John Edwards endorses Barack Obama

This endorsement is not free. In Edwards you are looking at the next attorney general of the United States. That's cool, just saying though. I'm liking the idea of Clinton as veep more and more actually. She could be like the prime minister in France: deal with all the domestic policy while the president represents the country and deals with international relations. She has the cojones (hah!) to wrestle with congress, she'll be able to give them the smackdown whereas they'd tie Obama into a pretzel, I don't see him having the intestinal fortitude to fight the Republicans in congress.

Obama is consolidating the whole conservative Southern Democratic establishment with him. He's an instinctual moderate-Left politician at best anyway, not much of a real liberal. (Really ambitious and righteous/egotistical people never are. After all, real liberals don't find wielding power fulfilling or an end in itself.) He got Jimmy Carter's fervent endorsement and treatment as his son long ago.

McCain...think Gerald Ford. Just a lot less principled and less informed.

Clinton is obviously running for '12 at this point, when the country has moved further Left than Obama and his coalition actually are and they're expended. Just like some fellow who didn't quite make the nomination for his Party in '76, but did pretty well when the country shifted further Right in '80.

I still don't see why, from Clinton's point of view, she should drop out. She's won the lions share of the primaries since mid-February, including every one of the major states, except Obama's home state of Illinois. His advantage has come entirely from the caucuses, which are a mockery of democracy.

Of course, Clinton knew the rules going into this, and it's her own fault for not preparing caucus organizations. She's a victim of her own arrogance, and of the tacit acknowledgment by rank and file Democrats that the Republicans were right about at least one big thing in the 1990s: The Clintons are sleazebuckets.

But right now she's closer to the nomination than Ted Kennedy in 1980 or Ronald Reagan in 1976 ever were, and both of them fought actively through the national party conventions. It's easy to understand why people who care mainly about the party in the abstract might want her out of the race, but for Clinton (as for any candidate), the party is just a vehicle for her candidacy. Why should she quit now?

The Democratic party stabbed the Clintons in the back, and you will see millions turn their back on the party.

On Wright alone, hell will freeze before this Democrat votes for Obama. The only thing that could change that is if Hillary is VP.

Unless McCain, who I would normally have no use for, does something extremely dumb to alienate moderate Democrats - like pick Huckabee as VP, which I have seen floated on some news stories - I intend to do what I can to punish the party by voting for him in November. This is not just me talking. This is my wife, my parents, most of the people I work with and most of my friends - all lifelong Democrats. We will do what we can to keep the party of of the White House for the next 4 years.

You get what you give and the Democrats blew it. They tossed away talent and experience in exchange for a pretty face so they could say "Look at us - we aren't racists."

Simon --

I kinda agree with you. It seems strange how the party big shots are trying to shut Hillary down just as she's beginning to gain some traction. I'm no big fan of any one of them (Obama, McCain, Hillary) ... but you get the sense that the Dems are worried that Obama is beginning to show that he has a glass jaw and they're trying to shield him.

I saw Obama the other day on TV (he was speaking in some small town in Missouri) and he sounded just plain dull. No big crowd. No teleprompter. No soaring rhetoric. Just trying to communicate like a normal person with normal persons. He's awful at that sort of thing. Almost tongue-tied and at a loss for words. I've seen that as well at other rallies. He doesn't actually connect with people ... but instead refers to "the people" and their problems in a remote almost clinical way. It is very off putting.

McCain is no great shakes as a speaker, but at least you get a sense that McCain is comfortable in his own skin. Obama just seems uncomfortable in his own skin (unless it is one of those big staged events where he's got a teleprompter and reading a script written by one of JFK's old speechwriters).

If Obama becomes President I think it won't be too long before the people begin to get bored by this guy and then sour on him. The balloon will eventually burst. And then they'll wonder what ever happened to that Senator lady from NY with the canary yellow pant suits, and why they didn't let her run for President against McCain.

If you looked like Obama would you be comfortable in that skin? He's a cartoonists dream.

yelladawgNC --

Who are you calling mean? A case of the pot calling the kettle black, perhaps?

In my case, I was just sharing an observation about Obama's speaking style when he's not relying on those teleprompters. He's simply awaful. That's not mean. Just telling it like it is.

Part of the problem for Obama, in fairness to him, is that he's been so grossly oversold by his friends in the media ... that the expectations are sky high for this guy. So whenever he scratches himself in the wrong place or speaks in a wooden, halting style ... voters are apt to say, "Huh! What ever happened to the great Messiah we were promised?"

The Democratic Party "stabbed" the Clintons in the back !

My Oh My ! How quickly we forget the disaster of the Clinton years and how it led to the equally disasterous Bush years.

Frankly, I will never trust a "woman" who repeatedly stood by while her "so called" husband dragged her through the mud of numerous public affairs, a perjury conviction, and a rape allegation that still stands unanswered - all for political power.

Obama may not be that great of a candidate or even a president but he is a better choice than woman who you can't trust.

Typical stick your finger in the wind politics brought to you by the three time loser(two Presidential Primaries and one Presidential election) John Edwards. If he felt this strongly, we did he not endorse during the North Carolina primary in his home state? Guess he must have thought Hillary had a chance to pull off the upset. Now Edwards is simply schilling for a spot on the ticket or a spot in a potential Obama administration. Well they both share one thing in common. One term in the Senate and inexperience. What a happy couple.

The past week has been a remarkable example of how the mainstream media still tries to dictate the course of the race.

-- Clinton wins Indiana (where much of the Democratic electorate is in Obama's home Chicago media market), but the media says her margin wasn't big enough.

-- Clinton wins West Virginia by an astounding 40 point margin, despite a week of press coverage insisting that Obama is the nominee, but the media shrugs it off.

-- John Edwards, who has no significant national following and no ability to shift votes or delegates to any candidate, endorses Obama, and the media heralds it as a decisive event.

None of this will affect the upcoming results in Kentucky, where Clinton is going to win by 20 points or more. But that, too, will be greeted with a shrug by the press. Bizarre.

"Obama is ... not much of a real liberal"

Gee, Jillian, that's not what those Republican ads in Mississippi said.

I mean, after all, one of the loudest voices in American media today is Rush Limbaugh, and he has pulling heartily for Hillary Clinton all this year, and that has had an effect. In fact, Republicans may have given Hillary her margin of victory in Indiana.

Rush Limbaugh is a entertainer, who is paid to give his opinions on politics and other matters. Since he's in the opinion business rather than the news business, his opinions have no bearing on the question of media bias.

The bias/inaccuracy of the mainstream media is found in the reporting ranks, where not only is the left-of-center outlook of the professional class nearly universal but also a herd mentality prevails. On issues such as this, the very fact that media outlets are declaring Obama the winner causes other media outlets to declare Obama the winner.

And for all Limbaugh's bloviating about "Operation Chaos" (the goal of which is apparently to cause turmoil among Democrats, not to help Clinton), I don't believe for a second that Limbaugh adherents have had a statistically significant impact on any primary contest to date.

And is it really up to Edwards to decide whom "his" delegates vote for anyway?

Nope. Once he releases them, they're free agents.

Not that his whopping 20 delegates are likely to tip the balance anyway.

Ex,

You REALLY think Obama is going to do something for GLBT Americans? He'll sell them out the way you say the Clintons did. No proesident who wants to be a part of the mainstream wmove on gay rights.

Except he won't have a chance.

Because John McCain will be president. And that will be preferable to Obama.