Edwards Pulls Out

It's soon to be official: after his weak showing in Florida, John Edwards is pulling out of the race.

I guess that means I'm an Obama supporter now. Not that I couldn't support Clinton, but I have enough doubt about the people she surrounds herself with and attracts — DLCers for example — that Obama seems a better bet.

I also think Obama will have an advantage in foreign relations, as he'll be perceived as more of a clean slate than someone named Clinton. He's been an opponent of the Iraq war from the start, and still has a better, clearer position than Clinton on ending the war and removing US troops from Iraq (even though Edwards's position was better still). He's better on telecoms issues too.

That said, on domestic issues there's also much to like on paper about the Clinton candidacy as compared to Obama's especially on health care. How much of that would survive contact with lobbyists and Republicans is the question.

Whoever it was who said that Obama is running as (Bill) Clinton and (Sen.) Clinton is running as Gore got it mostly right. I didn't want either as my first choice; even if I get my third choice it is sure to be much better than the remaining alternatives.

And I hope Edwards becomes Attorney General. That would be something.

This entry was posted in Politics: US: 2008 Elections. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Edwards Pulls Out

  1. shmuel says:

    Obama runs a Bush 2000 campaign down to the small details; I believe it’s by design.

  2. rory_and_me says:

    Right on the mark re Obama Michael.

    I have frankly been left cold by some of the tactics employed by the Clinton camp, and the willingness of the former president to play the race card. I mean in the name of God – comparing Jesse Jackson’s victories in South Carolina of the 1980’s with Obama’s win is close to an insult. Barack is a Senator and his platform has little in common with the issues that fired up Jackson in the 80’s. The sub-text of Clinton’s remark was really that it comes down to some sort of “black thing” in S. Carolina. This isn’t as cut-and-dried as it might appear in 2008 because as recently as December Hillary was in fact far ahead in the polling down there.

    America’s first “black” president is risking serious damage to his reputation if he carries on this mode. Sometimes you get the feeling that bubba is most comfortable when he’s opening the door and creating the opportunities – I’m not certain that he is as comfortable when a presidential candidate who is in fact black (rather than metaphorically black) demonstrates the winning form Obama has been showing.

    Bill Clinton has many fine qualities, and it’s a disappointing to see some of the tactics he’s been resorting to in the course of this campaign.

  3. abe_foxy says:

    Edwards’s repeated use of “neocon” early in the debates as a pejorative to impress his “working class” base is disturbing…as within some circles the term is simply a euphemism for “Jew”. Don’t trust him.

  4. michael says:

    That’s interesting. In other circles “neocon” has become a euphemism for “warmonger”.

  5. abe_foxy says:

    Agreed. Maybe he was referring to Ann Coulter. But google “euphemism neocon jewish” and see that there is some substance to my concern. Coupled with his appeal to lower economic classes, and an apparent lack of outreach to Jewish Americans compared to other serious candidates. I am not leveling specific charges at him, but I am suspicious. I have not heard either Hillary or Obama use the term. Tempest in a teapot perhaps, but keep on an eye on him because we haven’t heard the last of Silky.

  6. Brautigan says:

    I cannot believe that anybody as serious about ending the war, civil liberties and an open/neutral internet as Prof. Froomkin would seriously consider Hillary.

    She is most defineately a neocon in sheep’s clothing (to this day, she fundamentally endorses the “principles” on which the Iraq invasion was based – she has just adopted the “incompetency dodge”), and she has given every indication of being a martinette. Indeed, the Clinton administration was no great shakes on the privacy/civil liberties front.

  7. michael says:

    The question is often “compared to what?” Compared to “I love the surge” McCain?

  8. abe_foxy says:

    “compared to what” is exactly right for all discussions about these elections, no matter which side you’re on. If we all remind ourselves of this before every discussion among friends and fellow citizens, this has the potential to be the most amicable and least divisive election we’ve had for quite some time. Misery loves company so we should all be disappointed companions!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.