Looks like a two-person race now. It took me a long time to warm to John Edwards, and by the time I did it was almost over. But I think it was his presence in the race and his campaign that really set the tone for the whole thing, and he deserves an enormous amount of credit for any good things that may come in the next administration.
« Credit and Inequlity | Main | After Edwards »
Edwards Out
30 Jan 2008 10:51 am
Comments (58)
Dammit. Don beat me to the punch.
he deserves an enormous amount of credit for any good things that may come in the next administration.
That's going way too far. He deserves some credit for moving the debate a little during the primary, but that's about it.
It'll be interesting to see how narrowing to two will affect things heading into Super Tuesday.
I was going to vote for that Johnny "bitchen populist" fellow next week.
Speaking of Petey, you have to give him credit for picking McCain to win a few months ago, when everyone else had written the old geezer off. Having said that, McCain got lucky the way the early primaries worked out (Douthat has a post on this).
Uh, Jim, the two currently leading candidates followed Edwards' lead on just about every policy field. He deserves a huge amount of credit for pushing the debate in a more progressive direction.
You're assuming a Democrat gets elected.
You're assuming a Democrat gets elected; otherwise, anything good that happens will be accidental.
"Uh, Jim, the two currently leading candidates followed Edwards' lead on just about every policy field. He deserves a huge amount of credit for pushing the debate in a more progressive direction.
Posted by Clark | January 30, 2008 11:05 AM"
Very true. Let's hope if we get a Dem in the WH in January 2009, Edwards has some type of influence to keep them honest.
Will he endorse anyone? Probably Obama.
I fear 11 months from now we will all wonder why the hell we nominated a 'divisive' woman (hate that term, but you know what I mean), or a "Community Organizer" from Chicago who hasn't really been vetted like he will be come the summer time, instead of the candidate that was most electable, and had the best platform.
One of the many sad ironies of the Edwards campaign was that many leading bloggers finally followed their audiences and supported Edwards right before Iowa, when it was too late to do anything.
If the blogosphere had coalesced behind Edwards at the same point in the cycle as they did for Dean, he probably would have had the funds to hire more staff and run more ads in the early states and he would have had more than a fighting chance.
This is great news for Obama. Obama and Edwards were both the anti-Clinton and the change candidates. With Edwards leaving, his supporters will leave in droves for Obama. Their combined votes will make it much easier to defeat Clinton. Hillary won't even know what hit her when she loses on Super Tuesday.
Where is Petey on this post? He was so SURE of himself...sad little bugger I tried to tell him it was embarrassing.
You know, there may be a "Petey primary" next time around, where hopeful pols bid for his support, like the so-called "Shrum primary".
Petey did a good job: only cranky a few times in Dec to Jan when the pressure was on, made himself part of the community by chipping in astutely on everything else, top class performer frankly. I think it's fair to say that he shifted opinion on JE in MY's blog, certainly mine.
Alas, next time around there will probably be dozens of Petey-wannabes on every significant politics blog, which will be unbearable. MY will be more like Atrios, and Atrios will have 10,000 comments on each post. The small community is nice while it lasts.
Damn it, this is very bad for Obama. I was hoping that like Huckabee, he would stay in the race for maybe VP.
If nothing else, John Edwards singlehandedly rehabilitated the reputation of trial lawyers across the land.
Petey's maintained for a while that if Edwards drops out of the race, the bulk of his support will move to Clinton, giving her the nomination. I assume he'll hold to that now that Edwards has dropped out.
It sucks that Edwards is gone, and it sucks that he never got the attention from the media - or the support from the lefty blogosphere - that he deserved. He was consistently to the left of the other two frontrunners, and considerably more electable, but the supposedly policy-oriented lefty bloggers simply didn't care, caught up with the celebrity vs. celebrity death match.
I'm going to take the cynical route and bet he endorses whomever will make him VP. It would be intellectually defensible under MY's "both Clinton and Obama are close on policy" argument.
Maybe Edwards and Huckabee can run as a populist third party ticket. FWIW, Dick Morris's theory last night on Fox was that Edwards voters were the Dems who couldn't see themselves voting for a woman or a black.
Uh, Jim, the two currently leading candidates followed Edwards' lead on just about every policy field. He deserves a huge amount of credit for pushing the debate in a more progressive direction.
I already agreed to that. But, "any good things that come in the next administration", even assuming its a Clinton or Obama administration, will not necessarily have much to do with their capaign rhetoric. I think Matt's getting too wonky for his own good.
Questions for Petey as Edwards surrogate:
1) Will Edwards endorse Obama? If so, before Super Tuesday, or does he wait to see if his delegates would make the difference at the convention?
2) Do you still believe that Hillary has more to gain from Edwards absence than Obama does? Will the Kennedy endorsement be enough counterbalance Edwards departure?
3) Does Edwards have any political future given that he's not too popular in the Carolinas?
Methinks that this was a tactical decision by Edwards. He probably figured that he would help Obama in the Southern states (by siphoning off some of Clinton's white vote), but hurt him in the Northeast and the West Coast (by splitting the anti-Clinton vote with Obama). Until now, the Southern states were more important. On February 5, the Western states (California, Colorado, etc.) will be more important.
Dick Morris's theory
I've found that assuming the truth is the exact opposite of whatever Dick Morris says to be a reliable strategy.
Edwards would have had a very bright future in NC, and possibly then the country, had he stayed here and done something. Since he was basically launching Quixotic campaigns for president the moment he got here, there is no love lost for him here, and he will never be able to unseat the loathsome Liddy Dole and Richard Burr at this point.
"I'm going to take the cynical route and bet he endorses whomever will make him VP"
I would bet he wants a more influential position, like Attorney General.
One question about Edwards future for which I'm confident I know the answer: Will Edwards be offered the VP position by either Obama or Clinton? No way. I'm sure neither Hillary nor Obama would want any association with the failed Kerry/Edwards campaign. Plus, Edwards presence wouldn't help much with any state or important voting block.
In an ordinary election year Edwards would have had a good shot at the nomination, but he had no room to breath against the establishment strength of Hillary and the inspirational brilliance of Obama.
It took me a long time to warm to John Edwards
Why did it take you so long? Was it the silly poses he strikes, his fluttering eyelids, or the goofy yet sanctimonious way he talks? Inquiring minds want to know.
Edwards voters were the Dems who couldn't see themselves voting for a woman or a black.
Sadly that seems to be true, at least for a significant chunk of them. I believe polls in more than one state that's voted showed him winning among self-described conservatives and among white men. The first, in particular, was baffling considering his platform. But then I guess lots of people don't consider platforms -- just optics.
If the blogosphere had coalesced behind Edwards at the same point in the cycle as they did for Dean, he probably would have had the funds to hire more staff and run more ads in the early states and he would have had more than a fighting chance.
I can't blame progressives for early Edwards skepticism. Being a full-throated progressive was a new gig for him. He'd always been a centrist and it took a while for the new thing to seem authentic. And while I've not heard many others say this, for me his decision to bail on his Senate seat in 2004 called into question his commitment to the party (as distinct from his own ambition to be president).
The country would greatly benefit from the guy being in public office, but I think he has to aim lower, for now anyway.
"I'm going to take the cynical route and bet he endorses whomever will make him VP."
If Clinton is nominated, she'll have to choose Obama for VP or risk lots of Dem voters staying home.
Ignoring Edwards was a huge 'unforced' error on the part of Democrats. A three way fight for the nomination would've been salutary, as would a two way between Edwards and Obama. Unfortunately, now it's HRC's fight to lose, and she probably won't lose. Nice going, Dems! Would that it were not the case, but the odds are what they are. Prepare yourselves for the strong possibility of many more waves of expensive stupidity in the political realm and many more years' war in Iraq. Now you younger folks can grow up to be (much) less-affluent versions of baby boomers with crushed hobby-idealism. hoopla!
Maybe Petey can say a few words at Matt's book launch party?
What would make him drop out?
ONLY Money problems or health problems with his wife: one only hopes it is the money problems
Petey did a good job: only cranky a few times in Dec to Jan when the pressure was on, made himself part of the community by chipping in astutely on everything else, top class performer frankly. I think it's fair to say that he shifted opinion on JE in MY's blog, certainly mine.
I agree. Petey's performance was bad for his own dignity, but good for his candidate. He shifted my opinion in favor of Edwards as well.
Johnnybutter, cheer up man. Things ain't so dire. Edwards's policies are not so different from Hillary's or Obama's. Hopefully Edwards will back Obama and he'll choose him for VP or AG.
Maybe it was the Kennedies endorsements? Is it weird he's bowing out this early?
I found Petey informative if annoying. He'd spin every single thing as a positive for Edwards.
And he'd say mean things about theGarance.
peter k:
what about the elephant in the room? sure, MY got all snarky on the florida results but hillary completely rolled over both obama and edwards yesterday.
this former edwards voter was looking at hillary already as a practical matter for the primary. now i will run not walk to support hillary clinton.
Let's wish the Edwards family all the good and peaceful time together they can enjoy.
Later on we can talk about the office of the AG and succession for Governor Easley and Senators Burr and Dole.
Could Petey be the first blog-commenter celebrity?
what about the elephant in the room? sure, MY got all snarky on the florida results but hillary completely rolled over both obama and edwards yesterday.
I take it "elephant in the room" means "uncontested primary that awarded zero delegates."
Matt,
if your colleagues had covered the election, and not tried to influence it with their own opinions and feelings about the candidates, he would have won. Instead, marc Ambinder and his anonymous "majority of the press corps" got their way.
I'm still waiting for that coward to name names as to which supposedly professional journalist was blatantly miswriting stories in order to hurt Edwards.
The only thing that makes me sicker than the lack of coverage Edwards got up to this point is the back-patting, 'we will sure miss him' garbage coming out of TAP and MY and TNR. All of these 'liberal' blogs and magazines have always painted this as a two-person race, barely mentioning Edwards. It has mostly been a big Obama-thon. Well, I think Petey is absolutely right. This will only hurt Obama and seal the deal for HRC. And I don't think he will endorse anyone, at least not before Feb. 5.
John Edwards - may he be remembered as the first candidate of 2008 swiftboated because of a haircut and a mansion, both of which he earned due to personal talent, not from his dad or his rich wife. He shaped the debate in this election so far and now business can return to normal. It is nice to see all these great posts about him now. Too bad they weren't written a few months ago.
Re Ryan's comment "I can't blame progressives for early Edwards skepticism. Being a full-throated progressive was a new gig for him."
-------------
He voted for the war before he voted against it.
drfranklives:
Didn't Ambinder also say he knows of TradMed people who absolutely hate Edwards? They think he is a phony. That kind of thing. Digby has been right about "The Village" all along. It's right out of Heathers
I still don't know what Mr. Edwards's campaign was about (in the way you kind of knew what Howard Dean's campaign was about) but he seemed to be playing the anti-player to Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama's players and that was the reason I was going to vote for him.
Feingold on Edwards:
The one that is the most problematic is (John) Edwards, who voted for the Patriot Act, campaigns against it. Voted for No Child Left Behind, campaigns against it. Voted for the China trade deal, campaigns against it. Voted for the Iraq war ... He uses my voting record exactly as his platform, even though he had the opposite voting record.
http://mydd.com/story/2008/1/18/02424/5737
I take it "elephant in the room" means "uncontested primary that awarded zero delegates."
Posted by Freddie | January 30, 2008 12:08 PM
ahhh, sounds like your grapes are sour. so sad.
JB: "John Edwards - may he be remembered as the first candidate of 2008 swiftboated because of a haircut and a mansion, both of which he earned due to personal talent, not from his dad or his rich wife. He shaped the debate in this election so far and now business can return to normal. It is nice to see all these great posts about him now. Too bad they weren't written a few months ago."
Indeed. The lack of consistent, aggressive press criticism/pushback on the sites you mention did harm Edwards. But some 'professional liberals' are more worried about the next line in their DC resume (hint: they think Russert is an equal opportunity offender). And of course the atrocious press behavior currently targets evil HRC (and previously Edwards to a significant extent), helping Obama, so its all good.
Otto:
So why didn't Russ run? I was even able to tell Russ to his face that he should run. Also, if you are ripping Edwards, what do you say about RFK? Remember, he once worked for Joe McCarthy. Compare that with his 1968 rhetoric. Do you think RFK was insincere? I don't. Feingold is just pissed that someone is stealing his thunder(and I am as big a Feingold backer as anyone).
Thanks for that link, otto. Feingold's comments help illustrate why my interest in Edwards never got beyond luke warm and I suspect why in part he didn't do better as well as why so much of the conventional media seemed to hold him in contempt. There were always a nagging doubts in my head about Edwards progressive authenticity. I never could square the Edwards of 2003-2004 with the Edwards of 2007.
This may be harsh, but Edwards sort of struck me as the Romney of the Democratic race -- both in terms of their anchor guy looks and in their apparent strategic decisions to abandon their centrist pasts in order to outflank their primary opponents.
ahhh, sounds like your grapes are sour. so sad
Huh? Dude, they both agreed not to run. Florida awarded zero delegates. What don't you grasp about this?
FWIW, intrade shows a slight increase for Obama.
I think we all need to wait for a possible endorsement before we can figure out how this affects the race.
Obama and Edwards need each other support more than Clinton. Hopefully they realize this.
ahhh, sounds like your grapes are sour. so sad.
Just how ridiculous can you get? Mocking people b/c their preferred candidate loses the primary? What if McCain wipes the floor with Hillary? Who are you going to mock then? Intra-party Democratic debate is different than Republican versus Democrat debate. In the latter, there are clear differences in objectives. In the former, the objectives are much more closely aligned. Unless you are a power-broker standing to win or lose influence, whoever wins is incidental to the question of: what will the impact be (assuming you have the integrity to base your political preferences on policy outcomes instead of personal sentiments). And using, I would imagine, very similar priors as you regarding the desirability of different results, many people support Obama instead of Clinton. Given that, mockery is just small and pathetic.
I am beside myself waiting to see if Petey is a closet racist or closet sexist.
english teacher:
peter k:
what about the elephant in the room? sure, MY got all snarky on the florida results but hillary completely rolled over both obama and edwards yesterday.
this former edwards voter was looking at hillary already as a practical matter for the primary. now i will run not walk to support hillary clinton.
I think a lot of objective people would agree that there's a huge asterisk next to Hillary's "victory" in Florida yesterday.
What does a "practical matter" mean? Supporting a sure thing? Then why were you supporting Edwards in the first place?
What's funny for me is the people who went on ad nauseum about how disasterous the Bush administration has been on foreign policy and then go on to support Hillary, who isn't that different, and who as people like Frank Rich have argued, could easily lose to McCain, thereby giving the country more of the same foreign policy they supposedly thought was such a disaster.
If you bothered to actually look into Edwards you would have found that he ran on a anti-corporate/quasi-populist message in all three of his attempts at elected office. What the hell did you think "Two Americas" was about in 2004?
He had some shitty votes but he was one of the more "liberal" red-state Dems. Compare his voting record with that of Faircloth, Burr, Dole or Helms.
Posted by only idiots think he was phony
Fixed:
Posted by only idiots think he was phony
Comments closed February 13, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
Any concession speech from Petey?
Posted by Don Williams | January 30, 2008 10:58 AM