John Kerry writes off Tennessee, saying he's not running a "regional" candidacy. Well, he's certainly not running a national one. Is there a term in between--"multiregional," say?
It's an interesting question, as Kerry is using the term "regional" as slander against John Edwards' campaign. The argument appears to be that Kerry should be preferred to Edwards because Edwards has regional instead of national appeal.
Surely, though, the opposite is true? The Democratic party has institutional strength outside of the South's "region." A Democrat who can win in the South therefore is the only Democrat who has national appeal. He appeals to non-Southern Democrats who want to replace Bush, and to Southern Democrats who like his message. It's Kerry, not Edwards, who is actually "regional," or multiregional; he will not have nationwide appeal in the general election.
That will put him at a disadvantage against Bush, who will be running a genuinely national campaign. Won't it?