In recent weeks, both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton reportedly have been lobbying John Edwards, who is said to be close to an endorsement.
At first glance, Edwards would seem to be a natural ally of Obama, but there’s a chance he could choose Clinton if he thinks she’s better prepared to lead and will do more on universal health care and poverty.
But really — would an Edwards endorsement of Clinton be credible, after all the disparaging things he’s said in debates linking her to the “status quo†in Washington, D.C.?
Moreover, Edwards might have waited too long. He’s hardly a kingmaker at this point. Most of his supporters and staff have moved on — and most seem to have moved toward Obama.
Edwards is said to be genuinely torn between the two. But if he can’t make up his mind, why would his close decision carry that much weight either way?
48 Comments
Doesn’t matter at this point, as each with a few more wins tucked under their belt will be going after the nearly 800 Super Delegates that will ultimately decide who is the nominee.
That will be the “greased palms” election for the Democrats. :)
Yeah, right. Any time I want to know the inner workings of Democratic Party politics, I turn to the expertise of “Regular.”
Fact is, most Democrats were absolutely delighted with all of the presidential candidates this primary season. (Mike Gravel, not so much. But I digress.)
Edwards’ endorsement, in and of itself, probably won’t mean all that much. But the reasoning he offers for the choice he makes will be heard and listened to and considered.
Were I a betting man, I’d predict Edwards tilts toward Barack. But we’ll see…
I think Edwards was the man for the time, but the news media decided who they wanted to use to promote tabloid news. I will take into consideration what Edwards recommends his delegates do in supporting Clinton or Obama.
Edwards needs to endorse for Senator Clinton before this tide of deluded people sweeps the total unknown Obama to nomination.
And of course, we KNOW where Randy Scholfield stands. Right with the starry eyed sheep bleating “chaa aaaange”.
Don’t you even listen to yourself Randy?
“…but there’s a chance he could choose Clinton if he thinks she’s better prepared to lead and will do more on universal health care and poverty.”
And just WHERE is any idea Obama gives a damn about poverty or universal health care? Obama says the party of “suffer the little children” can be worked with! He wants high tea with the same folks who when referring to the poor say “pave ‘em over”.
John Edwards please. Save the party and America from this headlong stampede toward disaster.
Super-delegates could decide Democratic race
Reported by: Chris Hernandez
http://www.nbcactionnews.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=76157859-c55d-436c-8d37-bc0c69b7337e
KANSAS CITY, Mo. – Super-delegates are in the spotlight, as Democrats battle for the Presidential nomination.
The super-delegates are party “big wigs” and elected officials who go to the convention unpledged and are able to change their votes.
Missouri will have 16 super-delegates and Kansas will have nine. Some have made endorsements, but others are uncommitted.
If the race stays neck and neck through the next couple of rounds of primaries, the super-delegates could end up making the final choice between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, regardless of how voters chose.
It would be the party elders, at the convention in August, casting the final 20-percent of the delegate votes and picking the nominee.
“I think some people will be upset, I think rightfully so,” Mark Bryant said. Bryant is a Kansas City lawyer, and also a Missouri super-delegate. He supports Obama.
Bryant says it would be wrong if super-delegates pick a nominee who didn’t win the popular vote. “You can’t do that by forming some super-executive committee which makes independent judgments,” Bryant said.
Super-delegate Claire McCaskill is for Obama, while Emmanuel Cleaver is for Clinton.
Obama won the Missouri vote by one-percent. But in Missouri, and nationally, more super-delegates have already said they’re committed to Clinton.
“A number of these party leaders owe a lot to the Clinton’s, particularly during the 90’s. Bill Clinton did a lot to help a number of these Democratic leaders gain their seats,” UMKC Political Science Professor Beth Miller said.
Miller says there’s nothing the public can do if party elders control the outcome. It’s a party nomination, which follows party rules, not people’s votes.
“It is a big deal, because a lot of people don’t even know super-delegates exist,” Miller said.
Big city mayors usually get a shot. If he does, since he is uncommitted, Funkhouser would be targeted by both campaigns.
It’s something he says is good for Kansas City. “If it somehow helps me advance Kansas City’s agenda, gets us more notice, gets us on the national stage a little bit,” Mayor Funkhouser said.
Funkhouser says he’s leaning towards Obama, but will think carefully before making a final decision. Before elected mayor, Funkhouser was non-political, so it has been others who have been urging him to seek out the super-delegate slot.
I don’t want to pretend to be objective…I adore JOhn Edwards, his wife, his policies and feel that the media robbed the country of a real political debate by focusing on the historics, celebrity and fundraising of the Democratic nomination instead of anything of substance. As a result, I fear the easiest win for Dems to get back the White House will fall in defeat because we have an untested contender and a woman who 1/2 the country already hates.
With that said, from an ideological perspective you’d have to think Edwards MUST support Obama given that their policies, and messages are really on the same wavelength. I would never vote for HRC in my lifetime because I think she’s a calculating and manipulative person. More than any policy out on the campaign trail, the USA needs a President who has a balance of conviction and leadership. Bush had too much conviction and no leadership – so much so that even though all signs were indicating the sky was blue if he felt strongly about it, the sky was pink. It pitted the USA in one disaster after the next and cost us a war we may have won if we started with higher troop levels, and a little thing they call a back-up plan.
With that said, I think Edwards will endorse Clinton for one very reason. She is sort of tested and she does have the fire and resiliency to withstand the Republican attacks. Barack Obama’s wishes to hope our way out of the mess we’re in I think makes Edwards nervous. And as much as he hates Hillary and Bill as representatives as the “status quo,” he recognizes the desperate need for someone to come in and fight for the average American more. For that reason, I think Edwards endorses Clinton. I still won’t vote for her but that’s my prediction.
That will be the “greased palms” election for the Democrats
So Reps use KY, Reg?
When the time comes I will be interested in WHY Edwards supports a candidate. He is carrying a needed message and having a positive affect (kind of the Democratic Ron Paul only more mainstream, positive and acceptable).
It is very early and the process is working exactly as it should. I wish we could all ignore the naysayers — Republicans who have nothing so they must attack (as usual) and the media who need a story (also as usual). The Democratic Party fielded excellent candidates this year! As MonkeyHawk pointed out there were many highly qualified and we’re still in the process of getting to one. I’m really proud of our choices and know America will move forward from the dark years of bushco.
From the beginning I favored Richardson who never got off the ground. I hope he will have a cabinet position as his experience will be valuable to America. The one who seems to really have his finger on the pulse of America and is running the best campaign seems to be Obama. He is “The Little Engine That Could,” and that’s refreshing to Americans who have had enough of “be afraid, be very afraid.”
I still, personally, hope Clinton is the nominee. However, I won’t be disappointed. Hope feels good after what we’ve been drug through. The next president has much cleaning up to do!
Did anyone read Cal Thomas in this morning’s paper? Usually he is skim over material but he makes some good points this morning (mixed in with some of his own craziness). He does describe some of reasons Republicans will lose come November.
Looks like I’m not the only one feeling that obama threw us under the bus. The comments remind me of this blog, but I think you’ll find everything I ever said about the obama camp there. And the responses from the majority democrats are the same.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132×4566265
Moral of the story? You can piss on gay folks with NO price to pay. More and more of us are planning to stay home in November.
Not that the democrats care…
#
ghotiphaze
Posted February 13, 2008 at 8:17 am | Permalink
That will be the “greased palms” election for the Democrats
So Reps use KY, Reg?
—————————————-
Yeah they do…
Dems on the other hand, like it corn husk dry.
Yeah they do…
Dems on the other hand, like it corn husk dry.
Prep H compensates, but, I use it anyway. Y’know, when you actually WORK it’s a necessity. Just like ibuprophen is the new staple food of the pyramid.
“That will be the “greased palms” election for the Democrats”
This from the guy who buys KY – tingling, by the drum full —
Huh? You know your KYs too well. I didn’t know there was more than one.
then again, I’ve never bought any.
Edwards is said to be genuinely torn between the two.
.
.
.
Why doesn’t he just donate his hair.
Torn between two lovers………
ha-ha
JR – This is what he knows about poverty.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama
As Director of the Developing Communities Project, he worked with low-income residents in Chicago’s Roseland community and the Altgeld Gardens public housing development.
More and more of us are planning to stay home in November.
All two of you? hehe
Booo-hoooo!
Is it any surprise that a teeny tiny minority of
Americans don’t count?
I should hope not. That is why it’s called a democracy. Majority rules. Just look at the 30 states where WE THE PEOPLE voted to define marriage as between a man and a woman.
Would you like a box of generic kleenex?
Obama is someone the masses see as a difference from the crap they have been fed for so long. Right or wrong this is one train that will be hard to stop legally. I don’t count the Clinton’s out though. I have seen their dirty work too often. Hear Obama is giving a speech on the economy this morning. That should be interesting.
JR – This is what he knows about poverty…he worked with low-income residents
Like that cuts it? C’mon, let him live 6 weeks under an overpass, or another 6 weeks living off one 5 pund box of macaroni (mac &bbq sauce, mac and miracle whip, mac and ketsup).
Been there, done that. That’s why I have such simpathy for others in like circumstances.
Is it any surprise that a teeny tiny minority of
Americans don’t count?
Sorry, but I disagree with that. Unless I woke up in China or the mid-east this morning, WE ALL COUNT.
Unfortunately, KFG is too much of a lady to deign to comment on such an ignorant remark.
John Edwards might be the most irevelent democrat candidate on the national scene since Mr Hartpence.
The last time he was able to fool voters into voting for him into office was in 1998 when he was elected senator from North Carolina.
As the Vice Presidential butt-boy for Lurch in 2004 if he had of been able to deliver North Carolina Lurch would be our president today.
All that being said, I think he would be a better president than BHO or the Hildebeast!
Fish – Not everyone will have first hand experience with poverty. I’ve never been homeless, but have worked with homeless and disadvantaged people for years. I think I understand poverty better than someone who has never felt poverty, AND never worked with people in poverty.
From previous posts of yours, TDT, I agree with your assessment–as far as it goes. Without being told, I’d assume you honestly help those in need because it’s the right thing to do.
But, I’m thinking of the dowdy heiffer leaving her 32 room mansion to dole out soup at the homeless kitchen for a photo-op.
But, I’m thinking of the dowdy heiffer leaving her 32 room mansion to dole out soup at the homeless kitchen for a photo-op.
Wait a sec. First you dissed Obama because his work with the poor wasn’t enough. Then it’s on to Hillary for living well. You left out a few, many on the right. When did our current Pretzeldent ever miss a meal? He even managed a stint in the “Champagne Unit” of the ANG. And he thought it was GREAT when a woman in the audience was working THREE jobs!
Funny that it didn’t matter that Bill Clinton had grown up in a lower income family.
Let’s face it. We hate ‘em when they do, and we hate ‘em when they don’t.
Generic kleenex?
Sorry, there is no such thing. Kleenex is a trademarked name. Try using “tissue” next time.
And, please, please, don’t vote. We love it when you stay home! Just remember that it’s pitiful to complain when you opt to not vote.
Fish – Who’s the dowdy heiffer?
Wait a sec. First you dissed Obama because his work with the poor wasn’t enough. Then it’s on to Hillary for living well.
1st, I didn’t dis him, just stated I didn’t buy into it. And I’ve never said anything, anywhere (dig through ALL my posts) about the Clinton chick living well.
TDT, the dowdy heiffer was a generic hypothetical. For instance, I’d never use Carter and Habitat as an example, because i sincerely believe that HE sincerly believes in what he’s doing. Not because it looks good, but because it’s the right thing to do. Going to church only on Easter Sunday doesn’t count if the sole reason you go is to show off your new hat and dress.
the dowdy heiffer was a generic hypothetical.
Uh huh.
Both campaigns have met privately with Edwards. Is it a VP bid for his endorsement?
Despite being one of those evil rich people, his position on the issues would work nicely with Obama.
Obama needs as much steam as he can get, to counter the democratic establishments super delegates, who have close ties to both Clintons. Hope he goes to Obama.
the dowdy heiffer was a generic hypothetical.
Uh huh.
Really, I don’t even KNOW your wife.
*ducks*
It really was, RD. I just wonder about the pictures in the papers about “Feeding the Homeless” at Thanksgiving and Christmas. I know I’m cynical, but I have reason to be.
Fish – Okay, I agree. Some people that help are hypocritical, and are only doing it for some face time and to feel good about themselves. But sometimes, you have to take what you can get, ya know. And I don’t feel like Obama’s work with Chicago’s poor was hypocritical. I’m sure he could have worked for a very influential law firm, made untold sums of money, and not sullied his hands, so to speak, working with low income people, but he decided to do something that would make a true difference.
AmWay, I’m sure you and many others on this forum think I’m totally ‘anti-rich’. Really, I’m not. More power to Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and many others who actually earned all they have. Where I take umbrage is from the guy in your work dept. pulling in an egregiously inflated salary while spending his day on Monster.com tweaking his resume, hunting the net for one-sided arguments to use on a meaningless blog, perusing thirteenyearold dot com, On-line shopping for his 2 or 3 girlfriends, gossipping at the water cooler, hiding out in the bathroom, etc. Which would be fine. Good for him–except for the other people in the same department that has to cover his work. Except for the 5 to 20 (depending on relative salaries) actal producers (y’know, the unskilled, not worth the pay, lower echelon) that his salary puts out of work. Except for their constant gloating of how priveledged they are and everyone else is just scum.
That’s where I have my problems. If ya keep slappin’ at a dog, you’re bound to get bit. If you don’t know of anyone in your department like that, you’re it.
“I would never vote for HRC in my lifetime because I think she’s a calculating and manipulative person.”
It is amazing to me how many reasonable people have a serious loathing for anything Hillary Clinton. If she cries, “she’s faking it for sympathy”, if she doesn’t cry “she is a cold heartless bitch”, etc., etc.
Remember the media told us in 2000 that we had “Clinton fatigue” and were ready for something else. Even Al Gore seemed to believe that. That fatigue looks much better than the real fatigue this country enduring now.
“Funny that it didn’t matter that Bill Clinton had grown up in a lower income family.”
Bill Clinton’s mom was a nurse and his stepdad owned a car dealship. Do you think Dawson Grimsley is poor? I don’t. Bill being from a poor family is a myth that the Clintons’ successfully perpetrated.
Bill Clinton’s mom was a nurse and his stepdad owned a car dealship.
OK, not interested in their tax returns, but y’know nurses, while not exactly making sculleryslut wages, are vastly underpaid for the knowledge base they need and the work they perform. And owning car dealerships isn’t a given to affluence. Didn’t NoWay Elway get into financial binds (not that it really hurt him lol) with his dealerships?
It’s really amazing to see the expertise “American Way” proclaims about Democratic Party operations –
The Brothers Grimm should have conjured up better fairy tales.
For example, “American Way” posits –
“Both campaigns have met privately with Edwards.”
Uhm. No.
Senator Clinton apparently met with Edwards last Thursday. And there was a scheduled meeting between Edwards and Obama on Monday, but it was postponed.
“Is it a VP bid for his endorsement? Hell, I don’t know. You don’t know. Nobody knows.
“Despite being one of those evil rich people, his position on the issues would work nicely with Obama.”
Be specific, “American Way,” why you say this. List the issues and the positions of both candidates.
“Obama needs as much steam as he can get, to counter the democratic establishments super delegates, who have close ties to both Clintons.
And you base this little observation on… what, exactly? Many so-called “Super Delegates” have endorsed Barack. And “Super Delegates” are, by party rules definition, *un-committed* delegates to the national convention.
Oh, and most “Super Delegates” will find their own names on the ballot in November. They’ll vote at the convention for the candidate they deem to be the one with the longest coat-tails.
Now, this might not be as fun as imagining a so-called “Clinton Machine” wresting all Democrats’ wishes away. But reality isn’t nearly as interesting as your fantasies.
Fantasty Monkeyhawk?
Heck, all you have to do is google super delegates and Obama and you will find a direct quote from Obama on his concern. Very much aware of both parties “operations”, at least what is visible and not going on behind closed doors.
You will also pull up a few hundred blogs with many democrats voicing the same concern.
You are correct on the Obama meeting being called off. I had not heard that.
The super-delegates do not have to follow the vote of the people, which I imagine is why you will find so many blogs discussing this amongst libs. BTW, I have the same concerns about any party delegats pledging based upon anything other than the vote of the people, rep or lib..
I follow all the candidates Monkey and have read what their platforms are/were. Regardless of party. If you don’t see the connection between Edwards and Obama, fine. Many others do. I won’t do your homework for you though.
“American Way” –
I was orginally an Edwards advocate. When he dropped out of the race, Obama became my candidate.
So I know how many people see the issues.
At the same time, I recognize how Edwards’ populism might not readily embrace Obama’s philosophy of inclusion. Edwards is a fighter-advocate and most certainly Senator Clinton has an instinct for battle.
Either Democrat works for me as the nominee. Common goals, different tactics. Given the choice, I’m attracted to Obama’s approach.
That doesn’t automatically negate Senator Clinton’s approach.
As I’ve stated so may times in this forum, either Democratic candidate will be my choice over any Republic Party wannabe.
I want a landslide, though, rather than another Democratic 49-49% squeaker. We lost that one in 2000 and look where that got us.
I don’t think we are going to have a landslide either way. Our country is too polarized between the blue and the red. Voting demographics reflect this. Maybe someday a leader who is a combination of the best traits of either will emerge. Maybe
the people not happy with either will turn violet.
But I think we are still divided. Just readin this blog and the level of hate is revealing in that regard.
I think many conservatives are disappointed with the limited selection – and the changes in the republican party. But I still think most will go with the flow.
You should be happy if you win 60-40 at best. And very happy when you take both chambers of congress. But remember the midterms were almost all close races.
I’ve been posting on a blog started yesterday by former Edwards staffers and volunteers… and much to my surprise and gratification, I got over 25 responses agreeing with me… Obama simply hasn’t provided enough substance to win most of us over.
But we’re still keeping our minds open.
I want to support Obama… but with all my heart and soul. I can’t do that until I get solid answers to my questions.
I don’t want to just vote for him because he’s not John McCain.
“American Way” –
A 60-40% victory, between two capable candidates, is the definition of a landslide.
From my old political days, the assumption is that any competent candidate should win 40% of the vote. Ultimately, every election turns out to be a battle of the remaining 20%. If you get half of them (plus one), you’ll win the election.
Which means all that money and effort concentrates on 10% of the voters (plus one).
The damnedest thing about American politics is, year after year, election after election, about 20% of voters say they make their decision within the last 48 hours before voting. As politically aware as we who participate in this forum are, the people who actually decide elections are busy out having a life, earning a living, raising their kids, and putting off deciding who to vote for until the first Monday in November.
That’s the price of democracy, I guess.
“Obama simply hasn’t provided enough substance to win most of us over.”
Another thread mentions how John McCain is already exploiting this. And fatmouth Rush is already all over Obama’s idealistic but mostly empty rhetoric.
Progressives will never forgive John Edwards if he helps Hillary Clinton try to derail the best opportunity for real change we have seen in America for forty years. To back Clinton now for the sake of his own political prospects would be rightly seen by progressives as a sell-out and a betrayal of the highest order. Out of respect for John Edwards and his record on behalf of the progressive cause, I will assume that this is not what he intends to do.
Well Mark,
Your guy Obama wants progressives to work with Republicans.
Obama is proud PROUD that he has Republicans that are for him. As such, Obama is no friend to progressives.
And neither are you.
“J R” –
I recognize and share (for the most part) your visceral hatred for all things associated with the Republic Party.
But there’s something new in the mix this year.
I was at the Kansas Caucus on February 5th and saw first-hand a lot of traditional Republic Party partisans show up to stand for Barack Obama. These folks were Kassebaum Republicans, not Brownback Republicans. They said stuff to me such as, “I didn’t leave the Republican Party, the Republican Party left me.”
You won’t believe me when I say it again (and neither will “ksfarmgrrl” or a lot of other liberals), but Obama’s strength as a candidate is not one of appeasement, but attraction.
Mainstream Democratic Party politics is pretty damned moderate and mainstream Republic Party politics is extreme rightwing these days, especially compared to the days when Nancy Landon Kassebaum was a Republic Party leader.
We’re dealing with John McCain, about as far right-wing conservative as anyone could imagine in any other election year. But the Republicans you tend to reference think McCain is *too liberal!* John McCain!
So you’ve aimed your vitriol at the most extreme of the extremists. And it’s blinded you to what’s happening among real people in the real world.
Most people, no matter how “conservative” they consider themselves, are gonna buy into McCain’s vision of another hundred years of war in Iraq.
Most people, no matter how “conservative” they consider themselves, have experienced some aspect of the injustice resulting from for-profit healthcare coverage.
Most people, no matter how “conservative they consider themselves, want America to turn away from the policies of George WMD Bush’s Republic Party.
Nobody expects “Nathan” or “Hank Price” or “Econ101″ or “ksgrm” or “American Way, or “Regular” (et al) to be converted to Obama’s candidacy. Screw ‘em. They’re maniacs.
But there are some traditional Republic Party advocates who aren’t as crazy as “Nathan” or “Hank Price” or “Econ101″ or “ksgrm” or “American Way,” or “Regular” (et al).
For better or worse, whether rational or not, a lot of people in the middle of the American political spectrum will likely conjure up some reason to vote against another Clinton presidency.
Nobody except Republic Party stalwarts will vote for John McCain in November. But a lot of them will vote against Hillary Clinton for no other reason than her name is Clinton.
Reality, albeit a special case, is important.
MH – agreed 100%. Those Republicans who PaulTheCon calles “idiots” will cross over.
Steven,
I didn’t say Clinton grew up in a poor family. I said “a lower income” family. Fish/ghotiphaze was talking 32 room mansion. I think it’s highly unreal to say he grew up in a wealthy family.
Yes, Bill Clinton’s mother was a nurse and specialized, but she wasn’t making near the money some nurses make today. Not sure about how well the car dealership did. I remember many in the ’50’s that were nothing compared to the ones we see now. Fewer cars then, for one thing, and most families had only one, not two or three. Different times.
But see Monkeyhawk?
Like you, those Republican crossovers are buying into an unknown.
And the fact that Republicans are buying into an unknown leaves room for suspicion they know more or are willing to hedge their bets they can make Obama into one of their own.
When was the last time we had an honest, unwaffling Democrat President? We’ve had no compromise Republicans(Reagan, Bush, bush) and Republican lite (Bill Clinton) for the last 20 some years. And LOOK at the damage.
We have a real opportunity here. We can put the cons out of business for a generation. And a rumbling begins that Obama is all smoke and mirrors and no substance. Let’s be sure what we are doing in picking the next President. Let;s be better that the cons were in 2000 when they gave us bush.
Let’s take the time to do this right.
“Fewer cars then, for one thing, and most families had only one, not two or three. Different times.”
Granted RD, but it is still disingenuous to say Bill grew up in a poor family. He did not.
An Edwards endorsement? Let’s see . . . he couldn’t even get the people in South Carolina to endorse him for another term in the Senate. Nope – no help seen there.
9 Trackbacks
[...] WE Blog » The Wichita Eagle Editorial Department Blog wrote an interesting post today on Would an Edwards endorsement matter?Here’s a quick excerptWould an Edwards endorsement matter? Posted6:05 a.m. In recent weeks, both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton reportedly have been lobbying John Edwards, who is said to be close to an endorsement. At first glance, Edwards would seem to be a natural ally of Obama, but there’s a chance he could choose Clinton if he thinks she’s better prepared to lead and will do more on universal health care and poverty. But really — would an Edwards endorsement of Clinton be credible, after all the disparaging [...]
north carolina real estate…
Very interesting post. A little bit confusing, but it still ok Hm….
Friend of the Rugs…
…
wavelength spectrum…
Natural sources produce EM radiation across the spectrum, and our technology can also manipulate a broad range of wavelengths. It separates…
Pee Female Pee Pee Hole…
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view…
hilary duff nude pictures…
Thanks for the nice read, keep up the interesting posts…..
kitchen cabinet doors…
Still, I believe some people (like me) think in different way regarding this topic…
after prep…
Both problems are mild and fleeting. However, the Vienna Medical Society disapproved of such curiosity. An endoscope was first introduced…
Jack…
Thanks for the nice read, keep up the interesting posts…..