Edwards Out
Jan 30
People in Edwards campaign are confirming to CNN and CNBC that Edwards will announce he is leaving the race at noon today in new Orleans. I was hoping that Edwards would stay in the race longer. I realize, despite his being my first choice, that he probably could not win. But he dragged the Democratic race much further to the left than it would otherwise have been and I felt that as long as he stayed in the race, he could continue to have that effect.
Now I have to decide who to vote for in a week.
#1 by Morris at January 30th, 2008
| Quote
“But he dragged the Democratic race much further to the left than it would otherwise have been”
The democrat party doesn’t need help in moving to the left.
#2 by DavidD at January 30th, 2008
| Quote
Depressing news. I’m switching to Obama now, but in a lukewarm way.
#3 by Jefe at January 30th, 2008
| Quote
It’s too bad he can’t stay in it. I think he keeps both Clinton and Obama in line and in a progressive mode. I don’t much trust Obama, but I’m not necessarily a Clinton fan, either.
#4 by Janusz at January 30th, 2008
| Quote
Morris/Fred wrote: “The democrat party doesn’t need help in moving to the left.”
I’m not sure if that kind of exaggeration is merely meant as a provocation, or if you really believe it.
While there are some Democrats who are more progressive (in the Barbara Boxer mode) than the bulk of the party, I believe most thinking people would consider most Democrats to be pretty moderate when viewed in context of the American political spectrum. As for the front-runners, I wouldn’t call either of them raging lefties. They have some progressive platforms (health care), but the Clinton’s have always been very moderate to conservative on alot if issues. If you listen to Obama on social security, health care (against mandatory insurance) and stimulating the economy (through tax cuts), he sounds close to Republicans on those issues.
You tend to see the world in absolutes ie. Republicans/right/good vs Democrats/left/bad and real Christians/Fred vs phoney-baloney Christians/everyone who doesn’t agree with you. The world is somewhat more complex than that.
#5 by Morris at January 30th, 2008
| Quote
“You tend to see the world in absolutes”
That sounds like an absolute statement.
#6 by Stormy Dragon at January 30th, 2008
| Quote
I think Edwards prefers Obama to Clinton and knows the longer he stays in, the better Clinton’s chances are.
#7 by Ted at January 30th, 2008
| Quote
““You tend to see the world in absolutes”
That sounds like an absolute statement.”
regardless of how it sounds, it is not an absolute statement.
#8 by tgirsch at January 30th, 2008
| Quote
The silver lining is that this eliminates the “not Clinton” problem I worried about…
#9 by PurpleMinded at January 30th, 2008
| Quote
I too liked John Edwards a great deal. I’m curious though… I read this morning that 40% of Edwards supporters are thought to have Hillary as their second choice, just 25% Obama. That makes no sense to me. I would have thoght it would be reversed and skewed even greater towards Obama. What’s to consider?
#10 by Stormy Dragon at January 30th, 2008
| Quote
>I too liked John Edwards a great deal. I’m curious
>though… I read this morning that 40% of Edwards
>supporters are thought to have Hillary as their second
>choice, just 25% Obama.
Keep in mind the people telling you that are the same people who spent months telling us that Giullani was the Republican front runner and that McCain had no chance.
#11 by Morris at January 31st, 2008
| Quote
“it is not an absolute statement.”
LOL Another absolute statement.
#12 by Matt at January 31st, 2008
| Quote
Edwards may have pulled the democratic race rhetoric further to the left, but did he actually move Obama or Clinton further left?
What politicians say vs what they do rarely seems to line up.
Did Edwards presence in the race just slightly increase the size of the lies the other candidates spoke in order to get themselves elected, or did he actually cause a real change in the other candidates?