Her, yes. Him, no.

No, I don't miss their presence. Who cares? If down the road he proves his dedication to the struggle of those in poverty- yeah I'd respect him, but right now it looks like it was his ploy at being a nominee that didn't shake out. He's like a watered down Jimmy Carter with none of the resume. (btw I'd vote for Jimmy Carter right now)

It's clear: The couple is split. And since they can't agree on whom to endorse, no endorsement!

Good thing John did not become president! He would have been unable to act unless his wife agreed with the course of action!

HRC: would be a mistake. Her deviousness would mark an entire presidency. Her desire to "fight" would make the White House a daily soap opera.

Obama: Much better choice!

Nope, I don't miss them.

"Anyone else miss their presence on the political stage right about now"?

Not me. I initially supported the Edwards, even sent him money. But his refusal to endorse Obama has left him a cipher in my eyes. Wonder if he'll reimburse my donation?

John Edwards lacks testicular fortitude.

I wish them well. But I see them basically as do-gooder capitalists and not leaders of people. I especially hope that her health holds out and they figure out what their contribution can be.

Someone clue me in. What did Edwards do between being a Senator and now?

What I mean is, Jimmy Carter has all his stuff (habitat for humanity, voting rights) and he is actively involved in them.

Is Edwards? I know he always talks about poverty things being "his issue," but is that just something he's run on, or is there action behind it?

Curious. I've never heard much about him outside of his political ambition.

I think it shows the insane bind Edwards has been in between the two, and indicative of why he didn't do better in the primaries: weak spine. The stranglehold the Clintons have politically on him keep him from endorsing Obama outright.

His message on poverty hasn't been backed up with much substance either. But his endorsement of Obama would mean a lot to his former supporters.

"Hillary Clinton is for temporary relief."
- Terry McAuliffe

Not for internal use. Use only as directed. Avoid contact with eyes. Excessive use or prolonged exposure may cause irritation, redness, nausea, blurred vision, cynicism, financial instability, fifty more years in Iraq, and death.

Temporary relief, with a long list of side effects... or long-lasting change?

Yes we can.

I don't miss them at all. Fundamentally, I think they are pretty self-interested (not rare among politicos, I'll admit). I always thought John wouldn't endorse, to hold himself out as a "party elder" or even a dark horse in the event of a brokered convention. Delusional, but definitely a possible explanation of the mindset.

Note that Illinois and New York moved up their primaries to boost the hometown candidate. North Carolina did not.

Anyone else miss their presence on the political stage right about now?

um, no.

What political capital?

People!! They went to People to announce this?
What's the matter with them??

I am sick of the Edwards endless self promotion, including John flying out to appear on the Leno show, weeks after he had already withdrawn from the race. What the hell was the point of that, and what the hell was the point of him announcing that he would not accept the VP slot, that no one expected would even be offered to him.

Mrs. Edwards has taken to writing op-eds in papers such as the New York times. They are certainly still trying to stay in the limelight. What are they really up to. Is there a reason that they are not endorsing a candidate.

Here is some wild speculation to mull over:

What if the Edwards are seriously contemplating pulling a Ross Perot like run in the general election. I would not put it past them. Elizabeth appears to want the White House even more than her Husband, and she knows that her time to attain it me be short.

None of you have sufficiently shallow reasons for rejecting Edwards, so allow me to show you how it's done:

He always reminded me too much of John Davidson. And I just couldn't wrap my mind around a Love, American Style presidency. Every time he gives a sit-down interview, I flashback to Hollywood Squares. He is polished and perfect in the way a soap opera actor is.

I think a lot of it is the hair.

Edwards came up pretty small.
I seriously doubt President Obama will give him a position in his cabinet.

BTW - I thought it took some huge cajones to infer that Obama was empty, given Edwards' stellar record.

"Anyone else miss their presence on the political stage right about now?"

Not in the least.

I just checked, and in case anyone cares:

In the last 10 years, John Edwards won one senate race (with 51 percent) and two primaries, in North Carolina and South Carolina in 2004.

That's it.

Barack Obama has won, what, 31 primaries and caucuses this time around, not to mention 3 Illinois Senate races and a US Senate race with nearly two-thirds of the vote.

Even the Tigress of Tuzla has won two U.S. Senate elections and 15 or so primaries this time around.

In other words, neither one needs his endorsement, which likely wouldn't carry enough weight to change the Democratic primary outcome in his home state.

He's redefined irrelevance.

Doesn't he still have some committed delegates? What happens to those?

Edwards will be Clinton's AG.

Always overrated. Remember his lackluster performance in the debate with Cheney in '04? Considering how little he did as senator he's pretty useless. They seem as irrelevant as Chris Dodd or Kucinich.

Greg --
I would instead say that the 3-way campaign dynamic was in some ways salutary. It disciplined HRC's negativity by offering an alternative white candidate for those voters turned off by her antics and yet not willing to vote for a black candidate.

Maybe that's too cynical. He did develop some sensible policies, and seems like a reasonably nice guy. But the drama was a bit annoying, as the comments reflect.

I think that John ihas an extremely high opinion of himself.

He expects to be a "party elder" at the convention when it gets messy. However, if the North Carolina Democratic Party doesn't hold him in very high regard, I don't think that Howard Dean (or Al Gore) is going to be texting him to help in a process crisis.

He is an opportunist, who tried to hold Obama to a cabinet position (my own speculation), and Obama knew that he didn't need him; and then he considered Hillary (his wife's favorite), but she wasn't really in a position to help him, so he chose the "elder" route.

It is no mystery that his wife doesn't think much of Obama, and Hillary is more in line with her positions, but not with Edwards' anti-Washington positions.

Don't get me wrong, I kind of like her. Much more honest than either John or HRC. I guess that is the benefit of not running for office. Kind of like Michelle O.

pffft, in answer to your question, an emphatic 'no'. I just don't see them as being any more principled than any other politicians. I think their concerns are somewhat superficial, based on easily refuted beliefs. Obama needs more 'substance' beyond the rhetoric? this coming from John Edwards! a "populist" who was a DLC Dem until he suddenly became the great champion of the poor for this particular campaign? who Russ Feingold said he could never support because his very conservative voting record didn't come close to matching his progressive rhetoric? that's a bit rich. I still see Obama as by far the most principled of the 'top 3' of the Dem candidates, and there is plenty of substance there, if you bother to look. Obama has had, for over a year now, publicly available, highly detailed plans regarding every major issue. do the Edwards know what these are, or not? if they haven't bothered to read about all of this, then shame on them. if they have and are just pretending to not know, then even worse! I know Elizabeth strongly favors Clinton's plan to mandate that people purchase insurance from the big insurance companies. not sure why she prefers it, but I know she has made that no secret. but even though its her main issue, and she supports Clinton, and finds her divisive battle against Obama built partly on race baiting and the worst kind of pandering, to be a sign of 'strength'.

I've said it before and I'll keep saying it, the Edwards' are not paragons of progressivism in America, far from it. they are a politician and his wife, wanting to have their ring kissed. no more, no less.

The last Democrat in the race?

Puh-leaze.

Was it his vote to invade Iraq that convinced you of his ideological purity?

Voting for the Patriot Act?

Voting against Paul Wellstone's amendment to the bankruptcy bill that would have provided an exception for medical emergencies?

John Edwards campaigned as a populist because he saw an opportunity to go to Hillary Clinton's left.

All the rest is just piffle.

Has Edwards ever addressed Russ Feingold's assessment of him?

I like Elizabeth and John, but I think Feingold's statement that JE basically ran on Feingold's record without really voting that way in the Senate was worthy of a rebuttal. And I don't seem to recall JE providing one.

I mean, shit, Russ Feingold doesn't get to run for president because... why?

Oh, that's right, because he's too liberal. [/eye roll]

Check Edwards' voting record.

He's less progressive than Clinton, for God's sakes.

And you know why he couldn't win a state, any state?

Because when you were in a room listening to him talk, you couldn't get past the feeling that he was full of shit.

The "Edwards Endorsement" is now officially the equivalent of that funny story somebody insists that you tell at a party, but you keep saying it isn't that funny and then you finally tell it and it turns out it isn't really that funny.

Obama-Feingold is too wonderful an idea to even contemplate.

I think a lot of folks here are disappointed that Edwards didn't endorse Obama and that's where the negative remarks are coming from. Just my humble opinion - because that's how I feel right now.

Obama was not my first choice. I supported Bill Richardson first (because of his "leave no troops behind/ no residual troops in Iraq" stance. Then I gave money to Chris Dodd, then he dropped out, then I gave money to Edwards because I loved his populist speechifying! He addressed the real issues facing Dems this election year like a traditional Dem from days gone by.

So Obama is my 4th choice. i loved Bill Richardson's endorsement and it came at such an important time (after the first go round with Rev. Wright). Thank you Bill R! and it's too bad that Edwards couldn't follow with a strong endorsement of his own. Oh well. that's politics!

And, I hope Obama picks Richardson for VP and Bill convinces him to bring home ALL the troops!

Sorry I don't have a link and I don't remember the exact words, but Edwards said that both candidates had serious talks (negotiations) with him, but that whatever Obama offered him wasn't as compelling (concrete? specific? substantive?) as Clinton's. Several sources subsequently floated predictions that Edwards would endorse Clinton, but it didn't happen. Clinton may have offered him the Poverty Czar position, and Obama may have vaguely promised to work together toward common goals. Edwards had more to gain from Clinton, but Obama has a better chance of winning (both the nomination and the election).

So Edwards has been in a tight spot, still harboring some resentment that Obama usurped his position (and then his base of support) as Clinton's main challenger, but realizing that if he endorsed Clinton his own harsh words against her would be used to indict him as betraying his principles for political gain. He also may reason that if Clinton weakens Obama enough that he loses in November, voters will resent Clinton and turn to Edwards next time.

I'm not convinced that the Edwards' are divided. I think they just see too many pitfalls for the future if the endorse. Elizabeth may not be fond of Obama, but I think she's even less fond of Clinton. They're bright people; if the folks at TPM can see the kind of damage Clinton is doing to the Party, they can see it as well. They could have exerted pressure to bring Clinton back in line, and I'm disappointed that they didn't, whatever their reasons.

I don't miss either of them. Granted, I never liked either of them, so grain of salt and all. Still, from what my few family and friends in NC who are active in Democratic politics, this article in Politico pretty much sums up how Dems. in NC view the Edwards' and their...um...political capital.

For all the speculation surrounding John Edwards’ conspicuous silence on the eve of his home state’s primary, one important fact has been overlooked: According to North Carolina’s political class, the former Democratic presidential contender has virtually no clout at all in his home state.

The former senator and 2004 Democratic vice presidential nominee, they say, was like a political comet. He seemingly appeared out of nowhere, inspired awe with the intensity of his talent, blazed through a single term in the Senate, then disappeared from the radar almost entirely.

Because as my aunt's sister put it, "How do you run for president for 8 years straight and most people in your own party and in your own state not know it until they see in a debate. In January?

Edwards was the best hope the party had in November. The Democratic Party has "made History" and let's just hope it doesn't cost them the election.

"Anyone else miss their presence on the political stage right about now"?

I agree with many of the above. I don't miss Edwards at all. That $400 haircut was like a plastic shield holding together a massive, confused jumble of sentimental populism and earnest piety. He couldn't even deliver his home state for the Dems in 2004, and yet he still thinks of himself has having a privileged spot in the party. For what? Dodd, Biden, Kucinich -- those people have put in their time.

Oh, and I forgot to mention: I am a Progressive Patriot!!! Go Russ!

Late, late, late update: Ummm, still no. Edwards voted for the war. He never lived up to his call out of Clinton in the NH primaries. And he's a millionare plaintiff's lawyer who lives in a mansion. So, before he ran for office, what he cared about was a contingency fee. Thanks.

Interesting. They were saving political capital for their own causes. Sounds like they were waiting to see which candidate was going to be the winner, so they would offend the fewest number of voters. But they couldn't decide.

You know, this is all very entertaining, but it's got nothing on the foreskin fundamentalist who was ranting in comments over at Sadly No.