Why Esquire Isn't Likely To Have John Edwards On Its Cover Again Anytime Soon

Esquire has some of the best homo-erotic full-page advertisements along with Details. Which, of course, is frivolous and shallow, but you get my point. Edwards, perhaps, needed a sex scandal attached to his history.

who cares, these aren't magazines, they're catalogs.

Edwards would have had a shot in 4 years if he worked a little harder to get Kerry elected. All he had to do was carry his own state.

Rolling Stone is much better for politics than Esquire anyway.

Plus that cover sucks, the Newsweek cover was WAY better:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/kmmrky/jesleeper.jpg

Perhaps they could improve their mag for better sales.

The reason John Edwards didn't win is because we're a society who would write and read articles like this.

Oh boy, another stupid article whose only purpose is to knock Edwards. I'm really not surprised seeing this frivilous article because during the primary the Huffington Post could always be counted on to knock Edwards with their substance free reporting. I guess some things never change.

You mean the Breck Girl not good? No kidding.

Obama sells magazines-- and so does Spitzer--- Edwards has no Esquire or GQ appeal---

Why Huffingtonpost felt the need to post this article is beyond me. I guess they got tired of trashing Hillary Clinton, so they thought they'd trash John Edwards instead. I don't get it. Huffington Post used to support all Democrats against Republicans. Now, they spend most of their time trashing one Democrat and another all so their favored Democrat can get into office--Barack Obama. It's too bad, because by being so biased, he will likely never win now in a general election.

Esquire used to be a fine magazine with great in-depth reporting and terrific short stories, plus some sexy fluff for men to look at. Over the past decade they've lost everything but the fluff. This just proves that Esquire readers only respond to T & A.

I quit caring what Esquire magazine thinks when they put Donald "Dummy" Rumsfeld on its cover a year or two ago. And get this, just the other day I received a subscription offer from Esquire: a whole year of magazines for $6.00 US. Yeah, they're doing really well. It's kind of a shame because I used to like the magazine. Even now, each issue usually has a good article or two, but most of the stuff in Esquire is piffle. I've no need to read piffle.

John Edwards is smart and classy enough to not endorse anyone. He's staying out of it until there is a nom. Good for him.

He would make a great AG for some President. That won't be Obama, since Obama won't be President.

A stupid point, this is a reflection on their customers and America as a whole, had the cover had Chris Dodd, Obama, hell even John McCain 14 months before an election would have sold the same!

Am I missing something?

It's been quite sometime since I read the article. I had already decided he was my candidate. Interestingly, I rarely read Esquire, but I did buy that edition primarily to read about Mr. Edwards. I continue to believe that he was the best hope we had to defeat McCain, but neither the Mainstream media, nor voters who were voted for their gender/race over policy and vision, nor the corporate establishment found him suitable. I miss him, and despite reassurances from the Obama camp that I am welcome in his tent, I am still having problems with his muddled thinking on health care and his relationship with religious nuts (most especially Rev. McClurkin, the homophobe). I am going to vote for him if he is the nominee, but not with a lot of enthusiasm nor conviction. Giordy

John Edwards may still be the best thing that ever happened to this country.