Where’s John Edwards

March 5th, 2008 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

Kevin Sullivan asks his commenters, and PoliGazette co-bloggers and readers “[w]here is John Edwards? Couldn’t he ostensibly end this thing right now?” I agree with cfpete, who comments at Independent Liberal: he’s probably waiting for one of the candidates to offer him a VP spot or another top spot. Or, of course, he’s waiting until the very last moment so he can enjoy some time in the spotlight: kingmaker and all.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. @T
    March 6th, 2008 at 01:03
    Reply | Quote | #1

    Let’s HOPE John Edwards is waiting to go to Denver, where the Democratic Party will cast a few ballots and make him the Democratic Party’s nominee for president — instead of Hillobama, the "post-partisan" Republican-lite identity twins who can’t even commit to national health.

  2. DJ,Iowa
    March 6th, 2008 at 01:27
    Reply | Quote | #2

    @T……..I am with you on that one!!

  3. Fred
    March 6th, 2008 at 02:09
    Reply | Quote | #3

    Much as I was a staunch supporter of Edwards. . .

    it would take ahellofalot for me to support him again after he showed no character through his SDA (sudden disappearing act) which totally stiffed his supporters and strongly contradicted his "in it to the convention" promises.  Stinky!

  4. framecop
    March 6th, 2008 at 03:46
    Reply | Quote | #4

    Hopefully Edwards will not endorse either Clinton or Obama, because neither of them will win in November anyway, and he needs to be able to call the Dumbocrats idiots for getting suckered by the media AWAY FROM HIM 2 ELECTIONS IN A ROW.The media pushed Dean and then Kerry in 2004, and Clinton and Obama in 2008, to make sure that they DROWNED OUT John Edwards’ voice both times.Clinton and Obama have gotten far enough on the backs of the media, Edwards shouldn’t give the media what it wants by endorsing either Clinton or Obama.

  5. fjfjdvdv
    March 6th, 2008 at 08:04
    Reply | Quote | #5

    John Edwards has made himself irrelevant.  While hoping to parlay his kingmaker status into a political appointment, he passed up the chance to endorse early in the race, when he still had the respect of his supporters, who have now no doubt settled on either Clinton or Obama.  Instead of endorsing early, he had his campaign staff leak suggestions that — darn it all — he really just couldn’t make up his mind.  Get real.  He is a full-time politician, he campaigned against Obama and Clinton, and he knows them both personally.  And yet he wants us to believe that he doesn’t have a preference?  If he can’t discriminate between these two very different candidates, his endorsement shouldn’t really matter.  And if he didn’t have the strength of character to endorse back when there was no clear frontrunner, his endorsement shouldn’t matter.

    Edwards has gone from being a potential kingmaker to being just another superdelegate.

  6. Pages tagged “john edwards”
    March 6th, 2008 at 18:03
    #6
  7. Adam
    March 6th, 2008 at 23:05
    Reply | Quote | #7

    he’s holding out to see who wins…  doesn’t want to damage his political future by aligning with the loser.   i don’t really respect that, but what other reason could it be?

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.