With a Last Call to Action, John Edwards Will Exit the Race

posted by John Nichols on 01/30/2008 @ 10:34am

Email
Print
Share
- Buzzflash
- del.icio.us
- Digg
- Facebook
- Mixx it!
- Reddit
What is this?
Take Action
Comments (38)

Subscribe Now

John Edwards went back on Wednesday to New Orleans, the city where a year ago he launched a populist campaign to make poverty an issue in American politics.

He did not arrive in triumph, but he certainly did not look or sound like a defeated candidate.

The news of the day -- always blunt, and as such imprecise -- was that Edwards ended his formal run for the Democratic presidential nomination where it began -- in the impoverished city that was so battered both by Hurricane Katrina and the official neglect that came before and after that mighty storm.

And it was true that Edwards had suspended his candidacy.

But his campaign was far from finished, as the former senator from North Carolina made clear.

"Do not turn away from these great struggles before us. Do not give up on the causes that we have fought for," he told supporters who were still waving "John Edwards for President" posters. "Do not walk away from what's possible, because it's time for all of us, all of us together, to make the two Americas one."

Promising to continue pressing the Democratic party to embrace economic justice themes, he told cheering supporters that, "We must do better if we want to live up to the promise of this country we love so much."

The suddenly former candidate admitted that he was torn about his decision, suggesting that when backers in Minnesota had told him to keep fighting, he "almost reconsidered."

The fact is that Edwards did not want to abandon the presidential race. He kept up an intense schedule of events in "Super Tuesday" states even after he secured credible but disappointing third-place finish in his native state of South Carolina's Saturday primary.

But money was short -- too short for the media buys necessary to compete in the television "air wars" that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are preparing to reach voters in the score of states that will vote February 5. Media attention was scant, and usually focused on the question of why he was staying in the race. And even sympathetic Democrats were starting to abandon Edwards -- who is not expected to make an endorsement today but who never made much secret about his differences with the Clinton camp -- for a surging Obama campaign.

Yet, Edwards pressed on in the days after Obama's big win in South Carolina.

As late as Tuesday night, when Edwards won 14 percent of the vote and carried ten counties in Florida's Democratic "beauty contest" primary, the former North Carolina senator was still on the trail. More than 1,000 union members and activists rallied for his populist call to action at a Carpenters union hall in St. Paul.

Edwards recalled the legacy of his late colleague in the Senate, Paul Wellstone. The Minnesota crowd cheered the memory of one Democrat who made fighting poverty central to his politics and the hope that another Democrat might yet carry the fight forward.

But Edwards recognized it was no longer possible to do that as a third-wheel presidential candidate.

So instead of flying from St. Paul to Fargo for a scheduled event anticipating the February 5 North Dakota caucuses, Edwards and his team turned their plane toward New Orleans.

In the city where he began running, Edwards announced that, "It is time for me to step aside so that history can blaze its path."

That was a reference to the virtual certainty that, with his exit, Democrats will now nominate the party's first woman or first African-American candidate for president. But both Clinton and Obama made it clear that John Edwards, or at the very least the issues he raised, will be a part of that history.

"At a time when our politics is too focused on who's up and who's down, he made a nation focus again on who matters -- the New Orleans child without a home, the West Virginia miner without a job, the families who live in that other America that is not seen or heard or talked about by our leaders in Washington," declared Obama on Wednesday.

Clinton said, "John Edwards ended his campaign today in the same way he started it -- by standing with the people who are too often left behind and nearly always left out of our national debate."

But after that formality, the speech played out as what it had been billed: an anti-poverty address. Some of the lines were repeats from the stump speech. But, with their champion leaving the field of battle, there was a new poignancy to Edwards promise to the poor, the homeless, the unemployed and those without health care that "we will not forget you... we will not allow you to be forgotten."

As he spoke, it became clear that, even if the Edwards candidacy is done, the Edwards campaign will continue. By virtue of the warmth toward him and his message that was so in evidence Wednesday, the 2004 Democratic vice presidential candidate remains in a position to influence his party and his country to recognize and address the painful reality that there are "two Americas -- one rich and one poor."

It is, says Edwards, "the mission of my life."

Comments (38)

Although I was 80% sure before, that pretty much seals it for me. Obama has my vote come the 5th.

METT, in light of this development, I will try to hold back a little. :) BUT, if Obama gets the prize, I am curious to see how you feel in a few years given the expectations you have now.

Posted by Hman23 at 01/30/2008 @ 10:43am
"even after a credible but disappointing third-place finish in his native state of South Carolina's Saturday primary."

How is THIRD PLACE "credible" in the state he was born in (one removed from his state of residence and Senate election)?

He won it in 2004, facing the Kerry and Dean campaigns (less "historic" but still the "Establishment Candidate" versus the "Change Candidate").

"outspent"?...(again) Huckabee won Iowa and was outspent 5:1 (or worse) by Romney.

"Media focus on HRC and BO"?....South Carolinians so fickle they reject the guy who they supported in 2004? They "made it up to" McCain...why not Edwards?

As noted on the other thread, I have a slightly different theory...Edwards, the NEW Edwards ("populist") just wasn't popular, or maybe even believed by a majority of Democratic voters?

Posted by Mask at 01/30/2008 @ 10:48am
Posted by MASK 01/30/2008 @ 10:48am

Apart from questioning whether his shift was genuine or calculated, I think Edwards problem was that he was perceived as a one-trick pony. I am not saying any of it is accurate (I think he was genuine), but from a lot of poeple I have spoken to about this primary, that was the issue. In addition, many were not convinced he could win the nomination and thus thought it more important to decide between Obama and Clinton.

As far as genuine, we'll see where Edwards goes from here. I believe his future path will show many people that he believed what he campagined on.

Posted by Hman23 at 01/30/2008 @ 10:55am
Thank you, John Edwards, for the courage, grace & honesty you brought to this campaign. Obama hit all the right notes in his message to you today.

You will make a great AG &/or USSC justice.

Now, Jimmy Carter, time to strut your stuff & back Obama, while your endorsement can have its greatest impact.

Posted by sloper at 01/30/2008 @ 11:54am
This is ridiculous! Most of the states haven't voted and we are down to two candidates in both parties.

Posted by P. J. Casey at 01/30/2008 @ 12:03pm
Posted by P. J. CASEY 01/30/2008 @ 12:03pm

Agree 100%.

Posted by Hman23 at 01/30/2008 @ 12:22pm
This is a very sad day. Now ALL my favorite candidates are gone, and we are left with two eager beavers who do not have my interest. I wouldn't be surprised if I voted for McCain on Election Day in November. This race for money to run effective campaigns is just ridiculous. Our democracy is suffering for it.

Well, if Edwards does HALF the good Gore has done, just by being out there kicking ass and taking names, it may be okay. And that's now the best I can hope for.

Posted by barnesgene at 01/30/2008 @ 12:24pm
This is ridiculous! Most of the states haven't voted and we are down to two candidates in both parties.

Posted by P. J. CASEY 01/30/2008 @ 12:03pm

Voting, what's that?

Posted by K-STREET KREW 01/30/2008 @ 12:03pm

Posted by frosty zoom at 01/30/2008 @ 12:28pm
" I wouldn't be surprised if I voted for McCain on Election Day in November."

love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal

Posted by emile duBois at 01/30/2008 @ 12:32pm
I think Edwards "continued" work against poverty will go a long way toward alleviating doubts some progressives, including myslef and Feingold, had about his "recent" conversion to the progressive cause.

Posted by Metteyya at 01/30/2008 @ 12:48pm
Since there is no longer any real Democrats running for the Democratic nomination, I will stay home on primary day next week. I will also not be voting for any Democrats in November. No money, no work, no vote. Seriously.

If Democrats cannot tell the difference between a Kucinich or an Edwards and the Republican-Lite of Obama and Billary, then I'm not a Democrat, circa 2008. I cannot hold my nose and vote for either of these Republicans. Thanks celebutard voters, you can go back to watching Oprah and E! now. You just handed America back to the Republicans for 4 more years.

Posted by NoPCZone at 01/30/2008 @ 1:01pm
Posted by METTEYYA 01/30/2008 @ 12:48pm

And to think that all it took for YOUR conversion was for Edwards to drop out of the race! Imagine that!

I appreciate your effort to play nice with the Edwards folk, but you said quite a bit during the past several months.

Posted by Hman23 at 01/30/2008 @ 1:03pm
But, I'll get over it.

Posted by Hman23 at 01/30/2008 @ 1:04pm
After 6 years of war and 7 years of Bush, the country is stuck with McCain and H Clinton for presidential nominees?

Could there be a stupider, more morally callous electorate on the face of the globe?

Posted by Adscititious at 01/30/2008 @ 2:12pm
I am going to assert a litmus test. Endorse Clinton and you are a DINO. So we will probably see in the next few weeks whether Mett was right or whether the Edwards people here were right. If he endorses Clinton I see no way around him being a fake. If he endorses Obama (which I think likely because a deal with Obama is the best explanation of why he dropped out now).

On another note I hope to God that Nichols and I am wrong about where Edwards is pulling votes from.

Posted by dentedpat at 01/30/2008 @ 2:14pm
After 6 years of war and 7 years of Bush, the country is stuck with McCain and H Clinton for presidential nominees?

not yet they're not.

Posted by emile duBois at 01/30/2008 @ 2:19pm
Posted by EMILE DUBOIS 01/30/2008 @ 2:19pm

Well, HC apparently has sizable leads in California, New York, and New Jersey, and exit polls indicate an unwillingness of Latinos and white women to vote for Obama.

It's a pretty pathetic day when I have to hope that Romney will spend his millions to swift-boat McCain.

Posted by Adscititious at 01/30/2008 @ 2:35pm
Posted by ADSCITITIOUS 01/30/2008 @ 2:35pm | ignore this person

"it's not over until it's over". Lawrence Peter Berra

Posted by emile duBois at 01/30/2008 @ 2:38pm
Could there be a stupider, more morally callous electorate on the face of the globe?

Posted by ADSCITITIOUS 01/30/2008 @ 2:12pm

a lot of that is caused by an insane electoral process.

Posted by frosty zoom at 01/30/2008 @ 2:38pm
Posted by ADSCITITIOUS 01/30/2008 @ 2:35pm

Yeah but Hillary has had a sizable lead in every state. They polls are not reliable in any way.

Posted by Cccomfo1 at 01/30/2008 @ 2:42pm
Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 01/30/2008

Yes, but does it take any great genius to see that the Clintons are detestable, that McCain is a reactionary war-monger and media suck-up, that Obama is probably the best of a very dismal lot? Doesn't the inability to see these things suggest ignorance or dim-wittedness?

Posted by Adscititious at 01/30/2008 @ 2:47pm
Doesn't the inability to see these things suggest ignorance or dim-wittedness?

Posted by ADSCITITIOUS 01/30/2008 @ 2:47pm

maybe they're just waiting to see who britney endorses.

Posted by frosty zoom at 01/30/2008 @ 2:50pm
a lot of that is caused by an insane electoral process.

Agreed. What is needed is 1) a more generous public financing system and 2) a different arrangment for the primaries. I can't remember where I read it (American Prospect? The Nation?) but the idea is to scatter the primaries from March to June with the smallest quartile of states in March and build up to the big ones in June. This way less well-known candidates can campaign in smaller markets and have a chance to build momentum.

Posted by brunowe at 01/30/2008 @ 2:51pm
The "insane electoral process" hasn't prevented me and a few others from seeing things lucidly. So why make excuses for the masses?

Posted by Adscititious at 01/30/2008 @ 2:54pm
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/action/ignore.mhtml?who=brunowe

this is all moot at this time.

Posted by emile duBois at 01/30/2008 @ 2:55pm
I believe his future path will show many people that he believed what he campagined on.----Posted by HMAN23 01/30/2008 @ 10:55am

If so, as I said, happy to apologize to him and his supporters.

Posted by Mask at 01/30/2008 @ 3:09pm
"Could there be a stupider, more morally callous electorate on the face of the globe?" Posted by ADSCITITIOUS 01/30/2008 @ 2:12pm

Perhaps. But none nearly as large & as well armed, neither at home nor abroad.

Posted by sloper at 01/30/2008 @ 3:29pm
I'm not sure exactly why, but I was never completely confident that Edwards was legit, although I wanted to be. I agree with another post that he seemed to be a one issue candidate. As much as I might believe in his anti-corporation message, many of us have jobs because of them. Aside from taking care of those in need, this was the only message he ever showed any passion about. I just don't think it was enough. Now we shall see what he is really all about.

Posted by sbenasso at 01/30/2008 @ 3:30pm
If Edwards were an honest man, he'd have that news conference in front of that PALACE he's building for himself while all those poor Katrina victims suffered! An honest man would lead by example! He'd open his Palace to any and all who need shelter! He'd give the majority of his fortune ( stolen from hospitals and insurers with junk science and a little tug at the heart strings )to charities for the poor . But like most liberals ( it's a proven fact that conservatives are FAR more charitable and generous with their money than the supposed " bleeding heart liberals ". See: 10 year study by a self--described LIBERAL professor at Clemson who didn't like the results of his own study) John Edwards only believes in helping the poor with "other peoples money" and actually, like most elitist liberals, he doesn't give a shit about the poor. They are just a mechanism to enrich himself and now are being used as a mechanism to get him elected. Oh wait... he just dropped out. By the way, as a conservative (not Republican ) i'd like to point out that i'll vote for any dem. nominee if that sell-out McCain gets the nomination. He's a liberal through and through who has betrayed all Americans with his stance on ILLEGAL immigration.

Posted by barry25 at 01/30/2008 @ 4:41pm
Isn't it funny that the Dem's voted to put money BACK in the pockets of the American people in order to jumpstart a slowing economy! Conservatives have been trying to get these idiots to understand that more tax cuts/more money in the pockets of the American people HELPS the economy and INCREASES federal tax revenues ( if you don't believe this undeniable fact, just look at the fed tax revenues since Bush implemented the tax cuts in 03' ). This is shocking. For the first time the Democrats are admitting that tax cuts work, without having to admit it ( thanks to the ultra-liberal MSM .

Posted by barry25 at 01/30/2008 @ 4:46pm
He's a liberal through and through who has betrayed all Americans with his stance on ILLEGAL immigration.

Posted by BARRY25 01/30/2008 @ 4:41pm

Keep this attitude up, please. It will just about guarantee Democratic electoral success for the next generation.

Posted by Hman23 at 01/30/2008 @ 4:55pm
HMAN, I will definitely keep up this attitude. As absolutely despicable, seditious and evil as i believe most members of the democratic party are, I will vote against those Republicans who have decided to betray the American people. Unlike most liberals, I hold my own to account, and i'd rather give dem's the opportunity to show the American people, once again, how absolutely inept they are at running ANYTHING. Hopefully, in the future, there will be a conservative revolution and if not, i just sit back and watch this country continue to move toward chaos caused by the divisive, racist, and socialist policies of the illiberal left, all the while saying " I told you so, MORONS"!!

Posted by barry25 at 01/30/2008 @ 5:09pm
Barfy25, you will not live long enough to see a conservative revolution. this was IT. Bush is as far as the conservatives will get, their high water mark.

Posted by emile duBois at 01/30/2008 @ 7:03pm
The idea that being 'anti-corporate' in the sense that Edwards is means that you don't think there should be corporations and so think everyone working for one should be unemployed is silly.

Wanting to restrict their influence in Washington and prevent them from using the threat of going overseas to bully workers here does not hurt anyone with a job at a corporation in this country (except for the executives). No one is suggesting that we liquidate Wal-Mart and Citigroup. People are suggesting that we re-regulate them, publicly finance elections, take away the tax breaks their executives enjoy and renegotiate trade pacts so that corporations don't get to go wherever the labor is cheapest and the government weakest. So you work for a big corporation. Does that really make you hesistant about supporting the above positions?

Posted by dentedpat at 01/30/2008 @ 7:48pm
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/action/ignore.mhtml?who=dentedpat

this needed to said for some time. with the troglodytes here, if you express any sympathy for the working man, they accuse you of wanting to bring about what Mao did in China. this is a straw man they constantly are erecting.

capitalism, in order to survive, must constantly find cheaper commodities and cheaper labor. somebody said that, oh about 150 years ago. it's still true.

Posted by emile duBois at 01/30/2008 @ 8:29pm
Hopefully, in the future, there will be a conservative revolution and if not, i just sit back and watch this country continue to move toward chaos caused by the divisive, racist, and socialist policies of the illiberal left, all the while saying " I told you so, MORONS"!!

Posted by BARRY25 01/30/2008 @ 5:09pm

Oh Prunella!

Posted by nyknicks12 at 01/30/2008 @ 9:00pm
I wouldn't be surprised if I voted for McCain on Election Day in November.

Posted by BARNESGENE 01/30/2008

----------------

Do you want to vote in a another neo-con who said we might be in Iraq for another 100 years?

He is much worse than the neoliberal Hillary and the corporate friendly Obama.

You'll be making a HUGE mistake by voting for this Reagan acolyte.

Posted by proevo24 at 01/31/2008 @ 06:11am
from our credit where credit is due dept.:

all props to Maasch, who clocked Edwards' political future perfectly.

Posted by emile duBois at 01/31/2008 @ 09:26am