John Edwards and Obama Endorsement: Thread Two

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:08:56 PM EST
Tags: John Edwards, Barack Obama, 2008 (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Our first thread on John Edwards endorsement of Barack Obama is already full. Here's another one.

Lots of readers are now getting the John Edwards email seeking donations I mentioned in the last thread.

Coincidentally, John Edwards sent out a request for money today for one of his causes, College for Everyone. The e-mail, which went to everyone who got e-mails from his presidential campaign, is below. Will the media ask if there's a connection between the two?

[More...]

The email states:

I want to begin by thanking each of you for all of your support and commitment over the last year. It has meant so much to Elizabeth and me. We have been very busy since January working on the causes that got us into the campaign in the first place -- helping to build the One America we all believe in.
You may have heard me talk about one of those programs called College for Everyone -- a scholarship pilot project that Elizabeth and I started a few years ago in Greene County, North Carolina.
[Goes into description of the program]
That's why I need your help today -- with a tax-deductible donation of $10, $25, $50 or $75, whatever you can afford -- to bring us one step closer to our goal of College for Everyone. By contributing now, you will help fulfill the college dreams of deserving students in Greene County and show the world that if we work together on big and important issues, change is possible.

How much more money do you think he'll raise with his endorsement of Obama today?

Update: This thread is closing a new one is here.

< John Edwards to Endorse Obama in One Hour | Pro-Choice Women's Group Says NARAL is Wrong >

The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

Menu

Home | About | RSS
E-Mail | Comment Policy |
Search
Login

Make a new account

Existing Users

Username:
Password:
Creator and Principal Author
- Jeralyn E. Merritt
TL Alumni

Contribute To TalkLeft

Sections
Site Credits
- TalkLeft Graphics by C.L., Our Man in Hollywood (2006 - 2008)
- TalkLeft Header Graphic by Monk
- Powered by Scoop
Legal
- All Content Copyright ©2002-2024. Reprints only by permission from TalkLeft.com
- Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.
- TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.
"The pump don't work 'cause the vandals took the handles"
© 1965 Bob Dylan

John Edwards and Obama Endorsement: Thread Two | 205 comments (205 topical)

Here's one observation (5.00 / 3) (#3)
by andgarden on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:15:10 PM EST

I think we're much closer to the 2209 criterion today: Obama will get all uncommitted delegates from Michigan, and Hillary will get all of her. Florida will be seated as is.

Where are you getting this? (5.00 / 1) (#8)
by pie on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:18:24 PM EST

All that tells me is that they were in cahoots way back then.

Parent

You didn't guess they (5.00 / 2) (#14)
by kredwyn on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:20:02 PM EST

were cahooting back then?

Parent

: Yes, it's been obvious. (5.00 / 0) (#60)
by pie on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:26:04 PM EST

They took away what would have been her momentum.
But, in doing so, they got people to go to the polls to vote for her.
It's not over. She deserves to win on the merits.

Parent

Count on it (5.00 / 1) (#18)
by andgarden on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:20:18 PM EST

Parent

if that happens, I can live (5.00 / 1) (#17)
by bjorn on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:20:16 PM EST

with whatever the outcome is because it will be fair and square, imo.

Parent

Overall I'd say that's a decent outcome (5.00 / 1) (#26)
by andgarden on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:21:38 PM EST

for Hillary, because 2209 has to be her goal for a criterion now.

Of course, this endorsement gets Obama closer to that, not Hillary.

Parent

2210 (5.00 / 1) (#58)
by BDB on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:25:53 PM EST

Travis Childers ups the total number of delegates by one. So make that 2209.5.

Parent

: Indeed (5.00 / 1) (#68)
by andgarden on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:28:13 PM EST

Parent

I agree. (none / 0) (#27)
by sweetthings on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:21:46 PM EST

But I haven't sat down and crunched the numbers yet. I assume this helps Hillary, but how much?

Parent

Nah. (5.00 / 6) (#4)
by pie on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:15:53 PM EST

This isn't about knocking Hillary out before June 3. This is about a preview of what will happen on June 4.

A bunch of male democrats who have lost the nomination have endorsed Obama.

I'm so impressed.

It's all been very Grotesque. (5.00 / 3) (#11)
by Salo on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:19:17 PM EST

yes. Instead of begging for Bill endorsment, they've been kicking him.

I Hope Edwards is very careful in his statement today.

Parent

To borrow (and alter) a phrase: (5.00 / 2) (#15)
by ahazydelirium on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:20:05 PM EST

Failed male candidates: "You'll have to pry the White House from our cold dead hands."

Parent

Can we stop with the male bashing (5.00 / 2) (#141)
by independent thinker on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:41:29 PM EST

please. I fully admit that there has been sexist comments during this campaign, but there have also been racist comments.

The time is coming for us the rally around the nominee. True we don't know who that will be yet, but we will soon and all this trash talk is only hurting our ability to unify and beat McCain.

I have made similar requests on Obama friendly blogs too. Some people over there can't seem to lay off the hillbilly and harpy references.

I don't care which candidate you support, but this kind of dialogue needs to stop so the healing can begin.

Parent

: OK, sure - (none / 0) (#210)
by Anne on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:58:45 PM EST

Obama can go first, how's that?
It isn't the "trash-talk" that is hurting our chances of beating McCain - it's the freakin' Democratic Party "elders" and "leaders," who won't listen to the voters, have no earthly clue how to conduct a free and fair primary, would just as soon consign the voters of Michigan and Florida to the trash heap, have looked down their wrinkled-in-disgust noses at hard-working people who just want some freakin' representation, who are drunk on Obama money to the point where they make no sense, make me mad as hell and have me thoroughly disgusted with a party that I used to believe in.
Go peddle your Kumbayah garbage to them, will ya? Better have your checkbook handy, though.

Parent

Sexism (3.83 / 6) (#77)
by joharmon86 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:29:43 PM EST

This comment is highly offensive and sexist even though I'm a female. To assume that every male politician that supports Obama is doing so because they hate women is frankly irrational and myopic. There is nothing in Edward's record that suggests that he is sexist at all, but it's easy to use the gender card when Hillary is unable to get the supporters to crown her victorious.

Parent

I think you need to re-read pie's comment, (5.00 / 1) (#113)
by Anne on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:36:57 PM EST

because nothing in it said anything about hating women.

If you can point to a failed female candidate who is endorsing Clinton, that would be helpful.

OK - didn't think so.

And I don't think you're female, either.

Parent

Yes, it was yet another (none / 0) (#129)
by pie on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:39:46 PM EST

wtf moment in blog history.

Parent

: Oh, darn. (5.00 / 2) (#152)
by pie on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:43:35 PM EST

Dalton gave me a low rating. Just when I was starting to consider him a thinking person.

Parent

Actually Edwards was pretty sexist (5.00 / 2) (#140)
by Exeter on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:41:24 PM EST

to Hillary when he was in the race. His little stunt of having Elizabeth attack Hillary... you know to try and create a: CAT FIGHT! ... was pretty low-class.

And Edwards timing IS sexist -- he's said for months that he has no plans to endorse, then when their is heat for Hillary to drop out, he endorses. His enorsement = time for Hillary to drop out... even though no candidate in Hillary's position or better has ever been pressured in this way to drop out. It's a double standard and sexist.

Parent

timing can't be sexist. (none / 0) (#149)
by Salo on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:43:07 PM EST

Chronist

Parent

Hm (none / 0) (#171)
by Steve M on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:46:41 PM EST

I think Elizabeth is her own woman with her own opinions. I never got the impression that she was some attack dog to be deployed at her husband's beck and call.

Parent

: she always seemed (none / 0) (#202)
by Salo on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:54:30 PM EST

like she was voicing her own opinion to me.

Parent

Reading comprehension 101. (none / 0) (#123)
by pie on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:38:48 PM EST

You failed it, sweetie.

:-)

Parent

including all the males... (none / 0) (#12)
by jor on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:19:41 PM EST

... running NARAL.

Parent

NARAL would endorse a potato... (5.00 / 2) (#21)
by dianem on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:21:01 PM EST

...if it either had a "D" after it's name or claimed that it was pro-choice. If Clinton were ahead in the primary, you can bet that they would be endorsing her.

Parent

: Brian Williams on NBC Evening News asked (none / 0) (#144)
by jawbone on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:42:30 PM EST

Hillary Clinton if she was hurt that NARAL endorsed Obama since she had practically been present at its inception.
That had to hurt.
Oh, and NARAL? You that loyalty stuff? Want to count on Mr. I Wanted to Vote for Roberts Until My Chief of Staff Told Me It Was Politically Unwise for My Presidential Run????
Sheesh.

Parent

She may get (none / 0) (#195)
by PlayInPeoria on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:52:49 PM EST

knocked out Jun 4th... but Obama may get knocked out on Nov 4th..

The Dem Party cannot afford to get the Hilarry supporter mad.

Remember... the Repub Pary just nominated the closet person to being a Dem as they could find. That is how much the Repub want the WH..

John Mac will be courting those irate Hilary voters.

Mr Unity better start Unifying.

Parent

Just another opportunity for Hillary (5.00 / 4) (#7)
by felizarte on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:18:09 PM EST

to demonstrate her toughness and resiliency. Imagine this many male leaders of the party ganging up on her and they still can't sink her. She is one SUPER MOM!

On to Kentucky!

AP NEWS (5.00 / 6) (#10)
by bjorn on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:19:11 PM EST

Elizabeth Edwards said she is not part of this endorsement and did not travel with John.

thank you Elizabeth (5.00 / 5) (#23)
by Iris on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:21:19 PM EST

I hope she makes a separate endorsement.

Parent

: They'd get more mileage (5.00 / 0) (#155)
by JavaCityPal on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:44:10 PM EST

with Elizabeth endorsing Hillary for the Health Care benefits, and John supporting Obama for the contributions and endorsement for the college fund.

Parent

She's A Smart Gal...Could Teach John A Thing (5.00 / 2) (#29)
by PssttCmere08 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:22:26 PM EST

or three...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080514/ap_on_el_pr/obama_edwards

Parent

: She probably would not embarrass (5.00 / 0) (#193)
by BarnBabe on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:51:59 PM EST

John. I would love it if she came out for Hillary. But, I suspect, she will not over ride his endorsement. I said for years that she would be a great candidate and President. I am sorry she is sick because there would be a ticket. Hillary/Elizabeth.

Parent

Now we know (5.00 / 6) (#32)
by felizarte on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:22:32 PM EST

that the wrong Edwards was running all along.

Parent

I've always liked Elizabeth. (5.00 / 5) (#39)
by ahazydelirium on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:23:27 PM EST

But I'm terribly puzzled by her husband. Hillary is running on a platform more in sync with his own political ideology. Why this endorsement? It is disappointing, and I am disappointed in him--even if he was a strong and wonderful populist advocate.

Parent

I absolutely agree. (5.00 / 1) (#136)
by weltec2 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:40:51 PM EST

I feel as though he has compromised his integrity and that hurts.

Parent

obama signed on to edwards new program to (none / 0) (#71)
by PssttCmere08 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:29:00 PM EST

help reduce poverty....gives it some money and a jump start.

Parent

: Is this good enough? (5.00 / 1) (#164)
by weltec2 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:45:41 PM EST

What about a real universal health care program? And as for money for ending poverty. I'm just afraid this is going to be swallowed up in the usual Obama vagueness and empty words like "change".

Parent

Sort of . . . (none / 0) (#209)
by Same As It Ever Was on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:56:41 PM EST

His ideaology os more in sync with her on traditional issues like SS and health care but, as he repeatedly said on the campaign trial, much closer to Obama with respect to political reforms.

Parent

It makes me wonder (none / 0) (#214)
by blogtopus on Wed May 14, 2008 at 07:34:25 PM EST

if we won't see a slew of cancer patients deep in debt who would otherwise be covered by Hillary's plan but NOT Obama's, writing to Edwards asking if he agrees with Obama's health care plan.

Parent

Elizabeth is a smart lady (5.00 / 4) (#51)
by Steve M on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:24:47 PM EST

Take it from me, if someone invites you on a trip to Grand Rapids, you shouldn't go either.

Parent

There is a part of me that is tempted to (none / 0) (#35)
by inclusiveheart on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:22:52 PM EST

believe the intrigue that the media is inserting on this item and then there is a part of me that thinks she is just not going because she has other things to do at the moment. She has kids, she is still dealing with cancer and he was the nominee.

Just sayin' that it could easily mean nothing that she didn't go with him today.

Parent

no, (5.00 / 1) (#48)
by bjorn on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:24:32 PM EST

the AP newsline was specific, she is not part of this endorsement.

Parent

bjorn...I posted the link for that a few comments (none / 0) (#67)
by PssttCmere08 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:28:05 PM EST

back...

Parent

oops, thanks (none / 0) (#79)
by bjorn on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:30:26 PM EST

Parent

: Glad to help... (none / 0) (#99)
by PssttCmere08 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:34:30 PM EST

Parent

Yes!!! (none / 0) (#75)
by pie on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:29:29 PM EST

She's incredible.

OTOH, people do what they do for reasons. I'm not sure I respect his reason, because he knows how weak Obama is, but he did it, so I'll move on.

Parent

Yes and she has been misrepresented (none / 0) (#90)
by inclusiveheart on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:33:04 PM EST

in the media - even by AP - before.

She is a complex and interesting person. Completely incomprehensible to most of the media.

Parent

Uh, yes, if he had done the opposite (5.00 / 2) (#16)
by Iris on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:20:15 PM EST

of what he did, I would have the opposite reaction. No surprise there.

: Some sanity. nt (none / 0) (#46)
by ahazydelirium on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:24:01 PM EST

Parent

Considering how much closer Clinton's (5.00 / 8) (#20)
by lorelynn on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:20:52 PM EST

platform is to Edwards and considering how little Obama has accomplished that is progressive in nature, it's pretty creepy. He can endorse whomever he wants, but he was part of the boys club gang up on Clinton and it does reek of misogyny.

Clinton had met his son a few weeeks before his death, when he won an essay competition and was invited to the White House. Clinton attended his funeral and was very gracious to the Edwards in the days that followed. When I put that in the mix with Clinton's universal health care plan, Clinton's thorough understanding of and lifetime of work on poverty issues that are of concern to Senator Edwards, I am baffled as to how he can reasonably land in the camp he is in.

Strange days, indeed.

Well, Kerry and Kennedy couldn't help him in Massachusetts. I doubt Edwards can help him much either.

I'm guessing this is an attempt to stave off another 40 point loss in Kentucky. If he can just get Edwards' supporters, it may make a difference.

Not sure if it will work (5.00 / 1) (#34)
by Iris on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:22:50 PM EST

because a lot of the Edwards votes in WV were probably protest votes.

Parent

This Is Only A Deal (5.00 / 3) (#43)
by Athena on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:23:37 PM EST

But if Edwards was really into Obama - why not endorse before NC and WV? This is a backroom deal to get WX out of the news.

What did Obama promise Edwards? Let's get real.

Parent

: obama gave him money and a promise to (none / 0) (#109)
by PssttCmere08 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:36:44 PM EST

help out his end poverty program. I am sure it was with the stipulation that Edwards had to do it today or forget it.

Parent

Not that different at all (none / 0) (#94)
by v2r1 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:34:06 PM EST

The platform differences between Clinton/Edwards and Obama/Edwards was not that different at all.

Saying misogyny is stretching this a bit too far. Its almost like the few rabid Obama camp supporters calling all those who didn't vote for them racists.

As for meeting his son ... wow do you really have to pull that in ?

Parent

Universal health care was just part of Edwards' (none / 0) (#213)
by bridget on Wed May 14, 2008 at 06:17:16 PM EST

repackaging for this primary IMO. In 2004 universal health care was a nonissue for him.

2008 candidate Edwards needed a strong liberal policy issue to run with alongside the "two Americas" which just wasn't enough anymore this time around.

But in the end Edwards' campaign was mainly all about the apology and nonstop Clinton bashing. The talking points taken straight from dkos.

Edwards never bothered to run against Obama. His last debate performance made that very clear: e.g. What??? Over 100 "present" votes? Edwards obviously felt politically safe enough to sit up straight in his seat. After all he knows something about getting bashed for a wrong vote and Obama would forgive him.

re Univeral Health Care
Had John Edwards been serious about turning Universal Health Care for all into a reality he would have endorsed Hillary Clinton right away. He didn't. Fwiw I never believed he cared enough to give it a second thought - except by running as the champion of the poor he enjoyed getting the attention in the manner of Gore.

Too bad Hillary felt it nec. to give him that satisfaction - by taking him serious enough to ask for his endorsement esp. when one considers his political career so far.

Parent

Heh (5.00 / 4) (#38)
by Steve M on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:23:23 PM EST

Hooray for another thread where we can say all the same things all over again! I will just offer a couple predictions:

Elizabeth will not be making a dueling endorsement of Hillary. Come on.
I very much doubt that Edwards will be stumping for Obama and against Hillary in KY or any of the other remaining primaries.
This endorsement will be treated as yet another rendition of the Greatest Endorsement Ever by the media, and will be roundly ignored by the voters.
Edwards is still the same sweet guy you couldn't get enough of. Is he a politician? Folks, we should have all understood that going in.

pretty much agree. (5.00 / 1) (#55)
by Salo on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:25:35 PM EST

He should npt stump for Obama against Clinton.

MAke a speech saying he wishes Obama all the best, compliment Clinton and attack Bush and McCain.

Parent

: Jinx! (none / 0) (#64)
by andgarden on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:27:31 PM EST

Parent
: I think (none / 0) (#85)
by Steve M on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:32:15 PM EST

that this is more of a general election endorsement than a primary endorsement.
Obviously, from the timing, it's an attempt to bring the primary to a conclusion. No one can dispute that he could have waited a few weeks if he wanted to.
But from the fact that he didn't endorse before the NC primary, when it would have mattered most, it's clear that the main purpose is not to help Obama defeat Hillary.

Parent

And (5.00 / 3) (#92)
by Steve M on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:33:22 PM EST

5. Edwards will not be the VP nominee.

Parent

I pretty much agree (none / 0) (#59)
by andgarden on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:25:59 PM EST

Parent

Agree and Disagree (none / 0) (#100)
by EddieInCA on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:34:34 PM EST

2. I don't think Edwards will be stumping against HIllary in other remaining primaries, but I think he WILL be stumping in upcoming primaries stumping FOR Obama.

3. Ed Schultz just made the point that the United Steelworkers have not endorsed either Hillary or Obama. Edwards was their guy. He (Schultz) says the Union will come out for Obama soon, which will make PA, and OH much more interesting, and may not be ignored by the voters.

Parent

: I wouldnt put to much into (none / 0) (#114)
by Capt Howdy on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:37:27 PM EST

what Ed Schultz says.

Parent
: Schultz should be knackered (none / 0) (#157)
by Salo on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:44:40 PM EST

and melted down for glue.

Parent

everything you say is true (none / 0) (#107)
by Capt Howdy on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:36:12 PM EST

but it still irks me because it gives Maddow and her ilk a reason to tap dance.
this will be THE story until next tuesday.

Parent

Nor me. (5.00 / 4) (#40)
by Salo on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:23:30 PM EST

Obama still blows.

didn't Edwards say that he'd endorse if his (5.00 / 4) (#45)
by kimsaw on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:23:55 PM EST

choice needed help on Larry King's program. I guess his choice needs help with the working class voters. Smooth move by Obama after his huge loss and it may help him in Kentucky, but it will be Edwards doing the talking not Obama. Nice to know that Edwards is willing to support the guy who doesn't really support universal health care and voted present on important issues like abortion. Maybe tonight Obama will offer a new UHC plan.

This must be why Obama is so confidently (none / 0) (#148)
by felizarte on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:43:05 PM EST

announcing his victory on May 20. I hope he does and lives to regret it must like George W. did with his Mission Accomplished.

Parent

: Edit: much like George W. Bush regretted (none / 0) (#154)
by felizarte on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:44:06 PM EST

Parent

Words Cannot Express (5.00 / 2) (#52)
by creeper on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:24:50 PM EST

my disappointment in the man I once supported.

There seems to be no end to the surprises.

I'd bet Edwards is angling for the VP slot.

If he is the VP candidate (5.00 / 1) (#163)
by felizarte on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:45:37 PM EST

We'll never hear the end of the $400 haircut from the GOP.

Parent

: better that (5.00 / 1) (#194)
by Salo on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:52:24 PM EST

than the Wright story which will sink Obama anyway.
Edwards is not gunning for VP.

Parent
: But at least it frees Hillary (none / 0) (#177)
by felizarte on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:47:36 PM EST

from the pressure of running on Obama's ticket as VP if she does not become the nominee. And it also makes me feel better about voting for McCain.

Parent

Sometimes an endorsement (5.00 / 1) (#56)
by JavaCityPal on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:25:39 PM EST

is a cry for attention. I think John would be shocked to find out that Elizabeth's endorsement would carry more clout than his.

Not saying that's fair, but he's lost two bids for president, and one for vp. This is a maneuver that could look like an effort to get second place on the ticket again, which is self-serving.

Not sure how his endorsement connects with working class voters. John Edwards, like so many others, has taken the route to endorsement that brings the most attention to himself.

It's a good thing he has stepped out of politics. Obama has used funds and promises for many of his SD's, so maybe he promised a big contribution to his college fund for Edwards to stand on stage with him.

Elizabeth would endorse because who becomes our next president is a serious decision.

: List of supporters (none / 0) (#201)
by waldenpond on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:54:22 PM EST

If Edwards could access that list just once, NOW, Obama's supporters would give a little just as a thank you. If he waits till Obama gets beat up and this is in to the GE, Obama's donors will be focused on the GE and Obama needing their money and they won't donate to Edwards. It's got to be now at the peak of their enthusiasm for the endorsement if he wants their money.

Parent

I expected this of Gore... (5.00 / 3) (#65)
by semidi on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:27:42 PM EST

...but I'm really disappointed in Edwards. Not exactly surprised; he was much more conservative and pro-corporate in Congress than his newfound Populist religion (which he discovered a year or so before his presidential bid)indicated.

I think this is a sad case of Edwards thinking he knows which way the wind is blowing. Like NARAL, he's wrong.

Let's send some more Green Love to Hillary! (5.00 / 3) (#70)
by nycstray on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:28:26 PM EST

Who's in?!

My husband not maxed yet...! (none / 0) (#76)
by Stellaaa on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:29:37 PM EST

Parent

already been there today (none / 0) (#95)
by Capt Howdy on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:34:10 PM EST

Parent

I Am (none / 0) (#98)
by creeper on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:34:23 PM EST

Was just getting ready to contribute online when I got a call from the campaign. They seem to be on it.

Wish I could've contributed more.

Parent

: I'm In Too.... (5.00 / 1) (#128)
by PssttCmere08 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:39:38 PM EST

Parent

My grandfather used to say (5.00 / 1) (#72)
by Stellaaa on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:29:02 PM EST

Take a burlaps sack. Put all politicians in it. Get a club. Start hitting. Whoever you hit, you hit the right one. Amen, god rest your soul grandpa.

Disappointing (5.00 / 8) (#80)
by IzikLA on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:30:50 PM EST

This is not the unity we need. This is ganging up to push Clinton out of the race. Her supporters will not be happy. The Obama campaign is great with the media, but they just don't get it. Edwards couldn't get those voters, Clinton could. This doesn't change that for all the talking in the world that will be done about how he will help bring in the white working class. Just won't change a thing.

Rachel Maddow is tapdancing on Hillary's grave (5.00 / 4) (#83)
by kempis on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:31:36 PM EST

Her breathlessness is making me breathless.

Anyway, MSNBC (Obama News Channel) is going to bring us "The Endorsement" live. There's a constant split-screen with a crowd, a podium, a big ol' CHANGE sign.

Ed Schultz says that there's a natural affinity between Obama and Edwards because Edwards is for CHANGE, too.

Isn't it scary that a nation will uncritically nod and say "yes, change is good," and never ask for particulars? What change? Change what? How? When? Who? Where? Why?

sigh

Does anyone know what Obama is going to change?

Ed Schultz (none / 0) (#93)
by Capt Howdy on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:33:23 PM EST

pffft

Parent

Ed Schultz (none / 0) (#124)
by Stellaaa on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:38:52 PM EST

a cheap imitation of Rush. He is not a very smart guy. I have heard him say some racist stuff and my mouth fell that he was still on the air. He is the lowest.

Parent

: he competes with (5.00 / 1) (#170)
by Salo on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:46:36 PM EST

Doug Feith as the stupidest man on the planet.

Parent
: Ed Schultz (none / 0) (#145)
by Capt Howdy on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:42:40 PM EST

is from the Tweety wing of the "democratic" party.
he is the democratic Dick Morris.

Parent

Hillary supporters might want to show (none / 0) (#112)
by JavaCityPal on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:36:56 PM EST

their irritation by changing the channel to something that never broadcasts current events.

Keeping our tv's tuned into those cable entertainment news channels just feeds the beasts.

Parent

His Underwear....maybe (none / 0) (#151)
by PssttCmere08 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:43:15 PM EST

Ed Schultz is a big old blowhard and continually shows how ill-informed he is buying into the "change" b.s.. Where is the information on this change, other than I won't do business like they have done in Washington. No, obama won't...he is much worse with his Chicago style politics...the only change of interest to him would be trading up from his 1.6 million dollar home to a 5 million dollar home where he and michelle can fret over how they will pay for the ballet lessons, the summer camp....etc.

Parent

I really hate Shultz (none / 0) (#165)
by Salo on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:45:46 PM EST

Hope Edwards attacks Bush and mccain.

Parent

change (none / 0) (#212)
by weltec2 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 06:05:41 PM EST

I don't know. I've been asking Obamaniacs this from the beginning and all I've ever received is ba.a.a.a.a. They're like the mindless unquestioning sheep of Fox noise. Very depressing.

Parent

Maybe....just maybe (5.00 / 4) (#102)
by kindness on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:35:09 PM EST

Edwards prefers Obama.

I'm somewhat unimpressed with all the attitudes on display. Men aren't your enemies. Women aren't your only friends. To suggest that everything revolves around gender isn't much different than the hard core religious folk.

You are all better than that.

How many (5.00 / 3) (#120)
by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:38:31 PM EST

men in your professional life call you sweetie?

Parent

: Heh (5.00 / 2) (#183)
by Steve M on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:49:37 PM EST

I once had a male boss who called me honey.
Apparently he was so used to having female secretaries that it had become a really, really ingrained habit. Try to picture me in my deep voice saying, "I'm not your honey!" He'd apologize but he'd always end up doing it again.

Parent
: Hey I call all my male employees sweetie! (none / 0) (#156)
by Marvin42 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:44:33 PM EST

But then again I get sued a lot! ;)
The women on the other hand: if I did it once I would be dead or worse, so never!

Parent

ohfergodssake (1.00 / 1) (#121)
by madamab on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:38:33 PM EST

we've suggested many reasons for this switch.

Money. Power. VP. AG.

Ridiculous comment.

Parent

Who cares (5.00 / 1) (#104)
by sonya on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:35:47 PM EST

This won't get Obama any more votes. It only strengthens Hillary's underdog narrative.

If there was one thing that could help me (5.00 / 1) (#106)
by Militarytracy on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:36:06 PM EST

get over supporting Obama for president it is having Edwards as Attorney General after the past eight years of illegal unconstitutional bullchit. Nice touch John, there's more than one way to skin the heart of a Clinton supporter.

On CBS they were stressing (5.00 / 4) (#110)
by Rhouse on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:36:45 PM EST

that Elizabeth is NOT happy and is NOT her endorsement of Obama. This should be fun if she feels she has to come out for Hillary. Also it appears that Elizabeth didn't even fly out with John.

: i'd enjoy that. (none / 0) (#126)
by Salo on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:39:31 PM EST

Maybe she and he could have a debate about it.

Parent

Is this Superdelegate math true? (5.00 / 3) (#135)
by Chimster on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:40:40 PM EST

According to Obama, Hillary is Winning

According to this number-crunching from No Quarter, Obama says that Super Delegates ought to vote in accordance with the "will" of the people. NQ claims if Super Delegates are counted according to Barack Obama's formula, Hillary wins the nomination. Period.

Is this true? It sounds impressive.

Oh Man! What a Commedia Tragica (5.00 / 1) (#206)
by feet on earth on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:55:35 PM EST

is this spectacle of an endorsement!

Watching it and thinking
We Have Been Had
The Coup is On
Women are been sold everyday noe by the party and its leadership

COMMEDIA TRAGICA

My Opinion of John Edwards....WIMP (5.00 / 1) (#211)
by Mrwirez on Wed May 14, 2008 at 06:01:02 PM EST

As I see it he is also an opportunist. He waited until Senator Clinton just hammered Obama. If he had any REAL balls he would have endorsed BO before NC and maybe saved Obama somewhat from WV, maybe. John Edwards is just another sissy democrat that has been neutered THREE times. Again, where is he really going to help? I AM the TYPE they want to get to vote for Obama... 42 yr old, white male, IBEW electrician in PA that has voted in EVERY Democratic election since 1984..... Sorry I never liked Edwards he does have the "wimp effect", and I REALLY don't like Obama.

This whole endorsement REEKS of set-up... Us "working class" (I am now a demographic) guys are center-left. Not LEFTY left. That is the point Senator Clinton was making about working class men, before they screamed RACIST again. The Clintons are winners because they run to the center..... You all see were McCain is running? AWAY from conservatives. Center-Right, but center. I like lower taxes and organized labor and guns... ie. "Reagan Democrat"..... although I NEVER voted Republican.... not yet.

Post Comment

I think that most of this... (4.40 / 5) (#9)
by kredwyn on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:19:06 PM EST

is high comedy.

You've got callers on the radio bemoaning the fact that they think McCain is too liberal.

You've got perfectly sane liberals going so far into fandom for their candidate that I'm worried they'll be able to find their way back to reality.

And you've got a whole slew of "also rans" who think they know what they're doing so far as political calculations.

The Divine Comedy? (5.00 / 1) (#19)
by Salo on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:20:24 PM EST

Parent

: Matthew Pearl's (none / 0) (#41)
by kredwyn on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:23:31 PM EST

book was better...or perhaps just more graphic when it came to the decaying part. :-)

Parent

Doomed (3.66 / 3) (#2)
by Athena on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:14:22 PM EST

On a day when:

The issue of Wright's magazine appears that includes both Obama and Farrakhan on the same cover.
Obama dismisses a local female reporter asking him a question "Just a moment, sweetie."

How soon can I write Hillary in?

No. (5.00 / 1) (#31)
by pie on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:22:31 PM EST

The issue of Wright's magazine appears that includes both Obama and Farrakhan on the same cover.

Yikes! He's toast. The republicans will play this up. The dems have pissed off half the voters.

Rome continues to burn.

Parent

This is a joke, right? (5.00 / 2) (#63)
by dianem on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:26:55 PM EST

He didn't do this. Please tell me that this is a joke. He did not refer to a professional woman as "Sweetie"?

Parent

He did (5.00 / 3) (#74)
by americanincanada on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:29:18 PM EST

and there's video of the whole thing.

VIDEO

Parent

Yeah (5.00 / 1) (#78)
by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:30:23 PM EST

and he's the woman's rights guy NARAL just supported.

Just FEEEEL the unity.

Parent

I don't know what to say (5.00 / 2) (#119)
by dianem on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:38:27 PM EST

He was so dismissive. "Hold on a second, Sweetie". The most sexist men I know stopped referring to women that way in the 80's. Have we been moving backwards?

Parent

the video is devastating... (5.00 / 1) (#174)
by p lukasiak on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:46:59 PM EST

the woman's voiceover said it all.... not only did she nail Obama on the "sweetie" comment, her remarks before that [paraphrase "but he never did explain how he's going to help these workers"] is gonna hurt Obama a lot more than just a "sweetie" comment ever could.

Parent

: In looking up information on this... (none / 0) (#191)
by dianem on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:51:13 PM EST

...I found the following comment on a thread in Free Republic, regarding circulating this as widely as possible:
"Wait till we know Obama's the candidate.
Then...unleash hell."
By November, we'll be lucky to win Hawaii and Illinois.

Parent

3 times that I know of. (5.00 / 1) (#82)
by nycstray on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:31:23 PM EST

Parent

You're surprised? (5.00 / 3) (#142)
by Cal on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:41:57 PM EST

I'm not. He's "periodically" revealed his true nature throughout this campaign.

Parent

yes (none / 0) (#5)
by Salo on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:16:48 PM EST

The systemic failures of the party have put us in a spot where we are like the Titanic.

I really don't see that Edwards enabled this mess. he's just doing damage control.

Parent

or maybe rowing a lifeboat. (none / 0) (#6)
by Salo on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:17:24 PM EST

Parent

paddling hard (5.00 / 1) (#33)
by Nasarius on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:22:36 PM EST

Realistically, Obama has the nomination. Now is probably the last chance for Edwards to exert a bit of power, and hopefully get Obama to STFU about health care.

Parent

: Reality is.... (5.00 / 1) (#89)
by JavaCityPal on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:33:01 PM EST

this needs to go to the convention for the delegates to cast their votes.
Media and Obama supporters are all acting like this has never happened before under the democratic rules of nomination. The only thing different this time is the declaration it is over when both candidates are still 300+ delegates away from winning.

Parent

I for one... (5.00 / 1) (#47)
by kredwyn on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:24:28 PM EST

want to be cast in the role of the Unsinkable Molly Brown.

Parent

Band leader. (none / 0) (#166)
by Cal on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:45:58 PM EST

He's striking up "Nearer my God to Thee."

Parent

I think he wants to be on the winning side (none / 0) (#37)
by Capt Howdy on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:23:16 PM EST

other wise why wait till it is mostly meaningless?

Parent

He's the clean up crew. (none / 0) (#66)
by Salo on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:27:57 PM EST

Parent

I thought (none / 0) (#84)
by Capt Howdy on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:32:14 PM EST

that was Hillarys job

/snark

Parent

: It is Obama's job. (none / 0) (#197)
by inclusiveheart on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:53:33 PM EST

It is clear that Edwards attempts to help tonight with Obama's followers was not successful. They booed him when he started out by talking about his respect for Clinton.

Parent

Because he has a cause he is trying to draw (none / 0) (#73)
by JavaCityPal on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:29:06 PM EST

attention toward, and Obama is the money train.

Parent

"Sweetie" (none / 0) (#22)
by CST on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:21:11 PM EST

He did just apoligize to the reporter.... as he should.

Parent

Has he apologized for the other times? (5.00 / 2) (#44)
by nycstray on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:23:51 PM EST

Parent

: Has he apologized to Hillary? (5.00 / 2) (#50)
by ahazydelirium on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:24:43 PM EST

Parent

Is there a link (none / 0) (#61)
by americanincanada on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:26:23 PM EST

to this so-called apology?

Parent

Link (none / 0) (#69)
by Steve M on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:28:25 PM EST

here. Complete with audio!

Parent

Interesting part of that.... (none / 0) (#178)
by rghojai on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:48:16 PM EST

...is ""Second apology is for using the word 'sweetie.' That's a bad habit of mine. I do it sometimes with all kinds of people."

Is that to say there's a real prospect that he'd call me, a 45-year-old guy, sweetie? BTD? John Edwards? The pilot of his plane? mmmmmkay.

Parent

: Heh (none / 0) (#196)
by Steve M on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:52:52 PM EST

The "all kinds of people" part was really awkward. You could hear a very long pause as he tried to figure out exactly how to put it.

Parent

Vote for a third party (none / 0) (#25)
by ChuckieTomato on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:21:26 PM EST

It's worth considering this year

Parent

If Hillary Doesn't Become The Nominee... (5.00 / 4) (#53)
by PssttCmere08 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:24:54 PM EST

independent party here I come...you can't write-in names in NV. We have already had almost 8 years of an inept, corrupt administration, headed by an inexperienced leader. I am not participating in helping install another person of that ilk in the WH....sorry charlie.

Parent

We can here, Yes We Can! ;) (5.00 / 1) (#91)
by nycstray on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:33:08 PM EST

Parent

You can write in but (none / 0) (#175)
by waldenpond on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:47:02 PM EST

most states do not count write-ins unless the candidate has filled out the appropriate paperwork. Clinton will never participate in a write-in that would pull votes from the Dem.

We will never know the results of a write-in campaign.

Clinton's a better Dem than I am, she supports the party absolutely.

HRC.. mistake to vote for McCain

Parent

: This seems like excessive piling on to me (none / 0) (#203)
by ChuckieTomato on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:54:30 PM EST

At least let her finish the primary season before you tell her to get out of the race.
This is old school good old boy politics--can't let the girl win

Parent
: I will not vote for Obama or McCain (none / 0) (#204)
by nycstray on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:55:17 PM EST

A symbolic write in is fine with me. At least I'll be at peace with myself. I have some congress critters here I can support and I'll check out NoCal to see if any there need help, but that's as far as I'll go.

Parent

We disagree (5.00 / 1) (#97)
by Jeralyn on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:34:13 PM EST

TalkLeft supports the Democratic candidate, whoever that is.

Parent

question (3.00 / 2) (#86)
by iago on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:32:32 PM EST

What math gives Clinton a majority of the delegates? She's behind in elected delegates and automatic(super) delegates are going to her opponent in greater numbers.

Hillary is tough. Hillary is resilient. Hillary might even be a better candidate. But Hillary lost. I think the Edwards endorsement is part of the party coming together after a long primary.

And for women who will say they will vote McCain or stay home I have five quick points.

John Paul Stevens age 88
Ruth Bader Ginsburg age 75
Anthony Kennedy age 71
Stephen Breyer age 69
David Souter age 68

Ladies the primary is largely over. Time to man up and move on.

Maybe you haven't noticed (5.00 / 1) (#103)
by Esme on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:35:23 PM EST

but the primary isn't over yet. Don't come here and tell us it's over when people in Oregon, Kentucky, South Dakota and Puerto Rico haven't voted yet, and two huge states still remain disenfranchised. It's not over until someone has 2209 delegates, and since neither Obama or Clinton is at that mark yet, we don't have a nominee and the primary is still going on.

Parent

okay (1.00 / 2) (#116)
by iago on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:38:07 PM EST

How big of a percentage victory would Clinton need in ALL the remaining states, assuming she won all of them, to match Obama in elected delegates?

Sometimes the game is actually over before the final buzzer.

Parent

Your question doesn't matter. (none / 0) (#131)
by madamab on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:39:53 PM EST

2209 is the number. Neither one will get there.

It's all about the SuperDelegates.

Just stop it.

Parent

okay then (1.00 / 2) (#179)
by iago on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:48:21 PM EST

Is Clinton or Obama gaining more of the super delegates, not to mention endorsements, now?

I'm sorry but it's over.

Parent

: Ok its over (5.00 / 1) (#190)
by Marvin42 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:51:12 PM EST

Go celebrate the "victory."
We are not buying it.

Parent
: Then there's no more need for you to comment here. (none / 0) (#198)
by Democratic Cat on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:53:33 PM EST

Go away.

Parent

My goodness (none / 0) (#132)
by Steve M on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:40:03 PM EST

the dishonest "pledged delegates" argument? Is that really the best you have?

Parent

how about this one (5.00 / 3) (#105)
by dissenter on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:35:48 PM EST

I live in a pro choice state and I don't have to vote for a man who thought Roberts was just swell until someone pointed out it would hurt his presidential ambitions.

Parent

true (none / 0) (#130)
by iago on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:39:51 PM EST

True, and you don't have to have Roe V. Wade in five years either.

No one is telling you what to do I'm only pointing out potential ramifications.

Parent

Here's a hint (5.00 / 4) (#137)
by Steve M on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:40:59 PM EST

You are not going to win over anyone at all with this game of uterus blackmail. Just stop.

Parent

not trying to (none / 0) (#188)
by iago on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:50:57 PM EST

I'm sorry if you see it that way.

Parent

: Please (none / 0) (#199)
by Steve M on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:54:19 PM EST

Now you're just insulting the intelligence of everyone here. Get a clue and understand that YOU'RE NOT HELPING.

Parent

Time to eff off (5.00 / 6) (#108)
by madamab on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:36:17 PM EST

and move on.

Don't tell us what to do. Don't tell us to man up.

And don't assume that all HRC supporters are female.

Parent

LOL! (5.00 / 2) (#111)
by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:36:52 PM EST

The Supreme Court and Roe is on the table so you support the man who is wishy-washy on rights and calls professional women "sweetie"? And you think we should have confidence that he gives a care?

Who-whoo that is funny!

Did you know that a woman who is very firm on women's rights is running for president?

And you want us to elect the man who has had no experience that would make him a good fit for president? Do you know what happened last time we did that (Carter). We had 12 years of Reagan/Bush. How many judges were appointed during that time, hmm? And do you know who saved us from that fiasco? A CLINTON.

So sorry, the boogie man is not going to work for many of us this time.

Third party candidate here I come!

Parent

Shorter you: (5.00 / 3) (#125)
by Steve M on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:39:03 PM EST

"Suck it up, sweetie."

Parent

you know what (1.00 / 2) (#168)
by iago on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:46:28 PM EST

Perhaps it's too early to say this and wounds are still too raw but yeah, Exactly that. We all lose sometimes and when you do you can either drown in that loss of recover.

So yeah. Suck it up sweetie and get back in the game. Figure out how to pivot off Clinton's loss and garner something out of it.

Parent

: good luck with that (none / 0) (#181)
by Capt Howdy on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:49:01 PM EST

Parent
: Wow (none / 0) (#189)
by Steve M on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:51:09 PM EST

If someone had offered to bet me that you would AGREE with my post, they could have won a lot of money off me.

Parent

Did someone say "Sweetie"?? (none / 0) (#192)
by jawbone on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:51:39 PM EST

Check out Obama's smooth moves with the fairer sex on this video.

New button: "Sweeties for Obama -- NOT!,"

Parent

Well honey (5.00 / 2) (#134)
by Stellaaa on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:40:26 PM EST

it just means you gonna have to work much harder to make up our not voting. So, get off the internet and start working. Ok. We fought the fight, time for you to get out and sweat a bit.

Parent

Biggest laugh of the day! (5.00 / 1) (#139)
by tree on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:41:13 PM EST

Was this intentional? Or satire?

Ladies the primary is largely over. Time to man up and move on.

First prize for negating your own message in two sentences.

Parent

Please tell us (none / 0) (#127)
by cmugirl on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:39:31 PM EST

how Obama would choose better nominees? He was ready to vote to confirm Roberts.

Parent

pro life judges (1.00 / 1) (#153)
by iago on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:43:44 PM EST

If McCain delivers pro-life, read strict constructionist, judges the Republican base will give him leeway, and support, on a host of other issues. It's a easy bartering tool for him.

Obama wouldn't really have that option as the Republicans will be trying to reform their party as a party of opposition to him.

Parent

democrats controll congress (none / 0) (#176)
by Capt Howdy on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:47:19 PM EST

how about THEM stopping packing of the court.
crazy idea I know but worth a try.

Parent

: like to gamble much? (none / 0) (#205)
by iago on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:55:28 PM EST

An eight year McCain presidency would likely nominate two perhaps three Supremes. All the Republicans need is one, of the five I listed, to over turn Roe V Wade.
That's not bad odds and the entire time the Democrats would be playing defense, trying to hold onto a bare majority of 5, not building on that majority as they would be with a democratic president and a democratic congress.

Parent

Ladies?! Man up?! Move on?! (none / 0) (#133)
by nycstray on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:40:17 PM EST

in your dreams.

Parent

Time To MAN Up? (none / 0) (#173)
by MO Blue on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:46:50 PM EST

You are such a diplomatic person. Did you take a course in how to win friends and influence people?

Parent

Not for nothing... (none / 0) (#208)
by kredwyn on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:56:27 PM EST

but the whole thing about him having to be advised not to vote for Roberts re: SCOTUS--and then defending his peers who did--has given me pause to wonder if he really knows what he's doing when it comes to the judges.

Parent

So why didn't you stay and enjoy? (none / 0) (#13)
by Joan in VA on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:19:51 PM EST

Edwards as Obama's replacement? (none / 0) (#30)
by p lukasiak on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:22:27 PM EST

that's my theory -- Edwards made a deal that if SDs started going toward Clinton during the summer once the right wing noise machine revs up, Obama drops out throws his support to Edwards.

I mean, its the only thing that makes sense, considering how Obama opposes universal health care, and has pretty much told "working americans" to stuff it....

I just hope Hillary stays in this race (5.00 / 2) (#49)
by Iris on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:24:34 PM EST

til the very end. I have no desire to become the party of the Obama-nation.

Parent

Now both John and Barack can (5.00 / 1) (#62)
by oculus on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:26:26 PM EST

campaign together wearing Levis and blue work shirts w/the sleeves rolled up. Very effective for Edwards at Harkins's steak fry in Indianola, IA, I though.

Parent

Ha! (none / 0) (#57)
by madamab on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:25:51 PM EST

You think Americans will agree that Edwards should take Obama's place after millions of us have voted for Obama?

You think Obama will agree?

He won't even drop out for HRC, who also has millions of votes. Trust me, he wouldn't do it for Edwards.

Interesting thought, though. ;-)

Parent

I think that... (1.00 / 1) (#118)
by p lukasiak on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:38:26 PM EST

once the right wing noise machine gets going, Obama is going to look a lot less attractive to the SDs, and they will start talking about how the nomination wasn't settled in June, etc...

Ir would be perfectly in keeping with Obama to give up, rather than face a humiliating defeat at the convention -- or to get the nomination and be handed a humiliating defeat by McCain -- I mean, the guy isn't a fighter...when the going gets tough, Obama withdraws...

This way, he gets to go out a hero (blaming the nasty media the whole time, of course) who "sacrificed his own personal ambition for the sake of the party and the nation" without having to admit having been beaten by Hillary. And in doing so, he can run again in the future, because this ain't chappaquiddick -- once Obama has a record in the Senate, his past will matter a whole lot less than it does right now.

And seriously, what else but a shot at the presidency do you think could get Edwards to endorse someone who is opposed to universal health care, and has treated the working class voters who Edwards claimed to represent like crap?

The AG job? Not nearly enough.

Parent

: That is hilarious. (none / 0) (#147)
by madamab on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:43:00 PM EST

I agree with your assessment of Obama's lack of stick-to-itiveness 100%, but if Obama sinks, HRC is the candidate. I mean, duh.
There is no way Edwards could "step in" and replace HRC. 17 million people have voted for her. Come on now!!!!

Parent

Nope here's the real deal.... (none / 0) (#161)
by v2r1 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:45:26 PM EST

Sometime in July .. space aliens are going to kidnap Obama. Then all the SDs will move over to Edwards so we can have 8 glorious years for Dems. Meanwhile Hillary is quietly twiddling her thumbs.

I contend that my scenario makes more sense than yours. :-P

Parent

Rainy day? (none / 0) (#42)
by Fultron on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:23:34 PM EST

I thought I read Edwards waited to tell Clinton personally before coming out with his endorsement, but I have to think this was planned for quite some time. If he came before the 41% landslide in WV, his endorsement looks weak (would have been 34%?).

Wait until the next day and suddenly it looks like he can bring white blue collar workers back in to the Obama fold. Closer margin in KY, win the white vote in OR, and suddenly everything looks fine in Obamaland.

: Time will tell... (none / 0) (#88)
by Leisa on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:32:51 PM EST

Parent

Although not a super will Elizabeth endorse Hilary (none / 0) (#54)
by Saul on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:25:02 PM EST

I sense that this is not a mutual endorsement.

Edward's working class vote (none / 0) (#96)
by waldenpond on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:34:13 PM EST

How much of the working class vote was Edwards getting? My recollection is he wasn't doing well as he was not able to carry off his message. I checked out the exit polling, he wasn't pulling much in any categories. I know that was his platform, but I don't think he came across as believable to many. He seemed easily portrayed as an elite by the media. It was certainly the impression I got from the coverage.

I understand Edwards has time to campaign for Obama, but I don't see any working class appeal to Edwards.

: well that would be the media. (none / 0) (#117)
by Salo on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:38:13 PM EST

They were pointing out that he was a brash poor lad made good.
And that he couldn't therefore care about the poor or the working class.

Parent

That bus (none / 0) (#101)
by madamab on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:34:34 PM EST

just got a lot bigger.

Oh, toughen up. Most of the previous thread (none / 0) (#115)
by Democratic Cat on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:37:33 PM EST

was not "trashing" Edwards, it was exploring his motivations, trying to understand -- in the light of the better alignment of Edwards with Clinton's policy positions -- what Edwards might have gottten in exchange for the endorsement.

Unless you think that high-profile endorsements just happen on their own with no horse-trading behind the scenes.

: Edwards is being incredibly gracious (none / 0) (#182)
by inclusiveheart on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:49:03 PM EST

about Senator Clinton. Sadly - and this will make the news - the Obama crowd booed Edwards' praise for Clinton. I am embarassed by their response. Really embarassed. Obama needs to step up on this one and tell his supporters to get it together.

Parent

I am glad Elizabeth did not go to Michigan (none / 0) (#122)
by BarnBabe on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:38:48 PM EST

As a Edwards supporter, I am saddened of course. I just sent him a e-mail last night asking for my money back. Ha. Yeah, I know, but it made me feel better. I also voiced my concern about his endorsement little knowing it was coming so soon. Well, he is for unity. I use to believe in unity. For so many many elections. But the problem is after being treated as a nobody for a few months now, I don't trust this group hug.

The voters in Iowa (none / 0) (#138)
by Salo on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:41:00 PM EST

did that.

Once iowa voted Edwards was out.

Clinton didn't complain of it.

When did John Edwards become "One of the (none / 0) (#143)
by nycstray on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:42:05 PM EST

greatest leaders of the Democratic party"?!

when he endorsed Obama (5.00 / 1) (#160)
by Capt Howdy on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:45:20 PM EST

Parent

I don't know (none / 0) (#150)
by americanincanada on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:43:07 PM EST

that truly shocked me.

Parent

: Daschle (sp?) said something earlier (none / 0) (#186)
by nycstray on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:50:41 PM EST

along the same lines and I was like, huh?
So, that begs the question, what has Edwards done?

Parent

Makes no sense... (none / 0) (#146)
by MikeB08 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:42:44 PM EST

Edwards appeal has never been strong enough to make him a serious candidate for the nomination and couldn't even help he and Kerry win his own state in 2004. Not to mention the double digit thumping they got in WV, IN, SC and KY. If Obama thinks the 7% in WV that voted for Edwards will now back him, he's more out of touch than I thought. KY will speak loudly to Edwards blue collar appeal by giving Clinton another huge win.

If Obama becomes the nominee, I hope Edwards, the Kennedy's, Richardson, Daschle and even Oprah are forced to sit on the front row and smile their fake smiles at McCain's inauguration.

: Obama (none / 0) (#185)
by Salo on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:49:54 PM EST

being the nominee has not been enabled by Edwards.
Kerry lost on his own terms. A VP will never make up for what the top of the ticket lacks.
Obama is prolly going to lose anyway. Clinton was shut out by AAs and CCs. Edwards probably dropped out to help her get over the top, but I thin kt he voters split in a completely unpredicted way on supertuesday.

Parent

Listen to the booing. Did you hear that last (none / 0) (#158)
by Teresa on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:44:53 PM EST

night? I agree, we do have a class problem.

lovely (none / 0) (#159)
by Robert Oak on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:44:57 PM EST

Clinton booed and now Edwards saying he got to know Hillary very very well and therefore....oh, she's just "not the one"?
God.

My theory (none / 0) (#167)
by tree on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:46:16 PM EST

is that this endorsement was planned to be part of the coronation on May 20th. But Obama got whupped so bad in West Virginia that they had to move the endorsement up.

I'm disappointed but not surprised. I always thought that Elizabeth would have been the better candidate. Hopefully John got something good policywise out of the bargain.

Heh, she should use Edwards words for her next (none / 0) (#172)
by nycstray on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:46:48 PM EST

commercial!

Comments closing (none / 0) (#184)
by Jeralyn on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:49:45 PM EST

New thread with actual endorsement speech here.

Funniest thing about all this will be (none / 0) (#187)
by Jim J on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:50:56 PM EST

when HRC blows him out again in KY and PR. These media gasbags just don't get it, real working class people see right thru John Edwards, they always have.

Edwards email (none / 0) (#200)
by mjames on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:54:22 PM EST

I got the Edwards email - and checked in here before deciding what to do, suspecting something was afoot.
What is Edwards doing?
As far as I can tell,
Obama is not for universal health care.
Obama is not for saving Social Security as is.
Obama is not for saving the Supreme Court from overturning Roe v. Wade. He IS for a "dialogue" on the moral issues involved. (He was going to vote to confirm Roberts, for heaven's sake.)
Obama is not for gay rights.
For me, Obama has set back civil rights and women's rights 50 years at least.
So - what is Edwards getting for this?
I was a strong Edwards supporter, but he can never get me to vote for Obama. Never.

Edwards had no respect for Hilary's WV victory. (none / 0) (#207)
by Saul on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:56:08 PM EST

He could have at least waited so the savor of Hilary's victory in WV could have been absorbed for at least one complete day. I think he gave her the coup de grâce blow today.

John Edwards and Obama Endorsement: Thread Two | 205 comments (205 topical)

John Edwards and Obama Endorsement: Thread Two

The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

Menu

Search

Login

Creator and Principal Author

TL Alumni

Contribute To TalkLeft

Sections

Site Credits

Legal