home

John Edwards Will Stay and Fight for Nomination

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Sun Jan 20, 2008 at 12:16:02 PM EST
Tags: John Edwards (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

John Edwards today said he's staying in the race, even though he got his "butt kicked" in Nevada. He said he makes no excuses for the loss. And, he reminds us, we're 3 states down with 47 to go. (Actually, Michigan makes it 4, although the results there like in Florida, may not count.)

Edwards arrived in South Carolina last night and will be campaigning there all week.

Edwards has put far more effort in South Carolina than Nevada, spending $2 million on advertising there -- twice what Clinton and Obama have spent there.

While Edwards said South Carolina was important, he said he would stay in the race even if he ran poorly there. "Absolutely," Edwards said on CNN's Late Edition. "I'm in it for the long haul."

< Obama Supporters' Sour Grapes | Gray Power: Will It Trump Race and the Youth Vote? >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    John Edwards Will Stay and Fight for Nomination | 7 comments (7 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    He could set up that $2 mil. (none / 0) (#1)
    by oculus on Sun Jan 20, 2008 at 12:26:48 PM EST
    as endowment for a foundation.  Probably more effective.

    Or Bill Clinton (3.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sun Jan 20, 2008 at 03:59:56 PM EST
    could join Jimmy Carter and build houses for the poor instead of playing golf with G. H. W. Bush.

    Just saying.

    Parent

    Watching Edwards on TV this morning (none / 0) (#2)
    by tnthorpe on Sun Jan 20, 2008 at 03:31:29 PM EST
    showed me again why I like him so well, but also why I don't think his message is catching on.

    To simplify greatly, Obama's campaign is focused on change, Hillary's on experience, Edwards's on equity. The first two campaigns offer a much more positive image, while Edwards's positions can sound like so much special pleading, a too lawerly image, in fact. Either change or experience are a lot more potent as ideas/images than equity, even if in actual policy terms there isn't all that much difference between the top 3. Edwards ends up looking earnest and genuinely compassionate, but out of step somehow, which is odd to me, because I think Edwards's 2 Americas are a better description of the current state of affairs than Obama's utopian postpartisanship or Hillary's corporate centrism.

    My theory (none / 0) (#3)
    by athyrio on Sun Jan 20, 2008 at 03:38:06 PM EST
    I believe that Edwards is indeed the most progressive message out there today...but I also believe that the Republicans (Karl Rove) made up their minds that they were going to influence us to vote for Obama as he would be the easiest to defeat....So there has been a total blackout of the coverage of Edwards and the only reason Hillary gets coverage at all is because of Bills status as a former president....Corporate America is terrified of Edwards and to a lesser extent also terrified of Hillary....So they are pushing Obama for all its worth and apparently the ole time democrats arent listening and are voting for her in droves.....yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!

    Parent
    This sounds like (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sun Jan 20, 2008 at 04:09:12 PM EST
    magical thinking.

    Clinton is getting votes because she's got LOTS of money behind her, LOTS of help from the DLC folks and corporate types and has a large campaign staff. She advertises herself as a feminist icon and many people believe it.

    When the New York Times prints such racist tripe as Gloria Steinem's op-ed on the eve of the New Hampshire election, Karl Rove isn't pulling those strings.

    Don't make Karl Rove the singular demonic entity. It's more systemic, and Clinton is part of the system.

    Parent

    Disagree (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by athyrio on Sun Jan 20, 2008 at 04:11:10 PM EST
    Totally disagree and if she was so part of the "corporate insiders" how come the demonic portrayal of her in the media....

    Parent
    The ctlinon's idea of anti-trust (none / 0) (#7)
    by Rojas on Sun Jan 20, 2008 at 11:23:36 PM EST
    is an extenstion of reagans.
    No one has done more for corporations.
    Link

    Washington, D.C.
    June 16, 1998
    Today's hearing, on mergers and consolidations, is certainly a timely one. There can be no doubt that we are currently in the midst of an enormous merger wave that is sweeping the U.S. economy.

    To try to grasp the enormous level of on-going merger activity, I have looked at some historical and projected data that I would like to share with you. For every $1 of U.S. merger activity that occurred in 1992 (only six years ago), today there is $10 dollars occurring (a 1000% increase). Another amazing comparison is the following: if you combined the value of all U.S. merger activity that took place in 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, and early part of 1996, it would approximately equal the value of merger activity that can be expected in 1998 alone.

    This merger wave is not slowing down; in fact it appears to be increasing.... The dollar value of the increase in merger activity from 1997 to 1998 alone is likely to surpass the value of all merger activity in the years 1990, 1991, 1992, and 1993 combined, by a healthy margin.



    Parent
    John Edwards Will Stay and Fight for Nomination | 7 comments (7 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment