Why doesn't Edwards endorse? nt

[patrice]

[Bensthename]

1. He is too political to do something like that.

He is too worried about his carrier.

[ps1074]

3. Ummm... what career?

:eyes:

[Moloch]

33. LOL That's exactly what I was going to say...

the man hasn't held a job since 2004.

[patrice]

4. uhh . . . . It's called politics.

:eyes:

[onehandle]

15. Nice try. He wants to stop poverty.

Keep your slander for the the other two who will not end this.

[CK_John]

2. He may be getting ready to un-suspend his campaign. n/t

[kid a]

27. for what...is voter registration down?... is there lack of interest? did he find 1600 delegates?

[merh]

5. Hillary's health care program is almost identical to his.

To not endorse hillary is to turn his back on his own plan. Health care is where his positions differed from obama's.

But, he has called her the neo-con and doesn't like her corporate favoritism and/or her neo-con connections and support for bush. He has said what he thinks of her, part of the washington insiders.

He really can't endorse her, but he can't not endorse her.

He will wait and get an appointment in obama's administration.

[cali]

31. Do you know who Jacob Hacker is?

[merh]

38. I know who he is, why do you ask?

n/t

[2rth2pwr]

6. He is waiting until there is a clear winner.

[alarimer]

7. Because they both suck. n/t.

[Jim Sagle]

8. He can't tell them apart?

[patrice]

19. I guess I was thinking that if he really was "out of it" he'd go ahead and endorse. nt

[onehandle]

9. He's being courted by both of them and they are incredibly similar. nt

[Tribetime]

10. just a thought ,is it possible that anyone on the short list for VP

won't endorse at all so as to not turn off anymore HRC supporters if picked. I know Edwards said he wouldn't accept, but could you take that with a grain of salt? And would it make sense to put him on the ticket to get the white male vote.

[kenny blankenship]

11. Probably thinks it will have more impact after PA

While the race is focused on PA instead of NC, his endorsement would get lost in the sauce.

[newmajority]

12. Edwards will only endorse if it comes down to North Carolina

And at that point, he would likely endorse Obama. He won't endorse Hillary, because that would contradict every word of his own campaign.

You don't base a campaign on discussion of corporate corruption and the "Two Americas", and then turn around and endorse the DLC candidate who is the very embodiment of those things.

That and the fact that John has probably considered (as many of us have) the reality that his best opportunity to go after the corporate pigs, could very well be as Attorney General. But obviously not in a corporatist administration, like BushClinton Volume V would be.

[onehandle]

17. He may if it comes down to NC, but I'm not certain which it would be.

Corporation rights-wise, Clinton and Obama are identical.

Only Edwards was talking strongly about curtailing corporate crime.

[Sinistrous]

13. Perhaps he is angling for the VP nod from whomever gets the nom?

[newmajority]

29. John has said that he's not even remotely interested in the VP slot.

Granted, he also said that in 2004, but only when he was running for President himself. As I said before, if Edwards wants to be in the next administration, he's looking at Attorney General, because that would give him the machine of federal law enforcement to go after these corporate pigs.

[balantz]

14. Which one would be worthy of his endorsement?

Why should he join in on their "shoot yourself in the foot game"?

Neither of them measure up when it comes to the real issues, like addressing the growing problem of poverty, truly disengaging from the M.E., and taking our government back from the corporate-elite.

He's smart enough to know when and for how long to stay out of the game.

Besides, only the endorsement of the corporations' M$M really matter to the voters. The corporate M$M mouthpieces are the Kings of endorsement because voters still listen to their crap.

[Zachstar]

16. Because he wants to remain neutral for now.

[anonymous171]

18. Because both candidates have something to offer, but aren't the whole package.

[patrice]

22. This is true, but I still don't want them on the same ticket.

Unless it's Obama / Clinton.

[Occam Bandage]

20. Because while Edwards has always talked a great game, he's never actually stuck his neck out

for anything at any point, ever. Oh, sure, he sued some corporations--doing the "right thing," perhaps, but the only "risk" he was taking there was the tax bill on his multimillion dollar slices of the settlements. He's never taken a political gamble on doing the right thing. When push has come to shove in his career, he's always taken a seat and done the safest thing.

That's why he was for MFN status for China, despite knowing it was against his morals. That's why he was for the Iraq war, despite knowing he was selling out to Bush. That's why he stayed pro-Iraq-war through the '04 campaign, despite knowing that it was a bad idea. That's why he apologized for his entire fucking Senate career while preparing for his '08 run, despite the fact that he was smart enough to know exactly what he was doing when he cast those votes.

And that is why he has not gambled on an endorsement this year. If he endorses Clinton and Obama wins the Presidency, he's fucked himself out of a job in the Obama administration. If he endorses Obama and Obama goes on to lose the White House, then he's burned his bridges to Clintonland--and the Clintons seem likely to remain more important figures in the party than Obama if Obama is not President at this point next year.

John Edwards has fantastic views on health care, the economy, and trade. At the same time, John Edwards is a political coward of the highest order. That is why I did not support him in this race, despite agreeing with his views: I didn't think he would actually attempt to enact anything he said during the Democratic primary (or even hold on to most of those views through the general election, since they had only passing resemblance to his views in the '04 general election).

The fact that he hasn't endorsed is not some great mystery. A stirring campaign followed by silent inaction is classic Edwards.

[Radical Activist]

26. Exactly.

Very much the same reasons I don't support Hillary either.

[TheDoorbellRang]

30. Your read on him pretty much matches mine

I really liked Elizabeth Edwards. John? Not at all.

[Occam Bandage]

32. Same. I can't think of a bad word to say about Elizabeth either.

[Exilednight]

21. He really holds no weight. Endoresments are a joke. n/t

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

23. Both candidates willl be looking for a southerner to balance the ticket.

He's probably just keeping his options open.

[Radical Activist]

24. He didn't get the offer he was looking for.

Or he's hedging his bets to join the side that wins.

[Milo_Bloom]

25. No one has offered him enough yet?

Of he is too afraid of the consequences if he gets it wrong.

The guy is a politician to his core.

[Median Democrat]

28. Edwards v. Hillary in 2012

They both need Obama to lose in the general election to McCain. Edwards will be three time re-tread, but with Obama losing to McCain and a possible ongoing war with Iran, Edwards becomes the "change candidate," particularly if Hillary votes to authorize another war in the interim.

[Blue_In_AK]

34. Maybe he likes them both -- or doesn't. n/t

[Blue-Jay]

35. It's called "hedging one's bets".

[The Traveler]

36. It is called staying away from the shit storm

Edwards has clear concerns about both candidates regarding their willingness (Clinton) or wherewithal(Obama) to achieve the house cleaning that must be performed before a healthy agenda for the American people can be advanced. Given his viewpoint on things little can be gained by endorsing one over the other at this point, but damage can be inflicted. An Edwards endorsement would do nothing to diminish the flow of vitriol within the Democratic Party, and might actually throw gas on the fire.

Conversely, he clearly would not have any hesitation in throwing support to whoever faces McCain in the general.

[balantz]

37. You said it well n/t