May 14, 2008

Edwards endorses Obama.

Hot news.

47 comments:

Methadras said...

Wow. I'm shocked by this news. One primadona endorsing another primadona.

Jim Hu said...

I wonder if if anyone has ever lost as VP for two different candidates...

MadisonMan said...

I think politicians in general have an over-inflated view of the importance of their opinions. This endorsement is a good example.

Zachary Paul Sire said...

I wonder if anyone has ever lost as VP in one election, but then won it with a better candidate in a different election?

Blue Moon said...

Why now? He must really want to put the boot in to the Clintons. Had he done this 6 weeks ago, he could have leveraged something out of it. Now, it just smells like spite.

Eli Blake said...

You folks are just unbelievable.

madisonman: Are you suggesting that all endorsements are just a matter of an over-inflated opinion? Should no one make one? If not, how is this endorsement something that other endorsements are not?

Blue Moon: Why now? Well, how about: Why not now? If he is going to make an endorsement then it had to come on a calendar day, and someone would therefore ask, 'why now?' Frankly he showed a level of class by waiting until it was clear who the nominee was so he wouldn't tilt the field unfairly (and that's not an overstatement-- yesterday Edwards got 6% of the vote in W.Va. despite the fact that he dropped out of the race more than three months ago-- so he does have a following.)

methadras: See what I just said to Blue moon: If he was a primadona he'd have happily tilted the field just so he could prove it. But that's not the kind of guy Edwards is. By waiting he showed respect for both candidates.

Simon said...

Edwards endorses Obama. Earth still round.

This move is emblematic of Edwards' leadership: truly, it takes great courage to endorse a candidate after it is already broadly considered a done deal that they will receive the nomination.

michael farris said...

Charitable interpretation: He's being leaned on by higher ups for the sake of 'party unity' (is their any fouler collocation?)

Less charitable interpretation: He just fucking hates Hillary Clinton.

It takes no courage or vision or smarts or anything else to endorse the de facto nominee (barring catastrophe of some sort). So I assume it's not about Obama at all but about Clinton.

I like Edwards before this (I'm not sure if I liked him enough to seriously consider him for POTUS) but this is like reverse charisma. It does nothing for Obama and makes Edwards look small.

MadisonMan said...

Eli, read my comment more carefully. Do you see the word politicians in there?

Then re-read your question to me. Where have I even remotely implied what you suggest?

I will add that Edwards getting 6% might also reflect a None of the Above vote. Or, given that it's West Virginia, that the voters haven't heard that Edwards dropped out yet.

Drew W said...

I always thought that if Barack Obama were white, he'd be John Edwards.

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

Watching his speech. Now I remember why I didn't like him. Poverty, poverty, poverty.

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

Let me just say, I think Edwards would be a terrible choice for a running mate. Obama/Edwards is not a winning ticket.

George said...

Sweetie!

jdeeripper said...

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...Let me just say, I think Edwards would be a terrible choice for a running mate. Obama/Edwards is not a winning ticket.

But can you say Attorney General John Edwards.

Fred Thompson has already rejected the AG spot for Prez McCain.

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

"I forgot how good he is," says Barack Obama. I forgot how much he sucked.

Two Americas: the rich and the poor. We must tear down the wall between the two Americas. So there's no middle class? Only two class levels in this country? And two is two many? That does not appeal to me at all. Just sounds like a rich guy feeling bad about all the "little people" and how not-rich they are.

Nightmare scenario: Obama picks Edwards for a running mate, and then McCain picks Huckabee. Actually, I'd have to just vote for Obama in that case. I'm firmly committed to being anti-Huckabee.

rhhardin said...

He's endorsing Obama because the media will cover it.

The media will cover it because it fits a soap opera narrative for its audience.

It sells its audience to advertisers.

Eli Blake said...

madison man:

OK, should no politician then make an endorsement in a primary? My point in asking the question was how you jump from Edwards made an endorsement to that it must have been due to an over-inflated ego. Had it been that, he'd have made the endorsement just before the N.C. primary and then taken credit when Obama won.

Eli Blake said...

John Althouse Cohen:

I believe that you misread Edwards' comments on 'two Americas.'

He was using the term to describe the dichotomy between those Americans for which the system works (which includes the middle class, and even a lot of poor people) from those for whom it does not work.

Broadly speaking (because there is no single delineation), one America would be the employed, those with health coverage, those with the opportunity to go to college (or whose children have that opportunity), and who have and can pay for basic services like electricity, enough to eat and running water, and who therefore share a generally optimistic view of America. I'd argue that you, I and probably everyone else here belongs to this America.

But the other one is the 'out of mind, out of sight' America. That America is the opposite of the first America in many ways. Opportunity is limited, as are jobs, income and basic services. In many ways it is no different than living in a third world country. I have regularly visited one small community in that 'other' America not far from where I live. Last year a young man from that community was killed in Iraq, and I attended his funeral and blogged about him and his community here.

I guess if you've never been to the 'other America' it's easy to forget about it. But Katrina showed us luridly that it exists, and it exists in many places all over America. Just people in the 'first America' either don't know, or they know but find it easier to not care and pretend they don't know.

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

Eli Blake: I'm not John, I'm Chris!

vbspurs said...

John Edwards quote:

He said Clinton is a ''woman who is made of steel. She is a leader in this country not because of her husband but because of what she has done.''

Well, at least he said a true thing there.

Who would've thought that it wasn't winning the White House -- but merely running and losing the race that would separate Bill at last from her, in people's minds.

Is Bill Clinton even an afterthought now? He's a waste of space, a drain on her candidacy, the much vaunted black vote a twisted evaporation, and his own legacy is the poorer for it.

Cheers,
Victoria

rossi said...

Doesn't strike me as earth-shattering, but apologies to your son, it's much bigger than he can dismiss with a flit of his hand (given his Hillary stance).

But I'm glad I'm early on this post vs. last night's nearly unreadable rants between a few people (spattered with sexual innuendos from Titus).

So I suppose I'll come back in a while, and I'll look for more of Palladian's shrill stereotypical remarks like the one you disgraced your home page with today.

And maybe you'll post another of his up front, which is too bad, since really Palladian and all the other screamers can trot on over to TalkLeft's echo chamber and listen to the "fighters" talking about changing their stance to pro-life now that NARAL has also jumped on the inevitable wagon.

All due to the high crimes of endorsing someone not because they believe he's the best choice between the two, but because they endorsed someone other than their woman.

Certainly they're sexist. And racist. And they eat arugula. Pigs.

GoShrillary!

garage mahal said...

So Obama took his name off the original ballot in MI to genuflect to a neighboring state's voters and didn't want to count those original votes. He proceded to block a second vote sanctioned both by the DNC and approved by Hillary Clinton -and against the wishes of the voters in MI again. Now he's back in MI to an adoring crowd announcing a perennial election losing, preening candy-ass ambulance chasing brood parasite looking to squat a golden egg in the multi million dollar corporately owned Obama Inc.

RogerL- I think I'm of The Body now. LOL.

vbspurs said...

Nightmare scenario: Obama picks Edwards for a running mate,

Doubt it.

When was the last time a man was picked twice for the Vice-Presidency, on separate tickets?

and then McCain picks Huckabee.

Doubt it even more. If he's smart, he'll bury his extreme distaste for the rich-pretty boy Mitt Romney, who actually has a lot of experience, and I personally wouldn't be against it.

I'd be very against Huckabee, the Republican Jimmy Carter.

(Huck's a nice guy, and not a bad speaker, but that doesn't cut it with me)

Actually, I'd have to just vote for Obama in that case. I'm firmly committed to being anti-Huckabee.

See? A Conservative Republican, and a moderate Liberal have so much in common, Chris.

Anything is possible, in politics.

Cheers,
Victoria

Revenant said...

My point in asking the question was how you jump from Edwards made an endorsement to that it must have been due to an over-inflated ego.

Because nobody cares who John Edwards endorses. He's out of government, has no role in government, no significance in the private sector, and (as his abortive Presidential campaign showed) no real support among the public, either. So why make the endorsement -- other than for the obvious reason, i.e. getting his name in the paper again.

Had it been that, he'd have made the endorsement just before the N.C. primary and then taken credit when Obama won.

Maybe he was afraid that Hillary would either narrowly win, or challenge Obama enough to make people reconsider his status as a front-runner.

He must know that his personal position doesn't carry much weight in NC. Edwards' presence on the 2004 ticket reduced George Bush's share of the North Carolina vote from his 2000 total of 56.03% to... 56.02%. Probably more people voted for Jesus than switched to Kerry on Edwards' say-so.

Hoosier Daddy said...

Let me just say, I think Edwards would be a terrible choice for a running mate.

I'd say John Kerry would echo that sentiment. The drip couldn't carry his own state.

As MadisonMan said, Edwards drew 6%of the vote. Hardly a ringing endorsement for a VP pick. Top off the fact that him and Kerry couldn't topple the dumbest man on the face of the earth and Darth Cheney kinda proves that the guy is kryptonite.

Obama is probably better off with the Bill Ayers endorsement.

Simon said...

jdeeripper said...
"But can you say Attorney General John Edwards."

Or Justice Edwards. *shiver* Ironically, what would save us from that fate, should salvation be necessary, is his being a white male and the liberal urge to faux-"diversity."

"Fred Thompson has already rejected the AG spot for Prez McCain."

I liked Fred -- I loved that he talked seriously and sensibly about federalism, and his statement that "a dollar belongs in the pocket of the person who earns it, unless the government has a compelling reason why it can use it better" is a perfect and very succinct quote of the conservative view of taxation -- but I really don't think he's a good pick for veep in this election cycle. Too old, too white, too phlegmatic.

Hoosier Daddy said...

one America would be the employed, those with health coverage, those with the opportunity to go to college

Really? The opportunity to go to college? Well last time I checked it required decent grades and money. The first is hard the second is called loans or saving for it or getting a job. My mom was a mill worker and my dad was a cop and I did all of the above cause we were clearly not rich and probably lower middle class at that. Oh I could have been like some of my school mates who said fuck it, don't need no stinkin college and guess where they are? Yeah, that 'other America' working minimum wage or scratching for a living because outside of a high school degree, they don't offer an employer diddly that Jose or Juan Rameriez can't do.

Spare me the two America crap Eli because a good chunk of the poor are there because they made choices. Rather than have a good time after graduation, I took loans, got a job and worked through school and got my degree and then got a better job and another and another. See mommy and daddy didn't make enough money to pay for all my school so I had to do it. If granting that 'other America'opportunity requires taking more from my wallet so someone else doesn't have to 'work so hard', then no thank you. Everyone has opportunity, its whether or not you take advantage of it is up to you. And yes it sometimes requires sacrfice, something a lot of people don't want to do.

Hoosier Daddy said...

Holy crap Simon, I just noticed your bio page and you like Firefly, Babylon 5 and homebrewing?

Dude, are you my doppleganger? I just bottled some Irish stout yesterday and have a nice hefe on the deck. Thinking of a nice Imperial Pale Ale to be my weekend project.

Don't get me started on B5, best sci-fi series. Ever. Firefly definitely a runner up. Did you know Jerry Doyle has his own talk show now?

sorry OT/ as you were! ;-)

Simon said...

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...
"I forgot how much [Edwards] sucked. ¶ Two Americas: the rich and the poor ... [j]ust sounds like a rich guy feeling bad about all the 'little people' and how not-rich they are."

The irony is that, if there are two Americas, his desultory performance in the primary suggests neither of them want any part of him.

vbspurs said...

I've been researching this question of a twice-losing VP candidate.

Before Presidents could choose a running-mate, the second runner up in the nomination contest was automatically the VP choice (heh, imagine that today -- a forced Obama/Clinton, McCain/Huckabee ticket).

In 1804 AND 1808, the same two chaps ran and lost for Prez/VP:

Charles Cotesworth Pinckney and Rufus King.

Rufus King later ran and LOST again, this time for the Presidency. Loser.

No man has been chosen for two tickets by different presidential candidates.

I'd say Obama doesn't want to be tied to a loser at this point.

Cheers,
Victoria

Simon said...

Hoosier, I didn't know Doyle had a show. That sounds faintly disturbing! Firefly is my wife's doing - she loves the show, and got me into it. I have a batch of homebrew bottled at the moment, but it looks to be something of a bust. We'll have to see. Sometimes it turns out pretty well, but I keep expectations set on mediocre. :)

Seven Machos said...

Mickey Kaus says that Edwards has a love child from a scandalous affair. Obama won't touch him for veep. He won't touch him for Supreme Court, either. Let's give Obama some credit here.

Eli Blake: The USA is the only country ever to have "places like the third world" where the people have color televisions, air conditioners, and DVD players -- not to mention electricity and running water.

Idiot.

former law student said...

Why now?

Hillary had a nice long run, but it's over, and it's time to start pulling the party back together again. Hillary doesn't have any more bullets in her gun. All the skeletons have been pulled from Barack's closet, and the Afrocentric boogyman's power is spent. Hillary's lending her campaign another $6 million is a sign of desperation, not candidate viability. Further, right now she's getting a lot of lesser-of-two-evils votes that will turn Republican in the fall: White woman trumps black man, but white man trumps white woman.

Roger J. said...

Garage--stay with us man--its not bad on the wingnut side!

MadisonMan said...

Unsuccessful Presidential Runs notwithstanding, my favorite place for breakfast in Madison is on Pinckney Street.

Revenant said...

*Why* would Obama pick Edwards for Attorney General, or for the court? There have got to be about a zillion better-qualified, better-connected Democratic lawyers out there.

The only reason to promise something like that to Edwards would be if Edwards really brought something to the table. What's that going to be? Great hair?

Eli Blake said...

Sorry, Chris.

The post was about John, and I've been inordinately busy.

XWL said...

No man has been chosen for two tickets by different presidential candidates.

True Victoria, but let's not forget Vice President George Clinton (the unfunky George Clinton, not to be confused with the extremely funky George Clinton).

Sexy John C. Calhoun was the other VP for two different presidents, but he also wasn't the 'running mate' with either of the Presidents he served.

But Edwards has a good chance to be the only two time VP loser for different top of the ticket candidates in the modern era if Obama chooses him.

And before the 12th amendment, it would have been more like having a McCain presidency with an Obama VP (or vice versa), given that the 2nd overall vote getter became VP, regardless of party.

Imagine the shennanigans today if we kept ending up with split party Prez/VP results.

If the VP's party matched the Congress (and the Prez didnt'), they'd be itching to manufacture an impeachable offense to get rid of the other party's President.

Rather than only 2 Presidential impeachments we'd probably have had dozens.

Maxine Weiss said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Eli Blake said...

Seven machos:

No, you are the idiot. Follow the link in my post.

The people there don't have electricity or running water AND THEY ARE AMERICANS!! And since they don't have electricity, they don't have color TV, air conditioning or DVD's. I've gone to that community many, many times by now and I know people who don't have electricity and running water, and who have to go to the outhouse with an oil lamp or a flashlight, and THAT IS RIGHT HERE IN THE GOOD OL' U.S. of A.

No, it's not just that people like you are idiots. You are also intentionally blind and ignorant, because you choose to be so. Out of sight, out of mind.

Seven Machos said...

Eli -- I'm not following your link. Don't be ridiculous.

Are they camping? It's a nice time of year for that.

Alternatively, maybe you can send them a bus ticket to Moab, Utah, where I know for a fact that the local McDonalds is hiring at nine dollars an hour. That's righteous bucks, dude, almost a "living wage," but I'm sure you'd prefer something like an art therapy institute to be constructed in the area at the expense of the federal government. Jobs could be offered with free health care and everyone could make clay pots to express their sorrow.

vbspurs said...

True Victoria, but let's not forget Vice President George Clinton (the unfunky George Clinton, not to be confused with the extremely funky George Clinton).

Shame America isn't a parliament, really.

Hehehe.

Okay, enough schtick, Vic.

Seriously though, I noticed when researching that George Clinton was one of those who died "in office" as VP. In fact he was the first VP so to do.

Confusingly, he didn't actually die in his office. He was on the pot, had a heart attack and popped off.

Sexy John C. Calhoun was the other VP for two different presidents, but he also wasn't the 'running mate' with either of the Presidents he served.

John Calhoun makes anyone and everyone currently in politics look like a stooge. He was SO wiley, it hurt.

Did you see Amistad, XWL? I loved seeing all those portrayals of John Quincy Adams (Anthony Hopkins), Martin Van Buren (Nigel Hawthorne)...I just forgot who played Calhoun.

And before the 12th amendment, it would have been more like having a McCain presidency with an Obama VP (or vice versa), given that the 2nd overall vote getter became VP, regardless of party.

Ugh, God. Just thinking of that racist sot Andrew Johnson gives me the willies. I'm sure Abe Lincoln shared my sentiment.

Cheers,
Victoria

Palladian said...

"So I suppose I'll come back in a while, and I'll look for more of Palladian's shrill stereotypical remarks like the one you disgraced your home page with today."

Fuck off, twat.

Is that shrill enough?

Summer Anne said...

Alternatively, maybe you can send them a bus ticket to Moab, Utah, where I know for a fact that the local McDonalds is hiring at nine dollars an hour. That's righteous bucks, dude, almost a "living wage," but I'm sure you'd prefer something like an art therapy institute to be constructed in the area at the expense of the federal government. Jobs could be offered with free health care and everyone could make clay pots to express their sorrow.

Wow, I mean, really?

I know that there are fundamental differences between conservative thinkers and myself, but, seven machos, I think you're embarrassing your peers. Are you really trying to claim that there are enough jobs for everyone in our economic climate and that every poor-ass five year old in an underfunded school and a crime-ridden neighborhood isn't disadvantaged, just lazy -- because she wasn't motivated enough to get on the intertron and see that someone on Ann Althouse's blog was offering them a bus ticket to an available fast food job? There are plenty of different ways to approach the economic gap in our country and they don't have to involve the federal government, but pretending that it doesn't exist at all / that it's 'no one's fault but their own' -- that isn't 'conservative thought,' it's just being an ignorant, selfish ass.

hdhouse said...

Breaking news....Mathusala and Father Time endorse McCain

Seven Machos said...

Summer -- You have steered us back to my original thought. I was merely stating that poor people in this country have color televisions and air conditioners. They can buy fashionable coats at Wal-Mart (or H&M) for $20. And, of course, they have running water and electricity. I grew up mighty poor myself, so I know about which I speak.

Eli claims to have found some people in the United States who live in "third world" environments, ostensibly without running water and electricity. Is it really hardhearted and cruel to suggest that people without running water and electricity pack up and move if they want such basic services, given that virtually everywhere in the United States has them?

You are attacking a straw man in the worst way here, pal. No one in the United States has any business living like the "third world." Anyone who suggests otherwise has no concept of what the third world is actually like. If they don't want to help these alleged people move, which would quickly and easily solve the problem, they have no desire to actually solve the problems that ostensibly beset these people.

But you go ahead and criticize. Tell me that I should have to pay a bunch of money so that government largess can be showered. Have yourself a latte while you are at it. Take in an art film. Bank online.

Revenant said...

Are you really trying to claim that there are enough jobs for everyone in our economic climate

The phrase "enough jobs for everyone" doesn't make much sense. Employment isn't a zero-sum game.