John Edwards Endorses Obama (Breaking News)

[Derwood]

Headline on cnn.com right now. I'll add a link whenever they have a full story.

So, add Edwards' super delegates/supporters to Obama and Clinton is even more done than she was before.

[The_Jazz]

Originally Posted by Derwood

Headline on cnn.com right now. I'll add a link whenever they have a full story.

So, add Edwards' super delegates/supporters to Obama and Clinton is even more done than she was before.

19 pledged delegates
0 superdelegates

Not exactly the deal of the century, but every bit helps get the process over with.

There's a story here:

http://weblogs.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/blog/

Interesting that Drudge has NOTHING about this at the moment. Looks like he got scooped.

Also, here's a current scorecard, but it shows 18 delegates for Edwards. I'm not sure why there's a difference. This gives Obama a 189-pledged delegate lead and potentially enough to secure the outright nomination, although he already had that without the Edwards announcement.

[Derwood]

19 delegates more than makes up for the 12 he lost to Clinton in WVA

[Ustwo]

So a shyster who represents everything thats wrong with tort law in America and who's pursuit of personal wealth has led to uncounted unnecessary C-sections, directly harming and even killing women as well as increased medical costs across the country endorces Obama.

Well hes got that going for him.

[Willravel]

FINALLY
Jeez, we've been waiting for how long now?

[Derwood]

Originally Posted by Ustwo

So a shyster who represents everything thats wrong with tort law in America and who's pursuit of personal wealth has led to uncounted unnecessary C-sections, directly harming and even killing women as well as increased medical costs across the country endorces Obama.

Well hes got that going for him.

yep, that's the one, and people care about as much about all that stuff as they do about all the underhanded shit Hillary Clinton has done over the years

[ottopilot]

Originally Posted by Derwood

yep, that's the one, and people care about as much about all that stuff as they do about all the underhanded shit Hillary Clinton has done over the years

So we're all in agreement that John Edward's is as big a underhanded shyster as Hillary?

Amazing! More unexpected unity on TFP Politics!

[robot_parade]

Originally Posted by Ustwo

So a shyster who represents everything thats wrong with tort law in America and who's pursuit of personal wealth has led to uncounted unnecessary C-sections, directly harming and even killing women as well as increased medical costs across the country endorces Obama.

Well hes got that going for him.

Oh, so there's actual scientific proof of this, rather than the standard republican anti-lawyer crap? I am dying to see you link to this proof. Really.

[Kadath]

So when does one cross the line into trolling?

[ratbastid]

Originally Posted by Kadath

So when does one cross the line into trolling?

Somewhere around post #4, in this case.

The question of why he waited so long is as valid on Edwards as it is on any other superdelegate. It's not like the pledged delegates he's sliding onto Obama's roster are such a big deal. But Edwards was holding out the same as so many other supers because they wanted to make sure they were coming down on the winning side. None of them are voting their convictions--it's all politics.

[dc_dux]

Edwards may have made $millions representing consumers in product liability and medical malpractice cases....

Major Cases Litigated by John Edwards

...but that what a good advocate does and his clients were well served.

He wont be Obama's Attorney General, but he might be on the short list for HHS (or HUD) Secretary.

Originally Posted by Ustwo

So a shyster who represents everything thats wrong with tort law in America and who's pursuit of personal wealth has led to uncounted unnecessary C-sections, directly harming and even killing women as well as increased medical costs across the country endorces Obama.

The Reasons Why Critiques of His Medical Malpractice Litigation Record Are Wrong

I might be with Ustwo to some degree that we still need reasonable tort reform (we probably differ on what is reasonable).

And Obama did break with the Dems (and the trial lawyers) and voted for the Repub sponsored Class Action Fairness Act of 2005

[The_Jazz]

Originally Posted by Kadath

So when does one cross the line into trolling?

To give you my version of an official opinion, it's when you're just trying to get a rise out of the rest of the board. Given that I can go back 6 months and find at least 2 threads with Ustwo discussing his opinion of Edwards in pretty much these terms and that a significant number of tort reformers hold the exact same opinion, I'd say that this is just consistency.

BTW - Drudge finally picked up the story and now he's opining that Edwards will be in the #2 spot on the ticket. Interesting thought, but I'm still hoping for Richardson.

[ratbastid]

I can't imagine Edwards being #2 again. Obama's already strong in the south, particularly NC. Edwards wouldn't bring to the ticket what he was supposed to bring in 04.

I had a thought about this this morning. The timing of this CAN'T be accidental. I'd be willing to bet that Obama kept Edwards in his pocket to announce between his pre-ordained losses in WV and KY. It's a story-changer designed to break up the perception of Clinton momentum. I wouldn't be surprised if he's already got the needed superdelegates locked up and is dribbling out their announcements to keep up the perception of momentum.

[The_Jazz]

Originally Posted by ratbastid

I wouldn't be surprised if he's already got the needed superdelegates locked up and is dribbling out their announcements to keep up the perception of momentum.

Originally Posted by The_Jazz

Also, here's a current scorecard, but it shows 18 delegates for Edwards. I'm not sure why there's a difference. This gives Obama a 189-pledged delegate lead and potentially enough to secure the outright nomination, although he already had that without the Edwards announcement.

On the current scorecard, he's got enough for outright victory assuming the superdelegate vote the way they've publicly stated.

[Ustwo]

Originally Posted by dc_dux

Edwards may have made $millions representing consumers in product liability and medical malpractice cases....

Major Cases Litigated by John Edwards

...but that what a good advocate does and his clients were well served.

He wont be Obama's Attorney General, but he might be on the short list for HHS (or HUD) Secretary.


The Reasons Why Critiques of His Medical Malpractice Litigation Record Are Wrong

I might be with Ustwo to some degree that we still need reasonable tort reform (we probably differ on what is reasonable).

And Obama did break with the Dems (and the trial lawyers) and voted for the Repub sponsored Class Action Fairness Act of 2005

Sorry but I read transcripts of his cases in 2004, hes a shyster and spin isn't going to change it. My favorite was him talking as the fetus in the womb though.

[ratbastid]

Originally Posted by The_Jazz

On the current scorecard, he's got enough for outright victory assuming the superdelegate vote the way they've publicly stated.

I don't get how you arrive at that conclusion. That scorecard shows him at 1883 out of 2025. That 1883 includes declared supers (the ones who have publicly stated).

The undeclared supers are going to be the decisionmakers, and I'm saying I wouldn't be surprised if they're already secretly committed to Obama and being deployed little by little to shape the narrative.

[The_Jazz]

I read the "total delegates" as "pledged delegates" and added that number to the superdelegates instead of subtracting. It's a little misleading, at least for me.

[ratbastid]

Gotcha.

One correction to my above: Edwards is NOT himself a superdelegate. Congresscritters are supers only while in office, and former Presidents and VPs are lifetime supers, but not nominees who lost. Unless they're "party leaders". Supersdelegates are PLEOs (Party Leaders and Elected Officials, not this guy). So as a former Senator and one-time VP hopeful, Edwards doesn't get a vote at convention, but he does get to toss his elected delegates to Obama, which is like 15 times his single vote anyway.

The other question I'm hearing asked is, why didn't he stay in the race but suspend campaigning? By now he'd have a couple hundred delegates just on the power of his base, and he'd be the kingmaker.

[The_Jazz]

Originally Posted by ratbastid

The other question I'm hearing asked is, why didn't he stay in the race but suspend campaigning? By now he'd have a couple hundred delegates just on the power of his base, and he'd be the kingmaker.

1) No money.
2) Sick wife.
3) Didn't foresee this possibility. Not many did.

[ratbastid]

Originally Posted by The_Jazz

1) No money.
2) Sick wife.
3) Didn't foresee this possibility. Not many did.

Yeah, but I mean, he could have left himself on the ballot. Gravel did, and he's picked up a couple percentage points in several states. Not enough to win any delegates, though. But surely Edwards could have collected a moderate handful of delegates, especially in the bigger states.

[The_Jazz]

He didn't take himself off the ballot. He pulled 7.3% of the results in West Virginia. He didn't pull his name off; he just shut down the campaign.

[ratbastid]

Originally Posted by The_Jazz

He didn't take himself off the ballot. He pulled 7.3% of the results in West Virginia. He didn't pull his name off; he just shut down the campaign.

Heh. Whoever I read asking that question was uninformed, then. And I assumed they knew what they were talking about!

He wasn't on NC's ballot, I know that from personal polling place experience!

[ottopilot]

I'm sensing the general public perceives John Edwards as wealthy and artificial. Many on-the-fence voters see Obama as an intellectual elitist with a very liberal record. It may be more prudent to look for a more centrist choice for VP like (off the top of my head) Richardson, or a list of others. Heartland and crossover voters will think twice about pulling the lever for an Obama/Edwards ticket in a general election vs. McCain.

[roachboy]

i think you're dreaming, otto.
i think the republicans are in deep deep trouble because no matter what they say, they will take the hit for the bush administration.

and i don't see an obama edwards ticket as likely, at least not yet.
like alot of folk, i would prefer to see obama/clinton.
it is of no consequence to me what the limbaugh set has to say about that possibility.
but carry on.

[georgezepeda]

All I know is I'm totally excited about this news!! An Obama/Edwards ticket would be my dream. You feel that America, change is a coming!!! It is time for the American people to unite, and hopefully Barack will be the leader to bring us all together. I found the full video of Edward's endorsement speech that you can view below.


John Edwards Endorses Barack Obama

[ottopilot]

Originally Posted by roachboy

i think you're dreaming, otto.
i think the republicans are in deep deep trouble because no matter what they say, they will take the hit for the bush administration.

and i don't see an obama edwards ticket as likely, at least not yet.
like alot of folk, i would prefer to see obama/clinton.
it is of no consequence to me what the limbaugh set has to say about that possibility.
but carry on.

Another glib generalization, but fair enough...

FTR - I'm not a McCain fan, and I view Rush Limbaugh (right) much like Michael Moore (left) as maximum on the buffoonery scale.

[hunnychile]

Just for the record, I never thought Edwards was very impressive or that smart or innovative. He acts like he cares, esp. for the "blue collars" here in America. But in many ways he was always a "johnny come lately" HA, (sorry) couldn't resist that one....always waiting for more scholarly types to create the best sound bites and then jumping on board. He could be an ok Vice President though. No doubt he's up for that.

Luckily, at LEAST he's a Democrat. Good. But I think he's covering his butt to get on-board with the future President of the USA. He does stand a chance. Hmmmmm....now that I think about it, it makes me almost excited & glad that he could be a V.P.

[Willravel]

He brings a lot of supporters to the table. That's what matters. For Obama.

[Ustwo]

Hes a coward.

He waited until the 12th hour after the winner had been all but decided.

Now he does so hoping for some sort of bone be thrown his way.

Were Hillary the leader, I don't think anyone here would argue that Edwards would still have endorsed Obama. He would have done exactly the same thing for Hillary.

[Willravel]

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Hes a coward.

More flamin, eh? I guess that's one way to play it.

[SecretMethod70]

Originally Posted by willravel

He brings a lot of supporters to the table. That's what matters. For Obama.

Except he doesn't really.

http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/edw...ass_hero_1.php

Edwards As Working-Class Hero?   click to show 

Edwards As Working-Class Hero?The polls don’t support the press’s narrative
By Zachary Roth
Thu 15 May 2008 04:28 PM

The press is playing John Edwards’s endorsement of Barack Obama as giving the presumptive Democratic nominee a boost in attracting those elusive white working-class voters.

The New York Times says Edwards’s decision offers Obama “potential help in his efforts to win over working-class white voters in the general election.”

The Chicago Tribune calls the Edwards endorsement “an effort to transfer his appeal among white, working-class voters to a Democratic front-runner who has struggled to win them over.”

The Boston Globe says the news gives Obama “a symbolic lift as he courts working-class white voters.”

And The Washington Post notes that working-class white voters were “at the heart of Edwards’s candidacy.”

But hold on. A look at the entrance and exit polls in the nominating contests where Edwards competed doesn’t support the notion that his supporters are working class.

In Iowa, entrance polls didn’t ask about educational levels, which is how working class has generally been defined this primary season. But they did ask about income. And Edwards’s best income demographic was those making over $100,000 a year—the richest group. His second- and third-best performances were among those making $50,000-$75,000 a year and $75,000-$100,000 a year. His three worst showings came among the three groups making less than $50,000 a year.

New Hampshire’s results are slightly more mixed, but they still don’t offer support for the idea of Edwards as a working-class hero. Edwards performed just as well with college-educated voters as with non-college-educated voters. Looking again at income, his strongest performances were with voters making $50,000-$75,000 a year or $75,000-$100,000 a year. He did as well with voters making above $100,000 as with voters making below $50,000.

And in South Carolina, his best performance by education level was among those with a post-graduate degree. And he did better among voters with a college degree than those without. In terms of income, by far Edwards’s best result was with voters who made more than $200,000 a year.

(Edwards won only 4 percent of the vote in Nevada, which means that the sample size is too small to draw meaningful inferences about the makeup of his support.)

The root of the problem here is the press’s obsession with style and image—and simple, clear narratives—at the expense of substance and evidence and complexity. Throughout his campaign, Edwards reminded anyone who would listen that he grew up the son of a mill worker, and his campaign rhetoric was squarely focused on the economic struggles of ordinary working Americans. Apparently, that was enough to make many in the press assume that his supporters were working class—even in the face of empirical data suggesting a much more complicated picture.

[Charlatan]

That's not flaming. That's opinion. And I'd tend to agree with him on that. From all appearances, Edwards looks like he waited until the dust had settled before making a choice.

I don't know that that makes him cowardly but it certainly makes him look very calculating... I feel pretty strongly that had Clinton come out on on top he would have thrown his support behind her.

[SecretMethod70]

Gotta side with Charlatan and Ustwo on that one.

Not that I'm sad Obama has Edwards' endorsement.

[Derwood]

i would have preferred he made this move before Super Tuesday or before Texas/PA

[roachboy]

otto:

if you want something directed and serious, bring on something worth the bother.
if you don't then you've nothing to complain about.

[ubertuber]

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Hes a coward.

He waited until the 12th hour after the winner had been all but decided.

Now he does so hoping for some sort of bone be thrown his way.

Were Hillary the leader, I don't think anyone here would argue that Edwards would still have endorsed Obama. He would have done exactly the same thing for Hillary.

Huh... I thought the exact opposite. Were I Obama, I would have asked Edwards to endorse between the expected defeats of W. VA and KY. Everybody is talking about how he has a problem with "working class folks" and then the champion of those very people endorses...

I'd liken it to keeping your powder dry until just the right moment, and I wouldn't be surprised at all if the timing was directed by the Obama campaign.

[ottopilot]

Originally Posted by roachboy

otto:

if you want something directed and serious, bring on something worth the bother.
if you don't then you've nothing to complain about.

I'm not complaining. I was just responding to your odd comments directed to me in the previous post.
After I made a simple observation about Obama/Edwards (per the OP), you supplied the strange offhanded remarks about republicans and Limbaugh. So what's your point? You're not sounding so 3-D on this one.

[dc_dux]

I dont think Edwards' endorsement will do much for Obama in the long run....endorsement rarely do.

Obama still will need to personally make his case to those Democratic (and Indendent) blue collar white voters and seniors who have reservations. And he will need to do it in terms they can relate to, with specifics, and not just the theme of "change."

He has plenty of time to do just that before November and I suspect he will make a strong case for himself, possibly with Edwards by his side in some states, and other well known supporters with him in other states.

But I would be shocked if he would seriously consider Edwards for VP.

My money for VP is still on an older white guy..with either a strong military/foreign policy background (Wes Clark) or a governor with executive experience.

[guyy]

Originally Posted by ottopilot

I'm sensing the general public perceives John Edwards as wealthy and artificial. Many on-the-fence voters see Obama as an intellectual elitist with a very liberal record. It may be more prudent to look for a more centrist choice for VP like (off the top of my head) Richardson, or a list of others. Heartland and crossover voters will think twice about pulling the lever for an Obama/Edwards ticket in a general election vs. McCain.

Hiya! "Heartland" voter here. (The "heartland" is actually Obama's geographical base.) Anyway, Richardson would be fine, Edwards, too. I'm not going to get too worked up about vp candidates. I'll take whatever is necessary to clean out the Bush cabal.

[ubertuber]

Originally Posted by dc_dux

I dont think Edwards' endorsement will do much for Obama in the long run....endorsement rarely do.

In the long run, I think you are correct. However, I'm sure that the Obama campaign is glad to have Edwards' endorsement on the top of the news sites rather than his W VA defeat.