Edwards to Drop Out of Democratic Race - New York Times
Edwards Out
Although his chances at the nomination would have required a minor miracle his prescence in the race was a positive one. It kept the focus where it belonged, on the common folk. Damn!!
NEW ORLEANS — John Edwards, the progressive Democratic candidate who made a populist, anti-poverty message the centerpiece of his campaign, has decided to drop out of the presidential primary race, and is to give a speech this afternoon at the same place where he began his campaign — in New Orleans.
Comments
He seems like he would do well promoting these issues into the future. I'm sensing flavors of what Al Gore did for climate change.
When most of the candidates, especially the most articulate and (seemingly) authentic ones are forced to drop out of the race after less than 10% of the nation has voted i would have to suggest that OUR SYSTEM IS BROKE.
peace to edwards and his wife. and all of the fallen voices that would have given us a choice.
peace box
I'm surprised he's stepping down so soon after Kucinich did. Still, the writing was on the wall.
As phoenix mentions, Edwards would do well to keep his more thoughtful ideas (particularly economic disparity) in political conversation. Particularly since he is not committing himself to one of the remaining candidates, he can still exert some pressure on both of them (not counting Gravel here) in the near future, as well as change the dialogue long-term.
Pulling out at such a strange time, this is a definate strategy by Edwards. He must want to continue the issues past his losses, or to step out of the way to help obama grab super tuesday. Obama came out first to applaud edwards..
I predict Obama picking Edwards for VP.
Obama should choose someone with more experience as his VP. That will be the republican message and two one term senators won't be well equipped to counter it.
Edwards has been lobbying for AG for the last few weeks. Rumor was that Obama had turned down that offer. Maybe that was wrong.
Damn. Obama it is, I guess. I just hope he quits bickering with Hillary and starts sending a clear message about the issues.
That would be encouraging. Edwards replacing Cheney? There's a happy thought...
I don't think Obama will pick Edwards. I've said this before on the board, but I think Obama will pick someone outside politics.
The VP needs to be aggressive, and Edwards did a TERRIBLE job as Kerry's VP. I know there are many Edwards sympathizers on this page, but I think we can all agree that Cheney creamed Edwards in the 2004 Vice Presidential debate.
Edwards does still have his NC Center on Poverty, Work and Opportunity http://www.law.unc.edu/centers/poverty/default.aspx so he'll always be able to help the common folk throughout his life.
Pity about him not catching hold; he seemed to peak in the summer in Iowa and New Hampshire. Now on to the next set - watch and wait.
Isn’t it ironic that the year it’s finally possible for a woman or a black male to get the Democratic nomination for president over a white male just happens to also be the year when the woman and black male candidates are more eager than the white male candidates to fellate our corporate masters. What a strange coincidence . . .
Frankly I just don't know what to do now.
First I was a Ron Paul guy, then I switched to Kucinich and then Edwards.
I'm afraid of Hillary and Barack, but if Edwards was VP for Obama, I might consider that. Otherwise, I don't know what the hell to do now....fuck.
I'd like to think a lot has changed since 2004.
Well, you should have been afraid of Edwards and Paul - and yes, Kucinich - as well. None of these people are the shining heroes they are desperately trying to mindfuck us all into seeing.
Picking a leader is always an unfair compromise, but that compromise means the difference between a Bill Clinton or a Dubya Bush, an FDR or an LBJ. The difference is not as big as we would like to think.
The difference between those people is not as big as we would like to think, is what I meant.
The difference between the effects those people had, on the other hand...
Eric Alterman wrote the best commentary to this that I saw today:
And then there is Mike . . .
For those of you who live in the Bay Area, I'll pass on this information about Mike Gravel. He will be making two appearances in the Bay Area next week:
Feb 4 from 6:30 - 8 p.m. -- at University of San Francisco, Fromm Hall, Xavier Room, near Golden Gate and Fulton.
Feb 6 from 5 - 6 p.m. -- at UC Berkeley, IGS Library in Moses Hall, near the South Entrance, Bancroft and Telegraph.
I will attend the February 4th event. I've already heard him once and he makes for a good listen. I will not be voting for him but I intend to ask him about Ted Stevens and the scandal up in Juneau. If you can't make the event, feel free to pass on any questions you may have for a rather unique figure in American politics.
Charles Lemos San Francisco, CA
Frenetic -
I honestly don't think his debating style is any different than it was in 2004. Maybe if he had been more aggressive the media would have taken notice..?
But as the piece posted by Mr. Donohue points out, maybe it never really mattered to the media.
Who says they are shining heroes? Who is really doing the mindfucking here? Could it be the media telling us that the race has always been against Hilary and Barack? That they never gave anyone else a fair chance? That's the mindfuck, not those other guys' ideas.
Post a comment