Maybe Edwards stayed in the campaign in an effort to move the discussion to the left.  As a Edwards supporter I never believed he'd be the 2008 Democratic nominee but I thought he deserved support because when he came out on Election Night (2004) --long after the polls had closed (but before Kerry caved -- Edwards clearly was willing to to fight for Ohio and in 2008 Edward's message spoke to the people and issues I care about.  

I believe in rewarding the good.  After Edwards suspended his campaign HRC took up the charge and that's when she gained my support and $s.

As to friends helping friends that's okay too -- but if the money gets funny that's another story (Loyalty 101 -- be willing to follow to the edge of the cliff but no further).

Of course what certainly appears to be the continued lying and cover up does him no favors -- but his action maybe based on something as basic and primal as fear, the loss of his wife's respect and support.  

this would neatly explain why edwards, in the face of mounting questions regarding his association with ms. hunter, chose to continue his candidacy, rather than doing the obvious thing, and dropping out.

And she didn't.  

That's got to take remarkable self-restraint.  Or maybe they thought that it would be all over by supertuesday so they didn't think it was worth the aggravation.  

But it seems to have become a pattern with her.  She didn't smear Edwards and she didn't go after Reverend Wright.  She won by being positive and outshining the other guys.  

And voters say this is what they want in a campaign.  They want a candidate who doesn't go negative.  

Edwards should have dropped out after Elizabeth's cancer returned. None of this would have come out and no one would have questioned the withdrawal.

Personally, I think that if John Kerry were to act on behalf of all the people who voted for Kerry/Edwards in 2004, and give John Edwards a good solid punch in the face on national television, he would be cheered by a lot of people.

The more this goes on, the bigger JE's lies appear, and even his confession is now appearing to be a pack of lies.

Now it appears to be a... a whatchucallit...  A conspiracy?  A planned scheme to get out of accepting blame for something?  A whatever (words escape me at the moment).  Couldn't that be a chargeable offense if campaign funds are involved?  

I read something a day or so ago that quoted someone saying that the baby "looks like John Edwards in a onesie."

It can't be the mere fact that he had had an affair, right? Surely we can accept that there have been politicians, and very likely Presidential candidates who have had an affair while running for office, right? And that those affairs did not per se constitute sufficient grounds for them to drop out, right? How many male politicians might be left if those who had had affairs were obliged to drop out of consideration? (Of course, I'll grant, some might be happy to be rid of them).

Look, the real problem with Edwards affair was that he was involved with someone who pretty clearly couldn't or wouldn't conduct herself with enough discretion that she could protect Edwards. Another person might have been able to do that; in most such instances, my guess is that the women involved do so conduct themselves.

Now I'm not going to say that it wasn't Edwards who bore any responsibility for how Rielle seems to have behaved. He may have been a complete cad to her; he may have fully deserved to have been, say, threatened with exposure by her. In that sense, he may well have been far more responsible than she for her apparent unwillingness simply to recede into the background.

(I think, though, that's it a little hard not to see Rielle as being manipulative here, at least of someone. To put it bluntly, she had the baby rather than an abortion. Given her storied history of wildness, it's hard to see that as based on some deep seated religious conviction, rather than something else.)

I think that if one is honest about what the real problem with Edwards' keeping in the race despite his affair it is that he completely misjudged the person he was dealing with, and the likely consequences of being involved with such a person.

But I don't know when, exactly, he should have known that this affair with this person would very  likely blow up in his face. That would be the point at which he was being completely irresponsible to his supporters and to the Democratic Party more largely speaking.

But even there the problem would be that Edwards could simply go into denial about how likely it would be that the affair would blow up in his face.

The basic truth is that, in fact, Edwards had effectively kept the story out of the mainstream news pretty much until he himself admitted to the affair. It was not unreasonable for him to have believed before that that he might have been able to do so pretty much indefinitely.

As a sales rep and a manager, I always tell people to play to their strengths.  If the truth was on HRC's side, she should have used it to the fullest extent.

The thesis of this post is dumb because for the post to have validity, not only does Edwards have to drop out because of the affair, but everybody has to shut-up about it.  And since the original source was probably Axlerod [he's had three of his opposing campaigns encounter sexual revelations since 2006...let's get a clue folks] the idea that he would withhold this information that would hurt Hillary is silly.  

If Elizabeth, who knows him better than anyone, sees how easy it is for him to lie so forceably to save his sorry b*tt, is she now understanding that she most likely has only a small amount of his truth, too. She's got some really hard decisions to make.

I also lost respect for him because he may or may not have jeopardized our chance for having a great president, Sen. Hillary Clinton.

Apparently, she won all the crucial states, except for SC, but Edwards should not have tampered with such an important issue.