John Edwards Endorses Obama

John Edwards endorsed Barack Obama tonight in Grand Rapids, Michigan:

The media and blogosphere are abuzz as to the hows and whys of Edwards stepping up to endorse Obama when the race is down to the finish line with just a few primaries left, but the endorsement does come “at a time when the appeal of Mr. Obama appears to be lagging among white, blue-collar voters, a group to which Mr. Edwards openly appealed.”

Mr. Edwards’s endorsement also brings in tow 19 convention delegates he won in early party selections. He could certainly urge them to give their support to Mr. Obama, though they would not be obligated by party rules to do so.

And of course, the Obama camp timed the announcement of John Edwards endorsement “to coincide with the start of the major evening newscasts, which would have otherwise focused on Senator Hillary Clinton’s landslide victory in West Virginia, which raised new questions about Mr. Obama’s strength with white working class voters.”

Melissa on Shakesville says she’s “disappointed” that endorsed at all. I agree. Because now it seems rather suspect that Edwards has been “waiting, waiting, waiting – till after the poorest state in the nation voted to announce that Obama is his man on poverty.”

After all, as Jeralyn notes:

John Edwards has been on tv for two weeks saying there was no reason for him to endorse either candidate. What changed? In two words: West Virginia. In four words: West Virginina and Kentucky.

Ah… Political games. “Alrighty then.” Next…

Bookmark and Share

Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to John Edwards Endorses Obama

  1. Lee says:

    Edwards has always been disengenuous and weak …
    What a hypocrite … does he actually expect us to believe his commitment to poverty, when in reality he flaunts his huge multi-kazillion dollar compound
    (house) directly across the street from poor people … not to mention his $400 hair cuts, which could feed a family of four for four weeks! Then he waits till Obama is way in the lead, before endorsing him. What weak character … or, rather lack of character. I doubt his endorsement has any value … and, anybody who values his endorsement, doesn’t have any values.

  2. In hindsight, Sen. Clinton would have been better off to mount her campaign for the Presidency in 2004. Sure, she would have had to battle Sen. Kerry., and then an incumbemt President. However, her current effort says that she would have been up to that challenge. I think that she would be the incumbent today, and Sen. Obama would be sitting on the sidelines until 2012.

    Do I think that Sen. Obama is the superior candidate for this time and place? It seems like history is already prepared to make that pronouncement.

    Humanity evolves. What causes history to move where it goes may even well be inexplicable. But it seems to be inarguable that the mantle of leadership has now been passed from the baby boomers to those coming after us.

    McCain? Ancient history!

    Hillary Clinton? History!

    Barack Obama? For better or worse, where we’re at today!

  3. Darrell

    If HRC had run in ’04 she would not have had a chance – too inexperienced then with only 3 years in the Senate. She would have been subject to the same criticism that Obama is getting on that – only worse because she is a woman.

  4. Peace Out For Unity says:

    Analyst saying it didn’t and wouldn’t make much difference but did steal the headlines the next day. They called that smart politics? You stole the thunder but the lightening is on the issues that count and a gas holiday ! Go Clinton !