I recall writing rapid response comments during the 04 campaign. During the primary leading up to it, when it came Tennessee's time to vote, I felt sandwiched between Arkansas and North Carolina. And the vote showed a similar result. Wes Clark, on the west, is a person who speaks clearly on how the military should do its job. John Edwards saw discrepancy in living standards of the citizens. East Tennessee stood with Edwards, but it was evident that he would have a tough time to become the designated "southerner" for the Democrats.
On the waning days of the presidential race, Elizabeth Edwards appeared in Harrisburg in one of the talk-withs (I don't recall if they had a name for her standing on a platform in the middle of a room, answering questions from all directions). She covered a lot of questions and the audience was very engaged. When someone complimented her on her knowledge of the issues, she said she had the support of a very good team. My thought at the time was that she was a better campaigner than her husband.
John Edwards stuck to the script necessary to back up John Kerry. The conventional role of VP candidate as hatchet man just didn't work for him, so he was left with "two Americas" rhetoric which was classified as class warfare by the Republicans.
In the past three years he has busily traveled to other parts of the world and engaged with organizations which have broadened his knowledge of domestic and foreign policy matters. And through it all he takes time to engage with salient political turning points.
At the 04 convention his speech did not rise to rafter-ringing proportions, compared to Obama's. There is, I think, a complementary character between the two. And I'm reading comments discussing the possibility of their ticket. Part of the thinking is political oneupmanship, having two against one to counter Hillary Clinton's star power. I see it more like the down home guy meeting up with the global fellow.
It would be ironic to see Hillary worrying about the men ganging up against her.