[Update: The cite to "this sort of thing" references the new AG basically being of the "new boss same as old boss" sort but being more banal about it -- the "banality of evil" says Digby. Anyway, interesting essay on how the Warren Court influenced the top three Dem candidates, including the Tribe protege, Sen. Obama.]
Rudy lost big in Florida and endorsed McCain, who says he opposes this sort of thing, but enables it all the f-ing time. How many will all the same vote for JM since he seems a reasonable maverick? Pass me the puke bucket. And, stress me out, why don't you -- short memories and personality driven politics will do that to you in these cases. It also counsels the Dems to find a good v.p. candidate -- Clinton/Clark, for instance, would not be a shock.
[McCain is really the only credible candidate, Romney a fake flip-flopper that does seem to have the "conservatives who hate those who are even symbolically independent" vote. Cheney's non-gay daughter also is supporting him. This vanilla candidate, though his money helps, is just what Dems should hope for. The fact that McCain has some chance, even at this point, is just sad, but such it is.]
Also, heard about "Bush's" economic stimulus package ... bipartisanship here we come. This is the sort of thing that worries some per "above politics" Obama, though there is an argument that:
In Obama’s vision, presidential success is not measured by how many detailed policy proposals he can ram through Congress. Rather, his vision sets a new standard, that presidential success will be measured by an improved functioning of the government as a whole. In this vision, the details of policy are not as important as the principles that guide policy. In this vision, it is less important to secure ones preferred version of a bill than it is to mobilize Congress to solve the problem for which the legislation was designed.
This "potential," (as with faith, it tends to be mixed with some concrete experience) as one blog comment suggested, is the best option. As some provide regrets for Edwards, the value of his message (and recent experience, including public financing) having a stronger pull than the recent flavor of it all vs. his Senate record, we also have to move on. Not caring for the DLC approach, and finding Bush enablers distasteful (or rather, consistent ones), the choice is obvious. Besides, it is not that I am against Obama's overall approach. I just wanted more bite mixed in and worried about his lack of national experience.
OTOH, I very well might still vote for Edwards. The honest voter realized by now that he -- especially after a sad distant third in South Carolina -- was more of a message than a credible shot at nominee. This is far from chopped liver. Much more edible. It is essential to have his populist message out there, not only for its effect on the race (not only above the fray or DLC experience driven), but as a way for a chunk of the electorate to have a voice. I do not really know why he couldn't have waited a week to Super Tuesday.
Why "suspend" now? His name will still be on the ballots, yes? And, Dems don't favor "winner take all." The "Nader effect" is much less evident, except for deciding the "winner" of a state. Edwards could give his delegates to whomever he desires when the convention comes around and would have more pull with more of them. And, as long as he was officially an active candidate, people would have voted for him on Super Tuesday in big enough numbers that it probably would be significant: a sliver counts when a race might be close. I'm with those annoyed he didn't wait.
One more thing. There is some discussion that many Edwards voters would go to Clinton over Obama. Not this one. His populist message would seem to appeal to the latter, who might have a mixed record on certain subjects, but overall surely more populist than Clinton. The Iraq issue alone underlines the point. Now, it might be that there are some that are attracted to Clinton's gender and experience or perhaps have some Clinton nostalgia (including its anti-right wing conspiracy angle), but on balance favor Edwards. Or, something else might be at issue, including but not limited to race.
So, though Edwards' public message if anything leans toward Obama, maybe it amounts to a wash in the end. It is annoying -- even voting much earlier, I really have only one choice now. Well, active choice. My vote for Edwards for President in 2004 came when his campaign was if anything more dead than it is now, so why not? Anyway, keep up the good fight, and a special good wishes to Elizabeth.
I should have known ... he did look real tired in his recent Dave appearance.