Did Edwards hold back on purpose?

[jdj]

I watched so many of the townhall forums during the primaries, and John Edwards is a human flamethrower when he wants to be.

He can totally control and command a room, and cut people off at the knees.

Does anyone else think this was pure strategy, that he was told not to defeat Cheney (thereby possibly upstaging Kerry's presidential ass whoopin' of geedubya) but to instead let Cheney defeat himself and by letting Cheney's coldness become apparent? Because he did seem to lean on an anecdote or two and he seemed restrained.

[still_one]

1. Edwards did well, and won on the issues

[Carla in Ca]

8. I agree...

This thread helped me understand it
<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x982626>

[porphyrian]

2. That's what I'm thinking...

His talking points seemed pretty safe, given what he could've said. I wonder what that might mean strategically...maybe something relating to Friday's debate?

[bookman]

3. His goal...

...be presidential for those who may challenge his credentials.

Really he just needed a tie. I think he did better than that. (No matter what Tweety says)

[Marlie]

4. Remember

Senator Edwards was up against a seasoned liar and masterful
politician, not dumb sock Bush. Of course it would be harder to
hit it out of the park while debating Cheney. And he had a lot on
his shoulders, knowing full well if he blew it, it could
take away the momentum they have going - I'm sure he had to be
nervous. Taking all into consideration, he did absolutely great &
I'm really proud of him.

[jdj]

6. Yes, but he is a rabid pit-bull when he wants to be.

He is my senator, I am proud to say, so I paid alot closer attention to him during the primaries than most here, and I was one of a few who were rooting for him to go all the way.

This is not a criticism, because Edwards is alot smarter than that, and alot more in control. I think he did EXACTLY as he was told to do, because he could have torn Cheney a new asshole if he wanted to. I think they wanted Cheney to repeat the same lies he has been repeating canned audiences for months, about the Iraq-9/11 link , while he appeared home-spun and thoughtful. I think they seriously did not want him to detract from the way Kerry slaughtered Bush. Give Edwards a little credit.

[ochazuke]

5. "Until tonight, we've never met" Cheney lie #453632

Edwards must have known that was a lie, but didn't say anything. But if he had corrected him there, it might have seemed petty. All of us DUers an the Kerry campaign will prove the VEEP a liar on this one. And that's more effective.

[jdj]

7. yes, this comment from a proven liar.

Edwards just let him sit back and lie, while the public knows there are beheadings going on every day.

I think Cheney's comment appealed only to his base.

Funny thing, his base sure isn't hitting the polls tonight, the closest one I saw was about 70/30, except for the repug ones they closed down before Edwards got too much of a lead.

[Steelangel]

9. Maybe he has gone senile! <eom>