« Obama And Clinton Met Tonight In Washington | Home | McCain Compares Obama To William Jennings Bryan »
Edwards: I Don't Want To Run For VP
One key Democratic name has already taken himself out of the race to be Barack Obama's running mate: Former rival John Edwards. "I already had the privilege of running for vice president in 2004, and I won't do it again," Edwards said, according to Spanish-language newspaper El Mundo.
Regarding a certain other person who has been mentioned as a possibility, Edwards made sure to stay neutral. "Hillary Clinton is a great force in the Democratic Party and in the United States, whether she aspires to the vice-presidency or to another position," he said. "She is an extraordinary woman, and the role she will play depends only on her and Sen. Obama."
Advertisement
It's kind of funny that, short of SurveyUSA including him in their polling, no one is talking about Edwards as VP--except John Edwards.....
June 6, 2008 8:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
And that Edwards is talking about the possibility of it in a Spanish-language newspaper, given that Obama is perceived as needing to shore-up his support with Hispanic Americans.
June 6, 2008 8:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's actually a newspaper in Spain, so not many U.S. Hispanics reading it. I assumed it was a U.S. paper until I followed the link because the post says "Spanish-language." Sort of redundant to call a Spanish paper Spanish-language.
June 6, 2008 9:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sure, try to justify Edwards pandering to the Americans abroad vote ;)
It is kind of odd to refer to a newspaper in Spain as Spanish Language, as opposed to just Spanish.
I look forward to TPM Election Central posting about reports from the English Language NYT or Washington Post.
June 6, 2008 11:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Sort of redundant to call a Spanish paper Spanish-language."
Not at all. Certainly not in Barcelona, where most of the newspapers are in Catalan, nor in the Belearics or Valencia or the Basque country -- probably in Galicia, too.
June 6, 2008 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
What a childish and immature thing to say about John Edwards!
The guy is interviewed by a publication and they ask him about whether or not he would take the VP slot and you then snipe at him for talking about himself. What a jerky thing to say and how utterly adolescent of you! Okay, you don't like Edwards. Who cares?
July 7, 2008 5:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
No surprises here. I never thought he'd have the slightest interest. I'm sure he'd much rather be AG, HHS or HUD secretary, or "poverty czar."
June 6, 2008 8:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
On the contrary, I believe he VERY MUCH has an interest. What's the saying: methinks he protest too much.
June 6, 2008 8:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have seen inter views on TV where he said the same thing and if he is lying he deserves an Oscar. He looks like he is almost discusted by the idea of being the VP candidate again. I think he would very much like to be AG though.
June 6, 2008 10:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama can do much better than Edwards for VP. Much better.
June 6, 2008 9:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yep. He's got name recognition so he polls decently well right now. That's about it, though.
June 6, 2008 9:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, not like he had an excellent progressive platform or nothing. I mean seriously are our attention spans that short. Edwards was a great candidate. Why all the ragging on him here?
June 6, 2008 11:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not according to the polls. The survey results I've seen indicate that when matched up with Edwards, Obama scores better with voters than with anyone else.
July 7, 2008 5:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or did he take himself off of the list so he wasn't a 2 time loser when the 2012 primary season kicks off?
June 6, 2008 9:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Good.
June 6, 2008 9:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
You stole my thunder. I agree good. He can go back to trying pi cases. Adious.
June 6, 2008 10:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yawn...whatever...he became irrelevant by waiting so long to endorse. That and totally tanking as a VP candidate in 2004.
June 6, 2008 9:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Edwards' endorsement right after Clinton's win in the KY primary was perfectly timed, and helped Obama maintain the spotlight at a crucial moment. It also led to the endorsement of the UMWA.
I'm hoping that John has his sights on another important spot in the Obama administration, such as AG, or even a spot on the SC (he might not be temperamentally suited to the SC, but I still fantasize of all he could do to turn the Court away from it's overly pro-business approach of recent years).
June 6, 2008 10:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
Edwards endorsed after West Virginia but before Kentucky.
June 6, 2008 11:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Too bad. I think Edwards would make a strong ticket. He didn't mix well with Kerry, b ut he's more similar to Obama, and reminds me of the kind of ticket that Clinton-Gore had. ie. rather than trying to "balance" with an old general or someone, strengthen the youthful-reformer brand.
June 6, 2008 10:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree totally. I think many here forget that Edwards had the most progressive platform of the three candidates. It would've been a completely different race if he wouldn't have dropped out when he did. Indeed, Obama might not even be the nominee if he hadn't dropped out when he did.
June 6, 2008 10:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
If Edwards is not VP this time and Warner or someone formidable gets it, It would be difficult for Edwards to get the nomination in 2016.
VP is Edwards best path to the Presidency!!!
June 6, 2008 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree and think that would be awesome.
June 6, 2008 11:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
I actually think it is a worthwhile ticket--probably one of the strongest tickets actually. The compliment each other in ways that none of the other
June 6, 2008 2:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, he isn't irrelevant to an awful lot of supporters and -- give the guy a break -- it's 99% certain that he was *asked* the question in an interview and had to say something. Since he didn't give the standard, code response that means "I'm available" I think he really means it. NOT that he wouldn't be very interested in some ohther, more focused on poverty, position.
June 6, 2008 10:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
I love Edwards and would not mind seeing the two of them on the trail at all. Edwards is a safe bet going into the GE. Who else can offer that? Could Obama do better? Possibly. But I don't think he could do much better. And Edwards would do much to bring in Hillary supporters I think.
If he doesn't choose Edwards he needs someone like him. New politics. In many respects Edwards is more new politics than Obama (Can you tell Edwards was my first pick for President this year?)
I'm starting to think Feingold could actually be a possibility. He'd bring in Jewish voters, would practically guarantee a win in Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, possibly Michigan, Ohio, and Indiana. He's a senator, but WHAT a senator. This and he would be a huge news story.
Obama seems to be indirectly attacking McCain through news coverage and adding Feingold would be a sure fire way to do so. We'd have McCain vs. Feingold and could get news stories of how McCain isn't such a maverick anymore.
Otherwise, the Virginia boys look good as does Gov. Henry of OK. If Sam Nunn is the VP, I will have serious doubts about the Obama presidency. Sam Nunn is a horrible choice, we do not need a Dixiecrat. New politics? Forgedaboudit for Nunn.
June 6, 2008 10:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Good post. I agree about Nunn and the Virginia boys..and would like to see Edwards on the trail with Obama. I think his kids and the Obama kids make such a wonderful statement and the crowds really like Edwards and Obama.
Feingold...is a whole other ball of wax. Not vibeing on being on the ticket at all. Lieberman turned out to be what many suspected a pro-Israel hawk and we jsut do not need any more of that mentality at the top layers in DC. The neocons have done enough to last for 2 decades. Even though Feingold was pushing to bring the troops homes, unlike Lieberman..I just do not think he would add much to the ticket.
June 6, 2008 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
No offense, but please, please do not compare Feingold and Leiberman. It's not fair to Feingold and Jews everywhere. :)
June 6, 2008 10:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
Feingold in not "loyal" to Israel, certainly not anymore than Obama or Clinton.
Statement of U.S. Senator Russ Feingold
On the Escalating Situation in the Middle East
July 25, 2006
"I support Israel’s right to defend itself against Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations. As ground operations are conducted in Lebanon, Israel should use as much restraint as possible and do all it can to protect the lives of innocent civilians. The escalating situation is all the more reason for the U.S. to become more engaged by appointing a high level special envoy to the region - someone like Colin Powell or James Baker - who can engage in aggressive diplomatic efforts to find a solution to this conflict."
I cannot emphasise these words enough,
“Israel should use as much restraint as possible and do all it can to protect the lives of innocent civilians.”
June 6, 2008 10:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, Feingold is a gem, and I think he would work great with Obama, but he is probably too liberal--too easy a target--for vp, and we need him the senate.
There are plenty of good congresspeople to choose from, though, and if he's gonna go for an uber-liberal, my congressman, Lloyd Doggett, would be an excellent choice.
June 6, 2008 1:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gov. Doyle of WI is a Dem and could appoint....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_Lawton
to replace Feingold. She'd be awesome in the Senate!
Also, I'd check the Lieberman thread from today for more good reasons he should be picked. Too liberal is a pretty weak argument IMHO. His gains outweigh his negatives.
June 6, 2008 1:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is no secret that I would prefer an Edwards/Obama ticket . . . But . . . Well you all know.
Actually the more I think about it, the more I believe than Obama should avoid choosing a Senator. Tenure in the Senate shifts ones mindset towards being less proactive and more wordy.
Obama needs a gunslinger . . . a doer . . . preferably N O T military. Obama's Vice President needs to be a think also.
June 6, 2008 10:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
I believe Warner from VA is an excellent choice. He has all the creds plus he has been vetted by Biedelberg group as well. Edwards and Hill were vetted to but not Obama.
June 6, 2008 10:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree on the Senator charge (Feingold is my exception- he doesn't play politics as usual and his voting record is extremely consistent).
June 6, 2008 10:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
The more I think about it the more a Feingold pick makes a lot of sense. He's on the record voting against the war, voted against the patriot act, a proven reformer against lobbying and entrenched interests, tried to get a censure of bush, strong supporter of fiscal responsibility, and on the record supporting universal health care. He's shown the capacity for independent thought going against his party leadership when he thought he was right on big issues like the war. That's a really good fit with Obama's platform and stated change mantra. The only issues I see are concern about how much of an attack dog he can be against mccain since he worked so closely with him (although that also shows his bipartisan bonafides) and whether he helps bring any states that Obama doesn't already seem strong in.
any one know how good of campaigner he is? picking him would also make it truly a campaign of ideas and an end to the clintonian center politics since it would be a VERY liberal ticket.
June 6, 2008 12:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent campaigner. You should YouTube his old campaign videos from the 90's. Excellent grass roots effort on his part. He said "no" to negative ads then, a model for what Obama built upon.
June 6, 2008 1:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
For liberals, Edwards is a great idea, but for the rest of country, it doesn't seem like he'd add much to the ticket. Someone yesterday asked about Dean as VP and I thought that would be a great idea, until people brought up the same point.
IMHO, Edwards doesn't have the chops to stand up to the Republican onslaught - (there are only so many times you can bring up 'son of a mill-worker' without lulling everyone in the audience to sleep) - because, let's get real here, they're going to get real ugly.
June 6, 2008 10:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Even though I was an Edwards delegate in my caucus, he would not be my top choice for VP. I'd much rather see him in the Obama cabinet as AG. As for Mark Warner, he's a near certain Senate pickup for the Dems -- we're going to need that seat to move a progressive agenda. The same goes for Jim Webb.
I'm very impressed with Governor Sebelius, but similarly to Warner in Virginia, the question is whether there is a strong Democrat who could take over for her in Kansas to continue the bluing of Kansas. Bill Richardson has had too many problems with women, reminiscent of another Bill who's not going back to the White House.
So where does that leave us? Wesley Clark would be a strong choice helping to reassure voters who are concerned about Obama's lack of military experience. (Not that that was a problem for the current administration...) Another interesting option would be Republican Senator Chuck Hagel. A fusion ticket like that would just kill the Republicans. Finally, Governor Janet Napolitano could be a popular choice with westerners, helping to cement support from the Rockies to the Pacific.
June 6, 2008 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Gov. Bob Henry has a Democratic female Lt. Gov. He like Sebelius and Kaine is a very quality/qualified governor. I'd check him out. One that's overlooked. With Feingold, Gov. Doyle could appoint another Democrat (say WI's very awesome Democratic Attorney General) to take his seat. Also, if Obama took Webb couldn't Gov. Kaine appoint another Dem for his seat?
June 6, 2008 11:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oops, I meant Wisco's Lt. Gov. Barbara Lawton, not the AG. Here she is, she'd be a great senator!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_Lawton
June 6, 2008 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sincere - my Ass
John Edwards could easily retire and have a nice easy life, Just as easily he could become a corporate shill and rake in more money.
John Edwards has chosen a much harder path,, for the poor and Middle Class. Has to so with Ideals and a sense of fainess and Justice for ALL.
John Edwards,
helped set up an ACORN- administered "Louisiana Home Rescue Fund"
And
One Corps - helped with Katrina victims
Why don't you throw in $400 haircut while you are at it.
June 6, 2008 11:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oops - I commented in the wrong window that I left open - sorry
was for Present -
Edwards Secured Private Commitment From Obama That He'd Go On Poverty Tour As Nominee
June 6, 2008 11:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Josephcast, you make a good point about Gov. Kaine being able to appoint a Dem to replace Webb. My concern is more long term -- is there another Virginia Democrat who hold the seat as securely as Jim Webb?
Although Feingold is absolutely my favorite senator, I think he would be seen as far to liberal (which is why I like him) and would peel off much of the middle-of-the-road support that is now trending to Obama.
June 6, 2008 11:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
He's a populist, more than a liberal, unfortunately people like to associate the two as the same thing.
I realize the GOP would smear him for his liberal ratings, but I think it's something Obama has, and will be able to counter.
Feingold is very popular in the midwest and we need sway with Jewish voter. The net gains he offers outweigh his negatives IMHO.
June 6, 2008 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
He'd leave Lieberman looking like the douchebag he is too. Lieberman's gonna be a problem, Feingold as VP as the best way to counter his smarmy ass.
June 6, 2008 12:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd like a Obama/Edwards ticket. But I really trust the candidate, so I'm not too worried about who he ultimately selects.
However, to say Edwards has taken himself off the table is silly. This is what Hillary should have said if she was serious about wanting to be considered. It puts no pressure on the candidate and if Edwards is ultimately called on, it makes it look like a sacrifice instead of having won a suck-up contest.
June 6, 2008 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Second that.
June 6, 2008 12:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Regardless of what some of those who (inexplicably in my opinion)seem to despise something about John Edwards, all the polls indicate he is far and away the strongest choice for VP that Obama could make. He is well know and well liked by the American public. The numbers seem to indicate that with an Obama/Edwards ticket, states that are considered close calls become comfortably Democratic and for states where Obama is slightly ahead, they become blowouts for him if paired with Edwards.
Having made this point, I would think it extraordinarily unlikely Edwards would be asked or agree to become the VP nominee again. There's no precedent I'm aware of (certainly not in modern times) and it just isn't done. It's probably one of the longest possible shots out there in terms of who might become the VP nominee.
June 6, 2008 12:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Except he retracted this on Abc's This week. This was not a shermanesque statement.
July 7, 2008 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink