. I think it was very honorable for him to agree with Edwards. He definitely gained my respect. I also think Cheney was better debator than Edwards but I don't agree with what he said. But he definitely is strong at attacks and does it without being vicious. But at least Edwards is better than Bush held up quite decently.. I don't think Bush can survive if he has to debate Cheney.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Wed, 10-06-2004 - 10:56am
Well I would rather have the old hound at my side to advise me on issues over the inexperienced puppy any day.

How can you put so much faith in Edwards, who was not even going to win re-election to his seat in the Senate?

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Wed, 10-06-2004 - 10:57am
Slimy......that is a reference associated with trial lawyers.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Wed, 10-06-2004 - 11:03am
They promise to pay for everything, but dont explain how.

Maybe they plan on using Teresa's trust fund to pay for all of their proposed expenditures.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Wed, 10-06-2004 - 11:04am
You know something.....I really didnt pay too much attention to that.

I know that Cheney is continuously stoic, and has a stare that seems to go right through you sometimes.

Pages