He is irrelevant because in the general election, Democrats will never win Chris Dodd.

You know what I really love about Chris Dodd? He talks super fast. Just an incredibly fast talker.

At least Dodd has some spine.

*cough* Edwardsdoesn't *cough*

Chris Dodd is a man of principle and character. It is an honor for Barack Obama to have his endorsement.

It is well known that endorsements change rarely the dynamics a race for primary voters. But Dodd is "old guard" and very well respected. He is champion of the Constitution and made it his "special interest" during his campaign.

This endorsement *is* a big deal. It is a big deal for the Constitution and the Rule of Law. It sends a powerful message to the Dem establishment.

Maybe what we're seeing here -- and have been seeing for the past couple of weeks -- is the movement of Party Elders (slow and stately as befits such gray eminences) to throw their weight behind the presumptive nominee. Maybe it's not even Obama so much as the goal of party unity, so as to be able to win in November. In any case, it's a good thing.

As to Edwards ... I've always been on Obamaphile, but I can't buy into a theory that makes Edwards into some kind of villain. More likely, I think, he is following the lead of Al Gore and other party leaders who are keeping themselves neutral so as to be able to credibly serve as impartial arbiters in case some kind of deadlock needs to be broken. This is a responsible position, I think -- as is Dodd's decision to endorse. Anyway, as TooBubba notes, Obama probably doesn't need Edwards's endorsement so much anymore.

Both of these things look positive to me. As long as we don't see superdelegates joining Hillary in clamoring to seat Florida and Michigan, I'm not too worried.

I'll feel better in a week, though. I hope.

I suppose the concept of Dodd being free to endorse whomever he choses is foreign to the posters here?

Well, those Hillary supporters who insisted that they were supporting her because of her experience will have to further rationalize their position because the individual with the most experience in the race just dissed her for Obama.

I had the same reaction as kaspian -- this is the first part of a message from the Party Elders. I don't often quote Robert Novack but in yesterday's column "Who Will Tell Hillary?" (or something like that) he asked who could play the Barry Goldwater role in telling Clinton that it's just simply time for her to step down. So I'd already been mulling it over. Kennedy (and Kerry and Leahy) are out because they have endorsed Obama. Of the 'old guard' or those carrying significant current weight I could think of Gore, Biden, Edwards, Dodd, and I'm sure there are others just escaping my mind.

Of these, I would picture Dodd having the least impact on Clinton, because he is so close to Kennedy that would be an easy reason to not listen to him. BUT that makes him the perfect person to serve as a mild, initial 'signal' ... in hopes that, should she lose on March 4th, she might respond to the signal and thus obviate the need for an actual 'conversation'

I certainly don't think Dodd would given an endorsement he didn't mean (and that is much to Obama's credit), BUT I'm equally confident that he would pay attention to the timing and would consult with others in the Old Guard.

Which raises the part that puzzles me: why today? why the morning of the last debate? There is enough time before March 4th to make the endorsement and do some campaigning if he waited until tomorrow. ?????

One hypothesis: They have seen the dramatic change in tone and, frankly, demeanor since last Thursday's debate and, for the party's sake, they DON'T want the "scolding" - or "sarcastic" - or (yesterday's) "surly" versions of Hillary that have been making an appearance lately to show up on national TV watched by millions. Sort of a tap on the shoulder before she goes in front of the camera that more is at stake here than whether she wins the nomination: like the party's chances in Dec. AND her future standing in the party.

Of course we'll never know - but there is bound to be an interesting story behind the timing of his endorsement.

i finally figured why the far left members of congress are endorsing obama .......thse left wing nuts can control him when and if hes elected...........kennedy, kerry dodd etc can push him ointo left wing ideology and call in their endorsement favors........they know they could never control HRC.......i switched to independent because the far left of the dem party will destroy the party and really put a hurting on this country

Dodmania!

Catch it.

I don't think Edwards has to endorse anyone. If no one quite meets his approval, fine. There's no harm in that.

As for Dodd, in a better world he might be the candidate now. It was nice to see some Democrat exercising some courage this year--a refreshing change. I'm delighted he did this.

The good thing is all the Clinton supporters who are with her for "experience" must, ergo, have come to Clinton from either Biden or Dodd since they have tons more than she, so this should hold some weight with them..

Richard, about the state that doesn't matter--he was kidding. The Clinton campaign has a tendency of dismissing states they haven't won as ones that really don't matter (too black, too small, too caucus-y, too red, too....Connecticut-y, I guess.) The saracastic comments about CT, and Dodd being irrelevant in the general, are because of that.

I'M DODDY FOR DODD! WHOOOOOOO!!!!!

Chris Dodd once dated Bianca Jagger so that gives us a hook with Nicaraguan-American voters, and perhaps some older Rolling Stones fans.

He also dated Carrie Fisher, so we could round up a number of Star Wars fanatics as well.