Edwards is out

[KingYaba]

Just saw it on Drudge...
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8UG8ANG0&show_article=1

>>DENVER (AP) - Democrat John Edwards is exiting the presidential race Wednesday, ending a scrappy underdog bid in which he steered his rivals toward progressive ideals while grappling with family hardship that roused voters' sympathies but never diverted his campaign, The Associated Press has learned.

I think most of us saw this coming.

[mrkramer]

I was expecting at this point he would still be in at least through Feb. 5.

[themadchemist]

I was expecting at this point he would still be in at least through Feb. 5.

Probably can't afford it. Glad he's come to his senses.

[Queso]

Strange he's gone before Super Tuesday. What happens to the delegates that pledged to support him now? Do they get to vote for someone else, or are their votes just discounted?

[sushi]

Not surprised that he dropped out of the race.

[clevin]

Strange he's gone before Super Tuesday. What happens to the delegates that pledged to support him now? Do they get to vote for someone else, or are their votes just discounted?

im wondering it too. http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/1/27/12642/1282
If Edwards were to drop out entirely, those delegates would then also be free to vote for whoever they wanted.

[Lyle]

Word is that Giuliani is also set to drop out and endorse McCain.

[atszyman]

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/1/27/12642/1282

I wonder if he decides to endorse someone, will his delegates take that into consideration?

This could be a huge boost for Obama and push the delegate count within 30 if you're counting the Super Delegates (who are free to change their minds at any time). Or, it could push Hillary out in front and influence next week...

[clevin]

I wonder if he decides to endorse someone, will his delegates take that into consideration?

This could be a huge boost for Obama and push the delegate count within 30 if you're counting the Super Delegates (who are free to change their minds at any time). Or, it could push Hillary out in front and influence next week...

I do think His endorsement right now will have huge influence. But I don't see him doing it.

[QCassidy352]

This is why I hate the US primary system. So now, voters in every state except for a couple don't get to vote for Giuliani, Edwards, Thompson, etc. For some unfathomable reason the parties think it's ok for Iowa and NH to have more say in this process than the rest of us. :rolleyes: And then they have the nerve to discount the delegates from states that move up their primaries so as to make them relevant! I shouldn't frequent this part of MR... just makes me mad. :p

[miloblithe]

I do think His endorsement right now will have huge influence. But I don't see him doing it.

Capital "H"? You mean Jesus? Well yes, if Jesus endorsed someone, it probably would have a huge influence. :)

[clevin]

Capital "H"? You mean Jesus? Well yes, if Jesus endorsed someone, it probably would have a huge influence. :)

Thanks for your contribution, Im atheist. lol

[Queso]

This is why I hate the US primary system. So now, voters in every state except for a couple don't get to vote for Giuliani, Edwards, Thompson, etc. For some unfathomable reason the parties think it's ok for Iowa and NH to have more say in this process than the rest of us. :rolleyes: And then they have the nerve to discount the delegates from states that move up their primaries so as to make them relevant!
Yeah, it does seem a bit rubbish. Maybe just have one Super Tuesday and leave it at that. That's a much better idea.

[QCassidy352]

Yeah, it does seem a bit rubbish. Maybe just have one Super Tuesday and leave it at that. That's a much better idea.

I agree. If the general election were held this way people would go ballistic, and I bet the courts would say it unconstitutionally deprived people of their right to an equally weighted vote.

[themadchemist]

I agree. If the general election were held this way people would go ballistic, and I bet the courts would say it unconstitutionally deprived people of their right to an equally weighted vote.

Yeah, but there's that pesky tenth amendment.

[v-ault]

YES YES YES YES YES YES

Not only is this great news for my ears, so I'll never have to hear his patronizing shtick anymore... but this is a major help to Obama...

YES!

Never again shall I hear the words of "Two Americas."

"There are 850 million veterans sleeping under bridges tonight..."

...and let us not forget...

"I'm the son of a MILL WORKER!!!!!"

[IJ Reilly]

Yeah, it does seem a bit rubbish. Maybe just have one Super Tuesday and leave it at that. That's a much better idea.

Not really. The system as it exists now has its problems to be sure, but it does force the candidates into retail politics, meaning actually meeting and talking with people. I think you learn a lot about candidates this way. A one-day national primary without any smaller states coming first would mean a national campaign consisting almost entirely of television advertising. If you've ever seen any of these national TV campaigns ads, I don't think you view this approach as a better idea.

[QCassidy352]

Not really. The system as it exists now has its problems to be sure, but it does force the candidates into retail politics, meaning actually meeting and talking with people.

yeah, people in a handful of states. And the rest of us can go screw ourselves for all the candidates care.

[Naimfan]

Yeah, but there's that pesky tenth amendment.

Ah, "Tis but a truism . . . "

Don't make me go there! :cool:

[Virgil-TB2]

Capital "H"? You mean Jesus? Well yes, if Jesus endorsed someone, it probably would have a huge influence. :)I just hope Edwards doesn't do what everyone has assumed he will, which is sell his support to whichever candidate wants to make him VP.

Edwards would make a very weak, bad president and when the two leading candidates are a black man and a woman you have to figure that whomever is VP has a better than 50/50 chance of being president before the four year term ends.

Assassination is a serious possibility here that should be seriously considered and whether it ends up being Obama or Hillary, the candidates should take a long hard look at the chain of succession below them.

[atszyman]

Not really. The system as it exists now has its problems to be sure, but it does force the candidates into retail politics, meaning actually meeting and talking with people. I think you learn a lot about candidates this way. A one-day national primary without any smaller states coming first would mean a national campaign consisting almost entirely of television advertising. If you've ever seen any of these national TV campaigns ads, I don't think you view this approach as a better idea.

One method would be to keep the current primary system but somehow manage to keep the results of each primary secret until the conventions...

It would force the campaigns to do what they do now, but has the benefit of keeping "frontrunners" unknown...

[MacNut]

I would just get rid of the primary system all together an have one big vote on election day with all the candidates in it.

This is turning into a 3 person race, McCain, Hillary, and Obama.

[IJ Reilly]

yeah, people in a handful of states. And the rest of us can go screw ourselves for all the candidates care.

Whatever this means...

At least the candidates have to practice some retail politics somewhere in the country. You seem to be saying that it would be better if they did this not at all. Or are you? Hard to tell.

[MacNut]

Whatever this means...

At least the candidates have to practice some retail politics somewhere in the country. You seem to be saying that it would be better if they did this not at all. Or are you? Hard to tell.The candidates only go after the big states, they don't care about the small states that don't give them votes. They pick and choose who to go after.

[PlaceofDis]

i wonder when/if Edwards will choose to endorse, his timing will be crucial i'm sure

[MacNut]

i wonder when/if Edwards will choose to endorse, his timing will be crucial i'm sureDo endorsements really matter or do people have their mind made up regardless of what they are told. Just because a Kennedy tells me who to vote for doesn't change anything in my mind.

All an endorsement is is a power play for a person to get on the good side and hope they win.

[PlaceofDis]

Do endorsements really matter or do people have their mind made up regardless of what they are told.

it matters only for those people who are undecided between the two. an endorsement can push someone away or towards a candidate, depending on the media coverage.

[MacNut]

it matters only for those people who are undecided between the two. an endorsement can push someone away or towards a candidate, depending on the media coverage.So a persons issues don't matter if the voter just does as they are told.

The whole American voting process needs to be updated. We are not in the 1800's anymore.

[Lord Blackadder]

I'm surprised that Edwards has thrown in the towel before Super Tuesday, unless he plans to endorse a candidate and affect the last group of primaries.

Assassination is a serious possibility here that should be seriously considered and whether it ends up being Obama or Hillary, the candidates should take a long hard look at the chain of succession below them.

I think that's nonsense. I think Bush Jr is a greater object of hatred than any of the current candidates, especially when you look abroad. I don't see the risk of a domestic assassin being any greater with Hillary or Obama either, and it surely must be lower abroad as our enemies wait to see what foreign policy stance the new administration takes.

The whole American voting process needs to be updated. We are not in the 1800's anymore.

Actually, I am a bit nostalgic about 19th century American politics...back then they did a lot more of what IJ Reilly has referred to as "retail" politics.

[MacNut]

It is still always a good idea to pick a good VP, who knows if a Pres could get seriously Ill.

[Lord Blackadder]

It is still always a good idea to pick a good VP, who knows if a Pres could get seriously Ill.

My ideal ticket would be a cross-party grouping of Obama for Prez and McCain for VP...but an Obama/Hillary ticket would be better than one with Edwards as VP - if it wasn't for their egos.

[PlaceofDis]

So a persons issues don't matter if the voter just does as they are told.

The whole American voting process needs to be updated. We are not in the 1800's anymore.

hey i'm not saying its right. i'm just saying thats how things are. gotta remember there are a lot of people who vote based not on politics and policies, but on how they 'feel' about a candidate.

[MacNut]

My ideal ticket would be a cross-party grouping of Obama for Prez and McCain for VP...but an Obama/Hillary ticket would be better than one with Edwards as VP - if it wasn't for their egos.If Hillary and Obama somehow bury the hatchet and run as a ticket the Republicans will be all over it. Saying these 2 were at each others throats and now they are best friends. I don't see that happening.

[stevento]

well i was dead wrong. i said he's in it to the end.
this makes me sad. now there's only two choices for the democratic ticket
Hillary Obama or Obama Hillary. repubilcans will despise either one.
he had $40,000,000 and 26 delegates. i wouldve stayed there and held it down until tuesday. he had better not endorse anybody.

[IJ Reilly]

The candidates only go after the big states, they don't care about the small states that don't give them votes. They pick and choose who to go after.

You mean, big states like Iowa, New Hampshire and North Carolina?

The primaries are already loaded with "super Tuesday" events. Here in California, the most populous state in the nation with the most delegates, we're only seeing ads, one debate, and very little of the candidates themselves.

[MacNut]

You mean, big states like Iowa, New Hampshire and North Carolina?

The primaries are already loaded with "super Tuesday" events. Here in California, the most populous state in the nation with the most delegates, we're only seeing ads, one debate, and very little of the candidates themselves.That is still more then some states will see, nothing.

[IJ Reilly]

Actually, I am a bit nostalgic about 19th century American politics...back then they did a lot more of what IJ Reilly has referred to as "retail" politics.

Why I remember back in the 1800s... ;)

[IJ Reilly]

That is still more then some states will see, nothing.

And holding the entire primary on one day helps this how?

[MacNut]

And holding the entire primary on one day helps this how?I say do away with the primary all together and have one big vote on Election Day.

[IJ Reilly]

I say do away with the primary all together and have one big vote on Election Day.

You mean, abolish the parties? It's not a bad idea, but good luck with that.

[Nugget]

I say do away with the primary all together and have one big vote on Election Day.

Sounds great to me. Structure it using instant runoff voting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting) and I'm totally on board.

The other thing I plan to implement when I'm elected king is to eliminate income tax withholdings and then move election day to April 16th. I think that having people vote the day after they have to write a check for a quarter of their annual income could really do great things for spending reform. :)

[MacNut]

You mean, abolish the parties? It's not a bad idea, but good luck with that.Ideally yes, but that won't happen. I say have one big vote on election day. Each party puts up their candidates. You don't have a convention in the summer. The top vote getter on election day wins, then you have another vote for VP 2 weeks later.

[Naimfan]

Do endorsements really matter or do people have their mind made up regardless of what they are told. Just because a Kennedy tells me who to vote for doesn't change anything in my mind.


A Kennedy endorsement means I should vote for whomever they did NOT endorse. :cool:

[stevento]

If Hillary and Obama somehow bury the hatchet and run as a ticket the Republicans will be all over it. Saying these 2 were at each others throats and now they are best friends. I don't see that happening.

or maybe all that fighting was a clever ruse between them to marginalize john edwards...?
at the latest debate they were fighting like children, unbecoming of the both of them. their attacks had nothing to do with the question asked or anything presidential. especially that fighting over race.

[killerrobot]

it matters only for those people who are undecided between the two. an endorsement can push someone away or towards a candidate, depending on the media coverage.

I don't see Edwards endorsing anyone until it becomes time to back the democratic presidential nominee.

I thought Edwards was awesome in 2004 running as VP. He was well spoken, had clearly intelligent ideas of how to run the government, the war in Iraq, etc. I hate that once you run for president though, the "intelligence" factor gets played down and you just have to try to appear as normal as possible in order to try to get some votes.

[Eric Piercey]

YES YES YES YES YES YES

Not only is this great news for my ears, so I'll never have to hear his patronizing shtick anymore... but this is a major help to Obama...

YES!

Never again shall I hear the words of "Two Americas."

"There are 850 million veterans sleeping under bridges tonight..."

...and let us not forget...

"I'm the son of a MILL WORKER!!!!!"

What exactly makes Obama's message so great? Edwards had a bead on the big problem and voiced openly that corporations and the industrial military complex have utterly squashed the will of the people. There was no way in hell he was going anywhere. "Be a good boy Jonny... we don't want anyone getting hurt. You did real good. Oh yeah by the way you'll be endorsing Hillary." What's Obama running on? Oh "change." Change of socks, underwear... change of the weather? Maybe we could have a "war on" stagnation. Hillary..oh cool 28 years of Bush/Clintons. The choices are chosen for us. Ron Paul was another good one. The best imo. But again.. no chance to be heard. Squashed.

[MacNut]

or maybe all that fighting was a clever ruse between them to marginalize john edwards...?
at the latest debate they were fighting like children, unbecoming of the both of them. their attacks had nothing to do with the question asked or anything presidential. especially that fighting over race.That would be stupid politics, why run a campaign like that.

[themadchemist]

Do endorsements really matter or do people have their mind made up regardless of what they are told. Just because a Kennedy tells me who to vote for doesn't change anything in my mind.

All an endorsement is is a power play for a person to get on the good side and hope they win.

As I said about Kennedy's endorsement, it's a matter of constructing the winning media narrative, and winning the parallel race for the most positive media images.

[MacNut]

As I said about Kennedy's endorsement, it's a matter of constructing the winning media narrative, and winning the parallel race for the most positive media images.Is Kennedy a positive anymore.

[Naimfan]

All an endorsement is is a power play for a person to get on the good side and hope they win.

That would be cynical if it weren't true.

[MacNut]

That would be cynical if it weren't true.Kennedy didn't choose who he wanted, he chose who he thinks has the best chance to win and try to get on his good side.

[themadchemist]

Is Kennedy a positive anymore.

If you look at the way that the endorsement is covered by the media, yes, it is positive. I think endorsements tend to be positive unless they come from truly, truly fringe or extremist groups. For example, a Pat Robertson endorsement is still considered positive, even though he is distasteful to a lot of Americans. It's because the media will still portray that as a positive development for whatever candidate is endorsed. Those who are still offended weren't going to vote for that party, anyway. The people who Ted Kennedy really pisses off tend not to be Democrats or even independents, so what does it matter?

[Virgil-TB2]

... I think that's nonsense. I think Bush Jr is a greater object of hatred than any of the current candidates, especially when you look abroad. I don't see the risk of a domestic assassin being any greater with Hillary or Obama either, and it surely must be lower abroad as our enemies wait to see what foreign policy stance the new administration takes....I am willing to admit that this could of course be my own fantasy.
Far be it for me to disagree with the great Lord Blackadder. (bows obsequiously before the throne) :)

However if you look at the historical record, I believe that assassination attempts are most often made by random crazies against "weak" leaders, (multiple assassination attempts against Nixon and Gerald Ford), and by the establishment against strong leaders that try to buck the status quo on emotionally charged "deep culture" issues (Lincoln and JFK). There are some that don't fit into either model of course.

Again, only my opinion, but ... I would argue that despite being the "worst President ever," Bush's values and general direction are right in line with the majority of Americans and that he is both "strong" and well protected from "crazies." If Obama is for real (the jury is still out for me on that one), he is going to attempt to reverse course on a whole host of very important issues that a lot of folks with a lot of power will not like. Same for Hillary to a lesser extent.

Both candidates are also like honey for flies in terms of attracting "crazies." It's no surprise that Obama obtained Secret Service protection so early on and it was because of a death threat.

Whether it's the first black President or first woman President, one only has to look around to see the intense anger boiling over in some quarters.

[jelloshotsrule]

Probably can't afford it. Glad he's come to his senses.

why? so that we can have less options? so that the poor and unrepresented people in the country remain without a candidate to work for them?

sounds good to me

ps. according to his campaign, the financial aspect was not the issue.

[atszyman]

Again, only my opinion, but ... I would argue that despite being the "worst President ever," Bush's values and general direction are right in line with the majority of Americans and that he is both "strong" and well protected from "crazies." ...


Both candidates are also like honey for flies in terms of attracting "crazies." It's no surprise that Obama obtained Secret Service protection so early on and it was because of a death threat.

Whether it's the first black President or first woman President, one only has to look around to see the intense anger boiling over in some quarters.

Don't forget that the our current president has the best insurance against assassination that I've ever seen. There is no-one crazy enough to risk having President Cheney come into power...:D

[Naimfan]

Don't forget that the our current president has the best insurance against assassination that I've ever seen. There is no-one crazy enough to risk having President Cheney come into power...:D

The board of Halliburton?

[atszyman]

The board of Halliburton?

They've done just fine with him as the puppet master, and with his heart it's better to have him controlling things from the background while Bush takes the blame.

And it would be risky. Cheney would probably have a heart attack within minutes of taking the oath of office and the next in line in succession is Pelosi...

[Naimfan]

And it would be risky. Cheney would probably have a heart attack within minutes of taking the oath of office and the next in line in succession is Pelosi...

Only until a new VP was appointed and confirmed . . .

But wouldn't THAT be priceless?

[atszyman]

Only until a new VP was appointed and confirmed . . .

But wouldn't THAT be priceless?

Both houses are in Democratic hands... they could delay the nomination until the inevitable heart attack....

[themadchemist]

why? so that we can have less options? so that the poor and unrepresented people in the country remain without a candidate to work for them?

sounds good to me

ps. according to his campaign, the financial aspect was not the issue.

I like a lot of his arguments, but he didn't do much to advance them while in the Senate. He had a remarkably unproductive Senate career, even by the low low standard of Congress productivity.

And in the long run, it's better for democrats to come to a candidate as soon as possible. I want the Republicans to have a protracted, down-to-the-convention fight that makes them seem fragmented and ideologically unclear. I want the Democrats to coalesce around a candidate (whomever it is, though I'd prefer Obama, given the choices) and let that person get a head start confidently running as the presumptive nominee even prior to the convention.

[Thomas Veil]

Probably can't afford it. Glad he's come to his senses.Actually he says he's got enough money, it's a matter of the media not giving him any air time. He's got a point. For the last month they've been writing him off as if he had no chance, and he had no chance because they've been writing him off. It's as if the news media think they get to make decisions about who we want to vote for.

This is why I hate the US primary system. So now, voters in every state except for a couple don't get to vote for Giuliani, Edwards, Thompson, etc. For some unfathomable reason the parties think it's ok for Iowa and NH to have more say in this process than the rest of us. :rolleyes: And then they have the nerve to discount the delegates from states that move up their primaries so as to make them relevant! I shouldn't frequent this part of MR... just makes me mad. :pIt's precisely for this reason that parties don't want states to move up their elections.

While I'm sympathetic to the idea that Iowa and NH shouldn't have first say in everything, you're probably not gonna change that. So the next best thing is to not let anybody else jump the gun. Iowa and NH by themselves are not gonna dictate how the race will go. If everybody else just held off until Super Tuesday, we wouldn't have this situation.

Think how I feel. Ohio gets into it a month after Super Tuesday. That's just as dumb. We're like a football team that shows up to play in the third quarter.

YES YES YES YES YES YES

Not only is this great news for my ears, so I'll never have to hear his patronizing shtick anymore... but this is a major help to Obama...

YES!

Never again shall I hear the words of "Two Americas."

"There are 850 million veterans sleeping under bridges tonight..."

...and let us not forget...

"I'm the son of a MILL WORKER!!!!!"Any rational reason for this intense hate for Edwards, besides the fact that he was a drag on your guy and you didn't like his verbiage?

[swingerofbirch]

I am now an undecided voter. I was really behind Edwards. I think if he had been running with a group of white guys he would have had a much better chance. But imagine if after having had the hope of the first female or black president, the disappointment people would have had in picking a white male. I really think that was part of the problem. I'm not a huge fan of either Hillary or Barack. I just wish I had had the choice to cast my vote for John. We need to do like other countries and have a 30 day window for campaigning and limit this wasteful fundraising, so people like John and Dennis Kucinich have a fairer shot, and so the American people have a fairer shot to hear them.

[Eric Piercey]

I am now an undecided voter. I was really behind Edwards. I think if he had been running with a group of white guys he would have had a much better chance. But imagine if after having had the hope of the first female or black president, the disappointment people would have had in picking a white male. I really think that was part of the problem. I'm not a huge fan of either Hillary or Barack. I just wish I had had the choice to cast my vote for John. We need to do like other countries and have a 30 day window for campaigning and limit this wasteful fundraising, so people like John and Dennis Kucinich have a fairer shot, and so the American people have a fairer shot to hear them.

Ironic that the one guy fighting for the poor, railing against the corporations now dictating American government is rich and white. I think he knew what was at stake and dropped out accordingly- that is he would have pulled a large part of the Dem vote and lost. That last debate summed it up perfectly. He was competing for the general unwashed masses 2 second attention span, on TV, against a woman and a black man duking it out. Jesus on rollerskates wouldn't have a chance... well okay realistically Benjamin Franklin.

[v-ault]

Any rational reason for this intense hate for Edwards, besides the fact that he was a drag on your guy and you didn't like his verbiage?

I'm actually a republican, so Romney is my guy. But if McCain get's the nomination, i'd hope Obama gets the democratic nomination so I can just vote for Obama.

If it's a McCain vs Hillary race, i'm not voting.

[jelloshotsrule]

I like a lot of his arguments, but he didn't do much to advance them while in the Senate. He had a remarkably unproductive Senate career, even by the low low standard of Congress productivity.



in fairness to him, he was a freshman senator from a red state. also, have you checked out the bills he sponsored or co-sponsored in his short tenure?

check out this link:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4240333


what more would you have him do? do you think that obama is/was more likely to break ranks with mainstream dems to stand up for more progressive ideals? really??

[IJ Reilly]

I'm actually a republican, so Romney is my guy. But if McCain get's the nomination, i'd hope Obama gets the democratic nomination so I can just vote for Obama.

If it's a McCain vs Hillary race, i'm not voting.

A Romney Republican who'd rather vote for Obama than McCain. So much for conventional political wisdom!

This one strange election year. For sure the "old guard" isn't very appealing to many voters.

[Thomas Veil]

For sure the "old guard" isn't very appealing to many voters.That's why everything's about **CHANGE**.

Which, the way things are going, is about all you'll have left in your pocket soon.

[Cleverboy]

I am now an undecided voter. I was really behind Edwards. I think if he had been running with a group of white guys he would have had a much better chance. But imagine if after having had the hope of the first female or black president, the disappointment people would have had in picking a white male. I really think that was part of the problem. I'm not a huge fan of either Hillary or Barack. I just wish I had had the choice to cast my vote for John. We need to do like other countries and have a 30 day window for campaigning and limit this wasteful fundraising, so people like John and Dennis Kucinich have a fairer shot, and so the American people have a fairer shot to hear them.Don't be too sure of your initial statement. Ron Paul in my opinion should be KICKING THE ASS of everyone on the Republican side. As an independent his stance on a woman's choice is probably one of the only things that wouldn't make me turn from the Democrats if the Dems didn't have some stars of their own. In the end, Ron Paul is being out "relevanced" by pure pablum. McCain hates "gooks" (in his words) and Romney is a robot. I'd say Guliani is a fascist cross-dresser and Huckabee is a loose cannon, but that's becoming mostly irrelevant.

That said, I think Hillary and Obama have MUCH more to offer than simply their gender and race. Unfortunately, to the degree that they DO draw attention on those factors... Hillary has another "media freebie" as Bill Clinton's wife. If she didn't have that recognition, Obama's positions, prescience and policies would have long ago decided this. There is a foolish undercurrent of "some inexperienced black guy" that's hooking into natural cynicism instead of simply allowing people to LEARN about the man (especially considering Clinton says she has "more" experience, not that Obama has little or none). Type "magic negro" into YouTube. Being black isn't some "golden ticket" of positivity. Meanwhile, he sticks to the issues like a champ.

While Hillary has proclaimed that she'll be the first woman president at rallies, and that this is a huge "change" she represents (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hehMIfQP0mE). I'll guarantee you that Barack has only answered questions about his respective possibility... mostly regarding Bill Clinton.

If Clinton wasn't in the race, Obama would have a very tough fight against Edwards (and vice versa). As a people oriented constitutional scholar, Obama brings an fascinating layer of discussion to this election... guaranteeing that discussions about our collective vision of America are not simply framing and rhetoric... but when push comes to shove, start an examination of our higher selves and the true meaning of what it is to be American. That's what most people are eating up.

~ CB