Obama Flies to N.C. to Meet With John Edwards

Photo by ABC News)

They hugged as Obama left John Edwards' home after their sit-down today. Elizabeth was at the meeting too.

More tea-leaf reading anyone? Will Edwards wait until after March 4 and Ohio and Texas to announce his endorsement or will he give a much needed boost to Obama in those states? Or, could he be considering endorsing Hillary?

Update: While Obama used the downtime from the weather to fly to N.C. to meet John Edwards and ask for his endorsement, Hillary "pressed the flesh" at local eateries and grocery stores in Wisconsin.

How important is Edwards' endorsement? Poll below.

< The Expectations Game: Point To Clinton's Wolfson | An 'Inadvertent' Loss of Privacy >


Who Will John Edwards Endorse?
Hillary Clinton 20%
Barack Obama 26%
Neither before March 4 33%
Neither before the Convention 20%
Other 0%

Votes: 95
Results | Other Polls
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Obama flies, too? (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by Miss Devore on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 04:20:42 PM EST
    can't believe how cool that dude is.

    LOL on that one...... (none / 0) (#8)
    by BarnBabe on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 04:26:36 PM EST
    Very nice.

    I am a supporter (none / 0) (#12)
    by Miss Devore on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 04:38:30 PM EST

    It was funny. Go Democratic Candidates (none / 0) (#13)
    by BarnBabe on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 04:44:23 PM EST
    Reminds me of when I was in HS and the question was, What were the King's supporters called. I laughed before I answered and got a demerit for my dry sense of humor.

    lol n/t (none / 0) (#47)
    by jor on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 06:15:01 PM EST
    Edwards could come out a big winner here (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by sef on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 04:23:59 PM EST
    by sitting on the sidelines and brokering a deal between the camps after all the dust settles.  A few unexpected wins by either side could effectively end the race before then, but I strongly suspect Convection Chair Pelosi, Dean, & Edwards will play key roles in figuring something out if neither side has 2025 and the delegate count is close. Indeed, I could see events so deadlocked that the deal may be that each candidate draws one card from a deck, the high card is the nominee & the low card the veep nominee.

    If Edwards wants to be movement leader (and that does appears to be what he wants) he would do well not to endorse yet.

    movement (none / 0) (#20)
    by eric on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 05:06:16 PM EST
    "If Edwards wants to be movement leader"

    Movement?  No.  Maybe a party leader.


    The most he can realistically (none / 0) (#24)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 05:17:41 PM EST
    expect at this point is a cabinet post I'd say.  

    The minute J.E. decides that Obama (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Hypatias Father on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 04:24:29 PM EST
    has the ability to be effective as the nominee and and as potential president, he will endorse.  As a former Edwards supporter, that's my rough guess.

    Otherwise, I suspect he won't endorse at all.  My reasoning is that he would best help Hillary by not endorsing, whereas to help Obama he will need to fully endorse.  

    Grain of salt caveat:  this coming from a person who really hoped that it would be Clinton and Edwards slugging it out at this point.  

    To be lose when you think your are right is a very humbling experience, as I'm sure many here can attest.

    Gore is my choice (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by zyx on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 04:51:51 PM EST
    for president, too, and was in 2000, when it wasn't really cool to be an unabashed Gore supporter.  But I can totally understand why he's not running.  This is an UGLY business.

    --The American voters are, um, many of them are idiots--it's like their choosing "American Idol" or something.

    --The press is simply a disgrace.

    --The Democratic Party is a clusterf@@@.

    Gore (none / 0) (#34)
    by ghost2 on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 05:51:41 PM EST
    To the poeple who think Gore will endorse Obama (perhaps unlikely at this point), or think Gore will take Obama's side/POV, I have one question:

    Do you think Gore will come up against counting the 1.7 million votes in Florida?? Can he? Will he?

    disclosure: I admire Al Gore, and he is my last hope for an honest broker.  But believe me: even Gore's vote will be examined in this light.

    Gore is a great man.  Can he save the democratic party from itself?


    Not sure (none / 0) (#49)
    by Hypatias Father on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 06:20:07 PM EST
    what you mean.

    Do you think Gore will come up against counting the 1.7 million votes in Florida?? Can he? Will he?

    He won't have to be against counting the FL or MI votes--regardless of whom he offers support to--or to no one for that matter.


    I agree with that. (none / 0) (#53)
    by ghost2 on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 07:32:24 PM EST
    But what benefit is it to Obama's campaign to gain one superdelegate vote, but lose about 38 (net difference) in Florida?

    The really difficult outcome would be if Obama is ahead by just a few delegates in pleged delegate count, but will fall behind if Florida (and Michigan) are counted.  And that could very well happen.

    Be prepared for another version of 2000 election, where everything regarding the nomination process is going to be examined in detail.  Like it or not.

    There is no realistic way, mathematically, that either Clinton or Obama could clinch the nomination before the convention.  Either one has to completely dominate the contests from here on (like get 80% of the remaining pledged delegates).  

    Also be prepared for more talking points, especially from the Obama camp.  


    That they are going to be seated (none / 0) (#60)
    by Hypatias Father on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 08:22:03 PM EST
    is my assumption.  

    I think FL will end up (none / 0) (#63)
    by jdj on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 08:35:27 PM EST
    being seated as is, with half dlegates. MI may caucus. I don't see how you can seat MI otherwise, unless it is not a deciding factor in the nom. It would just be too destructive.

    I don't see that happening though, when I look to the races ahead. Obama will lead in delegates and pop vote in the end.


    Re Jeralyn's update: (5.00 / 2) (#15)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 04:59:43 PM EST
    HRC really can't win for losing.  HuffPost states she cried.  But the photo and the story do not indicate she cried.  She invited a woman whose daughter asked about kids losing their homes to join HRC at the mike.  Woman is a single mom, hairdresser, income going down, mortgage going up big time.  

    Homelessness (none / 0) (#35)
    by noonan on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 05:52:46 PM EST
    She brought up this story twice last night during her speech in Milwaukee. As moving as it was, it sure didn't move the crowd the way that Obama did after she was done.

    FWIW, Herb Kohl was within 10' of me at the dinner. Kohl seemed to applaud more for Hillary that Barack, but maybe Obama was talking after Herb's bedtime.


    What do you mean? (none / 0) (#38)
    by ghost2 on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 05:54:54 PM EST
    Don't you know women are hysterical and emotional and cannot be leaders?

    OTOH, if any male politician had shown emotion at the sight of that woman, there would be wall-to-wall fawning coverage.  

    The rumors of 'sexism is dead' were greatly exaggerated.  Sexism is alive and kicking every woman's ass.


    I thought Hillary's (none / 0) (#62)
    by jdj on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 08:29:35 PM EST
    emotional moment did her more good than harm. A few people decided it was a ploy, but they were mostly right wing hacks.

    It was a positive turning point in her campaign which seem to have a caculating quality to it up to that point.


    A Theory (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by NJDem on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 09:33:31 PM EST
    this is either totally nuts or insightful :)

    So HRC announces yesterday that she's leaving WI Monday morning, earlier than planned and opening up the  speculation that her WI internals aren't looking great.  

    Then with the storm today, she says all events are canceled.  Then BO cancels all events and decides that now would be a good time to go visit JE.  Then, with him gone, HRC says 'psyche'- I'm saying in WI until (at least) Monday night.

    It's very possible that the timing of things as I've laid out can be easily dis-proven.  But, I thought I'd share it as a little food for thought.  

    Wouldn't that have been pretty cleaver of HRC--I mean, she definitely pulled two 180s (one by campaigning today and by staying there past Monday morning).

    not really (none / 0) (#71)
    by jdj on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 10:28:20 PM EST
    people there are hearing a mixed story on whether her events are on or off. Can't be great for turn out at her stops.

    And her flight north couldn't land tonight (none / 0) (#73)
    by Cream City on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 10:41:38 PM EST
    in Wausau.  The rescheduled Green Bay/De Pere rally time has been set, but not the time of the rescheduled Madison rally.  

    Yet I am getting oddly similar emails from several friends outside of Wisconsin, who are Obama backers.  They are telling me, in Wisconsin, that because he has one event tomorrow, at night, it is she who is abandoning the state early -- as if they know the time of the Madison rally not set yet, and maybe a new Wausau rally, and we workers here in the campaign just aren't being told.

    These are not stupid people, these Obama backers; they are highly educated and savvy on so much -- but the way they buy into the media memes just amaze me.  So my reply was that with him having only one event tomorrow, and Clinton having two or even three, he must be the one giving up on the state.  I have yet to get their reply to that -- they must be waiting for their next orders as to what to say.  

    I have learned a lot in recent weeks, not only about the candidates but also about people whose opinions I trusted, too.  Not any more.  


    or they realize (none / 0) (#75)
    by jdj on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 10:59:35 PM EST
    your email is silly. One canidate spend serious time in WI one didn't. You don't need to buy into the media to know which one did.

    Clinton doesn't look savy, more like a chicken with its head cut off. I expect the votes will show that as well.


    Good way to win friends and influence (none / 0) (#76)
    by RalphB on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 11:17:29 PM EST
    people by insulting them for no apparent reason.

    Huh? I didn't email, they did (none / 0) (#79)
    by Cream City on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 12:50:34 AM EST
    You really need to work on your reading skills -- as well as your manners.  Your posts here are so rude to so many people.  Apparently, you have issues -- but this is where we discuss political issues, not yours.

    Links says they "apparently" hugged (none / 0) (#1)
    by Cream City on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 04:10:22 PM EST
    -- and I'm trying to figure that out.  That would mean that it's also possible to "apparently not hug"!

    Awaiting clarification (none / 0) (#18)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 05:01:52 PM EST
    from Obama supporters.

    BTW:  didn't Obama cancel his earlier date to meet with Edwards due to helicopters circling overhead and wanting to sneak in w/o press attention?


    I have no idea what he'll do (none / 0) (#2)
    by andgarden on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 04:11:08 PM EST

    Me neither. And I doubt it will (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 05:02:27 PM EST
    make much difference what he decides to do.

    If Edward's want to provide a boost (none / 0) (#6)
    by jdj on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 04:25:11 PM EST
    he need to endorse sooner than later.

    Edwards was (none / 0) (#7)
    by PlayInPeoria on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 04:26:07 PM EST
    meeting with Al Gore according to the
    New York Times

    A number of senior Democrats, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi and three candidates who have dropped out of the 2008 race, former Senator John Edwards and Senators Christopher J. Dodd and Joseph R. Biden Jr., have spoken with Mr. Gore in recent days. None have endorsed a candidate, although Ms. Pelosi made comments on Friday that were widely seen as supportive of Mr. Obama when it came to the process the party should use to make its choice of candidate.

    Yup, and one wonders (none / 0) (#10)
    by Hypatias Father on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 04:35:19 PM EST
    if Gore was or was not giving J.E. a quick Lessig 101 Tutorial on why he leans Obama's way.  (Lessig is actively influencing many former Edwards supporters in my neck of the woods...  and he and Gore are sympatico.)

    Gore's vague pro-Obama noises have me truly perplexed.  If persuaded by Lessig via Gore, would J.E. be Gore's proxy endorsement, since he cannot endorse himself? Hmmm.

    Maybe I should retract my vote on this thread.  Ah! The political machinations!  Ah, Bartleby! Ah, humanity!


    Al Gore could have spared us all this. (none / 0) (#11)
    by BarnBabe on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 04:36:51 PM EST
    I wanted Gore to be President. In 2000 and this year also. I was disappointed of course, but I was happy he was not making a early commitment. The reason I felt it not appropriate is that he flirted and teased us with every book and movie and refused to just say, "I am not running" as he did in '04. It took some of the shine off his halo to think that maybe he was using us to sell books and his movie which he needn't have because the subject of Global Warming is real and important to all of us.  

    Bigger effect if he endorses Hillary... (none / 0) (#16)
    by frankly0 on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 04:59:52 PM EST
    If Edwards endorses Obama, I think it would not have a particularly large effect on the race because they have both been running on the "change agent" proposition. Besides, I think most people expect Edwards to endorse Obama.

    If Edwards endorses Clinton, on the other hand, I see a larger effect. It's unexpected, for one. For another, Edwards can remedy the thing that Hillary seems most to lack in the public eye: the perception that she will bring about change.

    Hard to say which way Edwards actually will go, however; there are reasonably good arguments in both directions. Certainly Edwards' health plan is far more similar to Hillary's. She could rightly give him credit as the architect of the plan, and if he wants a concrete piece of lasting legislation to be associated with his name, Hillary should be the right choice. And of course nothing could be more of a contrast than Obama's negotiation and kumbayah on the one hand and Edwards' fighting spirit on the other.

    For all that, I think there'd be a lot less cognitive dissonance for most people if Edwards backed Obama, and that's not a trivial point. He'd have less to explain and justify to sceptical former supporters.

    It would be a slighty bigger win for Hillary (none / 0) (#27)
    by jdj on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 05:23:52 PM EST
    because it would be less expected. That said it is a sizeable blow to Hillary if Obama gets it. Just another factor that will draw superdelegates to Obama.

    good guesses (none / 0) (#32)
    by jdj on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 05:46:41 PM EST
    mine are Edwards endorses...

    Obama 60%
    Clinton 30%
    Nobody 10%


    Don't agree (none / 0) (#33)
    by Marvin42 on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 05:49:33 PM EST
    I am guessing the Edwards will most likely stay out until someone is clearly ahead. If he does endorse I am guessing he will endorse Sen Clinton.

    If he does endorse Sen Obama I think it will be a minor boost, but no real change. No SD will start really shifting until this thing is settled. Even if he does endorse Sen Clinton I think it will only give her a positive news cycle, that's about it.


    Edwards Is Going To Look (none / 0) (#17)
    by bob h on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 05:01:14 PM EST
    pretty ridiculous if he endorses Obama now, and the latter proceeds to lose in Ohio, Texas, and Pennsylvania.

    yeah (none / 0) (#44)
    by Nasarius on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 06:12:03 PM EST
    That, plus serious differences on health care, plus Hillary has effectively promised him a cabinet post, probably AG. She's also "toughened up" her rhetoric recently.

    He didn't endorse before Super Tuesday, and there's not much point of him endorsing now. He'll wait until there's a nominee.

    Edwards Act of Kindness (none / 0) (#21)
    by 1jane on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 05:06:27 PM EST
    If Edwards were to endorse Obama it would be an act of kindness for Clinton. Her campaign has been mismanaged from the get-go. The lack of planning after Super Tuesday's defeats, the inability to find an appropriate role for her spouse, positioning her as confrontational with the press, lack of careful selection of which battles to fight rather than taking a swing at all of them, her weak Senatorial record, and the R attack machine chompin' on the bit are all red flags that she is unelectable as the nomination. Edwards endorsement would give her the opportunity to make a graceful exit. It is sad.

    Up your meds (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by RalphB on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 05:19:46 PM EST
    No Internet diagnoses! (4.00 / 1) (#26)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 05:21:20 PM EST
    If Frist can do it via videotape ... then (none / 0) (#56)
    by RalphB on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 08:03:18 PM EST
    Don't go there. (none / 0) (#57)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 08:04:13 PM EST
    anything that ends this (none / 0) (#28)
    by jdj on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 05:24:36 PM EST
    quickly, is an act of kindness.

    What's the big rush? (none / 0) (#58)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 08:04:49 PM EST
    Even sadder that (none / 0) (#29)
    by badger on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 05:34:06 PM EST
    if all you claim were true, Obama can't manage to pull ahead by more than a handful of delegates and looks like he'll be losing the three big-state primaries still ahead.

    Perhaps he should withdraw now before he's too badly embarrassed. Or perhaps we should let the process work the way it's supposed to.


    Do we really have any choice (none / 0) (#37)
    by Hypatias Father on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 05:54:41 PM EST
    but to wait and let the process work it's way to completion? Surely, there's no real threat from bloggy prognostications such as found here (from mouths on either side).

    No, up somewhere else (none / 0) (#43)
    by echinopsia on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 06:09:47 PM EST
    My hope all along is that JRE (none / 0) (#22)
    by hellskitchen on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 05:10:56 PM EST
    would stay above the fray.

    One of the news stories after his suspending his campaign was that he didn't want to be the spoiler at a historic moment - first AA president or first woman president.

    After considering what posts he might serve in either an Obama or Clinton administration, I think he serves his ultimate goal by staying away from both of them - both in the election and in the assumed administration.

    What I'd really like to see is Edwards, perhaps joined by Gore, work as a leader/coordinator of all the progressive interest groups - civil rights, trade, labor, healthcare and so on - to bring fighting power to counter the lobbyists and hold the winning feet to the fire.

    I realize that we have organizations like PFAW, but their effectiveness is limited.  I'm thinking more a progressive version of the DLA gaining clout with the administration and with both houses of Congress.  They could lobby, bring lawsuits.

    Edwards would be dynamite at that.

    Not sure it makes a lot of difference (none / 0) (#23)
    by MikeDitto on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 05:15:34 PM EST
    The graphs at pollster.com indicate most of Edwards' supporters going to Obama already. The few delegates Edwards has will make a difference, but not a huge one. An endorsement might make a PR difference and provide a little bump for the upcoming primaries.

    Now if Edwards goes out and actively campaigns for Obama as a surrogate on the same schedule that he would as a presidential candidate himself, forks over all his lists, starts raising money for Obama...that's a different story. May not make a huge difference overnight, but could make quite a bit of difference within a few weeks.

    It all depends on how far (if at all) Edwards goes with an endorsement.

    Can you post link please? (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by Marvin42 on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 05:35:50 PM EST
    All analysis I have seen has been pretty much an even split between the candidates.

    It's the national numbers (none / 0) (#39)
    by MikeDitto on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 06:00:22 PM EST
    Note the trend lines after Edwards's withdrawal. Obama gained about 10 points, Clinton gained about 3 points. Some of the rise (about 5% split in some proportion between the two) is undecideds deciding, but with Edwards supporters taking 11.5%, and since most of them did not switch to undecided (Undecided has been trending town, it's in the 6-9% range from 15%+ a month ago), a big chunk of the difference has to be made up from Edwards supporters switching to Obama.

    Ah! Its an assumption then (none / 0) (#41)
    by Marvin42 on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 06:03:22 PM EST
    I think these trend lines have to do with Sen Obama gaining support and generally ending up at a tie and maybe even a little ahead from his own support. All the polling info (fwiw) shows that Edwards voters really didn't heavily favor either candidate (which kind of makes sense).

    I thought maybe there was a new bit of information out there.


    They're national numbers (none / 0) (#45)
    by MikeDitto on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 06:12:19 PM EST
    So they're not reliable indicators of any particular upcoming state (95% of Edwards' previous support could have been in Wisconsin, or maybe 100% of it was in the early 5 states and none elsewhere) but there's no assumption there. Nationally, Edwards support is largely going to Obama organically, which is why I say I don't think an endorsement alone would make a lot of difference in August.

    But a bunch of elbow grease on Edwards' part could both sway undecideds and even peel off some Hillary support, so I fully understand why Obama is courting him personally and is very likely making that part of the ask.


    I am missing something or dense (none / 0) (#66)
    by Marvin42 on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 09:10:24 PM EST
    The only basis of your statement is that his numbers are going up, and you are jumping to the conclusion that his votes are coming from Edwards. Is there any actual data behind this assumption?

    Just do the math (none / 0) (#82)
    by MikeDitto on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 09:10:44 AM EST
    Take the the three Gallup polls before the day Edwards dropped (using the same poll so the sampling model is consistent). Clinton had 43-47% of the total, Obama had 31-33%, Edwards had 8-14% and, undecided had 7-8%.

    In the most recent Gallup poll, Clinton has 45% (unchanged), Obama has 47% (15ish points higher) and undecided is 6% (slightly lower).

    The other polls have the numbers in different proportions, but show the same trend. When Edwards dropped, Obama saw higher numbers by almost the same percentage as Edwards' previous amount of support while both Clinton and the undecideds stayed about the same.


    Just saying (none / 0) (#83)
    by MikeDitto on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 09:16:57 AM EST
    On the other extreme, one could propose that some huge amount of musical chairs happened where Clinton took 100% of Edwards supporters and then Obama converted an identical amount of Clinton supporters to his side, but that would be an enormous assumption unsupported by any facts. Occam's razor states that all things being equal, the simplest explanation tends to be the right one.

    Hillary at El Ray supermarket (none / 0) (#36)
    by Ben Masel on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 05:54:33 PM EST
    Scene of a notorious drug raid gone wrong in 2002. 52 cops, with a warrant over unlicensed antibiotics.
    Badger LawReviewThe case grew out of a police raid in full tactical gear in broad daylight on September 18, 2002 on the El Rey grocery store and tortilla factory in Milwaukee. A number of Milwaukee citizens complained about the tactics used by the police, including forcing pregnant women to lie on their stomach, jamming gun barrels into the ribs of store customers, and obscuring their identities.

    No action taken yet in El Rey raid case
    Georgia Pabst, Milwaukee Journal/Sentinal Sept. 7, 2003

    Nearly a year after Milwaukee police stormed two Latino grocery stores and a tortilla factory in search of antibiotic drugs, arrested five workers and outraged the Latino community, no charges have been filed.And a joint complaint submitted to the Milwaukee Fire and Police Commission on Nov. 7 by 25 workers at the El Rey grocery store and tortilla factory alleging police used excessive force while executing the search warrant still sits.

    Civil cases bounced to the State Supremes and back, I presume still pending as Google reveals no outcome.

    Wonder if anyone briefed senator Clinton on the history.

    And I care abot this why? (none / 0) (#55)
    by RalphB on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 08:01:08 PM EST
    Apparently she wasn't involved the raid or arrests

    She had a chance (none / 0) (#72)
    by Ben Masel on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 10:38:04 PM EST
    to make a strong positive statement on what could be expected of her Administration on the Justice front.

    I'm asking if the opportunity was spotted, the store's move notwithstanding. If so, I applaud.


    Ben, it's a different store and site now (none / 0) (#61)
    by Cream City on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 08:25:18 PM EST
    and an amazing success story in our Latino/a community.  (Yes, the raid was appalling, the treatment of pregnant women -- and the outcry here, especially considering the fine family owners, only helped to solidify community alliances even more.  A lot came from it since then that is so good. . . .)

    Trying to stay out of it (none / 0) (#42)
    by blogtopus on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 06:08:05 PM EST
    I think he'll try to stay out of it until the convention. I imagine he's going to be the broker when the clusterf@@@ hits. If Hillary is ahead in popular + superdels but Florida and Michigan are included, then he's going to have to see how to mitigate it all. Same for Obama.

    At this point, I think it's only a matter of who leads the ticket.

    Endorsement (none / 0) (#46)
    by chemoelectric on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 06:12:56 PM EST
    I think if Edwards endorses Obama that would be cool. If he endorses Clinton it may help her but due to their differences it could harm Edwards's reputation (especially if it is in exchange for the Vice Presidency, but then he could have some years as VP to make that up).

    If I were John Edwards and if, as reported, I were leaning towards Hillary Clinton, I would sit it out and not make an endorsement. If I were leaning towards Obama I would likely endorse him. I wouldn't ask for the Vice Presidency in exchange, but would take it if offered.

    Why would it harm Edwards's (none / 0) (#50)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 06:22:57 PM EST
    reputation to endorse HRC as opposed to Obama?  She is closer to his views re health care.

    If he endorses Clinton it may help her but due to their differences it could harm Edwards's reputation, . . .

    it would tarnish him in my eyes because (none / 0) (#64)
    by nycvoter on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 08:56:18 PM EST
    the people he wants to help are voting for Hillary.  They believe in her ability to focus on issues that will help them.  Who is he to say they don't know who they want.  I'm tired of people acting like Hillary supporters aren't smart enough to know any better.

    Amen (none / 0) (#68)
    by BrandingIron on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 09:28:19 PM EST
    I don't understand it, either.  Friends of mine in NY who were Edwards supporters went to Obama.  Why?  Don't they even care that Clinton is the one who's more in line with the people that Edwards wants to help (+healthcare)?  Doesn't make any sense except for the whole "Fresh!  New!  Hope!  Change!" line.  It really irritates me.

    More tortured Logic? (none / 0) (#77)
    by hairspray on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 11:26:59 PM EST
    I think he won't endorse, but.... (none / 0) (#48)
    by Teresa on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 06:16:13 PM EST
    The couple has been impressed with Clinton, who has more effectively courted them since the 2004 vice presidential nominee dropped out, people who talk to the Edwardses say. Obama has been less attentive, they say, and some of those close to the Edwardses have been annoyed that Obama has continued to ridicule him for once saying his biggest weakness is that he has a powerful response to seeing pain in others.

    New AP article

    I've wondered if Obama making fun of him didn't bother him. It would me. The article also mentions the healthcare issue with Obama and that he worries that Obama isn't ready yet.

    You Might Be On to Something (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by cdalygo on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 06:46:35 PM EST
    I saw either the same or similar article about Edwards' supposed feelings toward Obama. He apparently got angry the last time because Obama's people leaked the meeting date. Similarly he allegedly felt angry over Obama's criticism of his proposals.

    Of course, if was going to endorse Clinton he would have done it by now. Certainly it would have helped with the last couple of primaries.

    On the other hand, he's getting a really good look at how Obama treats folks that he deems expendable. It's not pretty. Nor will it inure Obama much support when he attempts to campaign in the GE and/or govern post election.  

    Thus Edwards is probably just as happy to stay out.


    if that's true (none / 0) (#65)
    by nycvoter on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 08:58:08 PM EST
    maybe the helicopter photos will be enough to push him over the edge to stay away from Obama.

    To me an Edwards endorsement of Obama would be a psychic blow.


    Yeah and this (none / 0) (#70)
    by BrandingIron on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 09:34:09 PM EST
    "Still, since Edwards has left the race, Obama often praises him in public. This week he told Wisconsin voters that Edwards will "be a major voice in the Democratic party for years to come, and I want him involved and partnering with me in moving this country forward."

    When you're in the way of my ambitions you're not my friend, but once I've burned you from the path of my ambition, you're suddenly my friend.

    Obama is a @#&*^!@.  I'm beginning to really, really dislike him.


    North Carolina (none / 0) (#67)
    by phat on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 09:25:21 PM EST
    Has the 4th largest number of delegates up for grabs in the remaining contests.


    according to HC.Com (none / 0) (#74)
    by NJDem on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 10:55:38 PM EST
    she has a rally in Madison from 6:30-10pm on Monday, FWIW.

    She's not abandoning Wisconsin (none / 0) (#78)
    by Cream City on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 11:36:28 PM EST
    -- this is a message to idiot media, and Obamans saying so because the media said so.  It was Obama who abandoned Wisconsin to meet Edwards.  It is Obama who will abandon Wisconsin all day again Monday, not returning until night for a rally.

    But Clinton stayed today to work Milwaukee whereever she could find us after events had to be cancelled owing to weather.  She even got all the way to Wausau before her plane had to turn back because of weather.  So she will work across the state at THREE rescheduled events Monday, such as  Madison's (doors open 6:30, she speaks about 8:15-8:30).

    Yet Obaman friends around the country are sending me oddly similar emails saying that she is abandoning Wisconsin, and one finally said it's because they got some email from the Obama office -- and so did the media, so they say so, too.  

    Idiots, all of them.  Check the facts first -- and if the events still are being reset, stop with the stupid conclusions.  Seeing this sort of crap close up, in addition to his sexist comment here -- where we women here do NOT need it, either -- after the sexist comments elsewhere for weeks now . . . I really would find it difficult to vote for Obama, if he is the nominee in November.

    I never have felt that before -- I've always had the "lesser of evils" mindset that means I never miss an electiona and always have voted Dem, for decades.  But what I see going on makes me wonder what I will do, for the first time, as the misogyny IS evil.  


    Know what you mean Cream (none / 0) (#81)
    by kenoshaMarge on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:52:45 AM EST
    I have always ended up voting for the lesser of two evils even if I had to hold my nose with both hands and write with my toes.

    But how do I square it with my conscience, with my 7 granddaughters and with the trials and tribulations I have endured because of gender and vote for someone I perceive as either a misogynist or a panderer to misogyny?  

    I know we are supposed to suck it up and do what's best for the country. Problem for me is; I'm an not convinced, even a little, that having an Obama Administration is best for the country.

    As a former Edwards supporter, who now supports Hillary Clinton, I sincerely, and respectfully hope he keeps his mouth shut. He slammed both candidates and to endorse either one now will signal a lack of integrity to me.


    i wonder if he leaps (none / 0) (#80)
    by cpinva on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 03:03:39 AM EST
    tall buildings in a single bound too? :)

    when i was in hs (pleistocine era), i got called to the office after having filled out the "emergency contact" card. the item in question was "sex". i put down "yes". even back then i was honing my smart-ass skills.

    truthfully, given mr. edwards' small #'s, i have to wonder how much difference his endorsement would make, to either sens. clinton or obama. it isn't like he was killing out there. had he been, he'd still be in the hunt.

    Edwards should (none / 0) (#84)
    by bob5540 on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 09:42:39 AM EST
    use his endorsement Obama to leverage a promise of universal healthcare. Obama could change his position very easily, without cost, simply by announcing that Edwards has "convinced him" that universality is more important than avoiding mandates.

    That would be the best outcome in my book.