Chicagoist: Final Nail In Hill's Coffin? John Edwards To Endorse Obama

widdlytinks

Thu, 15 May 2008 16:00:33 -0600

I always think of Russ Feingold's statements about Edwards about how his record is in stark contrast to his rhetoric. If actions speak louder than words, than this is a hollow endorsement.

Spav1

Thu, 15 May 2008 13:14:22 -0600

Wesley Clark has endorsed Hillary.

Stephen

Thu, 15 May 2008 13:04:09 -0600

Spav, I think you're right on RE: Edwards lusting after the AG position. I hope the veep candidate will be a beltway outsider like Janet Napolitano, but I wouldn't be surprised to see Wesley Clark's name pop up again....

Spav1

Thu, 15 May 2008 09:51:35 -0600

I bet someone like 49603483903 years ago here that Edwards wouldn't get on ANY ticket and I fervently believe that. My money is on Jim Weber for VP- he was Sec of the Navy under Reagan. Perf.

Spook

Thu, 15 May 2008 09:40:32 -0600

O'bama would never pick a independent minded person like Edwards, Daley and Jones most certainly would not approve

Marcus Gilmer

Thu, 15 May 2008 09:36:28 -0600

@Spav - Or possibly VP? He appeals to the white blue collar voters Obama has allegedly had trouble reaching (i.e.m WV).

Spav1

Thu, 15 May 2008 09:33:10 -0600

Edwards was holding out because he wants to be Attorney General or some other high level position. He couldn't run the risk of endorsing the wrong person and then having to eat crow and peg for a position in the new administration.

sparky

Thu, 15 May 2008 09:23:18 -0600

MilkDrinker: I think it was a pretty smart move. He did it during the national news, live, in Michigan. Obama likely wouldn't have won W. Va. anyway, so it didn't matter that he didn't get Edwards endorsement then. Obama is winning. The Edwards endorsement does deflect the loss of W. Va off of Obama, and takes the "look at me, look at me!" shouting away from Clinton for awhile. They stakes really haven't changed for Clinton or Obama in months, so I don't think that it would have mattered it he endorsed Obama two months ago or tomorrow. Smart political move.

I_h8_toyota_and_BT

Thu, 15 May 2008 08:51:24 -0600

Are you surprised that the republicans are bad at governance? Because you shouldn't. They've spent decades telling us that Government IS the problem. So, they're elected to power and you're surprised that they can't govern? Ummm...HELLO!!! Governing effectively is antithetical to their entire belief system. It's called a self-fulfilling prophecy. They are out to prove their theory that government is the problem. They want to prove that government can't help people by failing utterly at governance. And if a few cronies get rich sucking on the taxpayers teat, so be it. The republicans are bad at governance because they hate government. Kind of weird that so many of them want to work in government though... The only thing stupider than electing republicans and expecting them to govern well is electing anarchists and expecting them to govern.

I_h8_toyota_and_BT

Thu, 15 May 2008 08:48:03 -0600

are you surprised that the republicans govern poorly? when you elect a party to power that believes that government itself IS

plumbum82

Thu, 15 May 2008 00:06:28 -0600

I'm Senator Unicorn Moonsparkles (Green-VT) and I approve this message.

plumbum82

Thu, 15 May 2008 00:02:53 -0600

@Sears Tower: What, like Italy? They've only had, what, 82 governments since unification? Germany has fascists making a comeback. Ask the French how Sarkozy is working out in his coalition government... Multiple parties SOUND good, until you figure out they bicker just as much as two parties. Not to mention extremists on both sides of the aisle all of a sudden have power because they could be tie breakers. Imagine a congress where a Nazi is on the Ways and Means Committee and Senator Unicorn Moonsparkles filibusters every bill that threatens a tree. That's essentially Europe right there.

Sears Tower

Wed, 14 May 2008 20:59:41 -0600

I wish I could be excited about the continuing drop in GOP power, who have basically run a how to book on being ineffective while in power. Then, I look at our Democrat controlled city, county, and state government and I am not so sure. And, a Chicago machine politician (yes, he is) as president? Shudder! Ah, for a country with four, even five, legitimate political parties.

Tannerman

Wed, 14 May 2008 19:51:10 -0600

Edwards is also endorsing the Patriots, Tiger Woods, and the Yankees. Way to go out on a limb.

magilla gorilla

Wed, 14 May 2008 18:50:43 -0600

i'm so glad this clinton/obama thing is finally over. went on WAY too long

AvidMilkDrinker

Wed, 14 May 2008 18:46:09 -0600

Wow...way to take a bold stance, jackass. No time like AFTER the race is over to endorse the winner.

waitwhat

Wed, 14 May 2008 17:11:28 -0600

It's about time that either he or Gore made Clinton's vanity campaign end and put the Democratic party out of it's misery in this phase. More important news is that GOP losing 3 congressional races in a row. Holla!