I'll admit, I'm not all that plugged in to the Kerry campaign, but I do some consulting and research work for a fairly big name Dem in the Midwest, and have a number friends scattered around the country and DC who have better connections in the party. Basically, everyone knew back in 2002 that Kerry would be the Democratic candidate, and right now, while it's not quite a lock, people are starting to game plan for Graham. (In fact, I've seen sample signs already)

As far as Edwards... Yes, that is a media creation based largely on the fact that the media (CNN, Fox, MSNBC) has to respond to the fact that the viewers really don't know much about people other than Edwards. Plus, at some point a whispering campaign got started that Edwards was really only running for veep, and that began to be brought up in the news. It's the classic story... The loser of the primaries is the presumptive choice for veep. Rockefeller in '68, Reagan in '76, Hart in '84, Jesse Jackson in '88, Bob Dole in '88, Bradley in 2000, and McCain in 2000 are all similar examples. I think it's still rooted in the old tradition of using the veep to give a consolation prize to the defeated wing of the party, which hasn't been the case in a while.

Look, it's this simple. Edwards doesn't help Kerry. He doesn't add stature, his credentials are really weak, he doesn't help with swing independents, he can't deliver a single state that Kerry doesn't win already (including his own), and the power Dems, including Kerry, don't like him. Also remember, the candidate for veep will have to debate Cheney on some pretty serious issues, which means that substance matters. Edwards may have a nice smile, but it would be the Democratic version of Dan Quayle.