No endorsement coming from John Edwards

May 6, 2008

WASHINGTON – Remember John Edwards
    He ran a spirited campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, never caugJohn Edwardsht much fire and dropped out of the race about, oh, it feels like 10 years ago (actually it was January).
    The former North Carolina senator has kept a low profile ever since and has resisted entreaties from the remaining Democrats, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, for his endorsement.
    And he is still resisting, as voters cast ballots on Tuesday in his home state’s Democratic primary election, according to People Magazine, which tracked down Edwards and his wife, Elizabeth.
    Edwards, who was John Kerry’s vice presidential running mate in 2004, told People he likes Clinton’s “tenacity” but sees “a lot of the old politics” in her.
    He likes Obama, too, but “sometimes I want to see more substance under the rhetoric.”
    Bottom line, according to People, rather than endorse one or the other, Edwards and his wife will save their political capital for causes such as fighting poverty and improving U.S. health care.

Click here for more Reuters 2008 campaign coverage.

http://www.reuters.com/news/globalcoverage/2008candidates

Photo credit:  Reuters/Lee Celano (Edwards, with wife Elizabeth on the right, announces his withdrawal from the Democratic presidential race in January.)

33 comments

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/

Sometimes you have to make decisions as a President. He hasn’t. That is why he is not in the race to run for President. Go ahead and pick a side already.

Posted by Rod | Report as abusive

I think he’s ready to endorse himself as nominee for Vice President.

Posted by db | Report as abusive

Clearly, the Edwards delegates are not assets of the Clinton machine. Assuming they are free agents, it’s a good bet that they swing to Senator Obama.

Posted by Charles | Report as abusive

Is John Edwards, with that country twang in his voice a very deceptive racist? Why won’t he join Obama? Will he wait until Obama wins the Presidency, and then claim he supported him all along? Obama is America. He is half Black, and half White. He is a Christian with a Muslim name. His skin tone is a reflection of every color in the United States, with all shades of color included. There is a City in Japan named for him, years before his arrival in America. Asian’s love him, Whites love him, Blacks love him, Latino’s love him all over the Country, and John Edwards won’t stand up like a True American Man and declare his support for Barack Obama?

The hell with John Edwards then. You keep your 19 pledged Delegates and make selfishly force there lives into worthlessness. Those 19 Delegates will hate you for the rest of their life for not allowing them to Pledge for the best and brightest leader this Country has ever seen! I hope you sleep good at night. One last thing John Edwards, its almost impossible that your wife has not told you to announce support for Obama. Your wife is a great woman, and she knows the writing on the wall. How dare you ignore her common sense!

Posted by LandofTheBrave2008 | Report as abusive

Good for John Edwards. This ridiculous race between Clinton and Obama is simply an illusion, staged to make people feel like they’re actually making some sort of decision for the country. The real political battles are either fought out behind closed doors or they’re fought out in the streets by focused political movements. It looks like Edwards has decided to make an attempt at some real political action this year or the next, and I’m glad to see it. I’d much rather join with like-minded people to make a public push for universal health care on our terms, instead of casting my lot with Obama or Clinton and then trusting them to speak for me when they’re meeting with executives as POTUS.

Posted by Reporter | Report as abusive

It is unfortunate that John Edwards’ funding decisions forced him out of the race. After listening to Elizabeth Edwards recently speak about health care issues and solutions, my respect for John and Elizabeth went up enormously. They both sincerely understand the health care issues facing average Americans and have endured difficulties again and again, only to pick themselves up and move forward productively.

The political climate in the US, along with the crazy rules put into place by the states’ Democratic Parties, have made a mockery of the electoral process and popular representation, from my perspective. Couple that with the vast quantities of money needed to run a viable campaign and the net result is special interests, political posturing, lack of trust, and the usual suspects pulling the political power strings. Jimmy Carter may want to monitor elections here in the US for fairness and integrity.

I am expecting the federal governmental system to implode before it gets better because there isn’t anyone on the political radar screen large enough, skilled enough, or with the kind of character needed to solve the mess in Washington DC. About all we can possibly expect is someone with character and integrity, which doesn’t seem to be high on the list of qualities of the usual suspects.

Posted by George | Report as abusive

This guy should be president. He’s far more progressive than Hilbama and he polled much higher against the GOP.

Posted by AverageJoe | Report as abusive

Edwards doesn’t have to endorse anybody. Period.

He’s already said no to being VP. Never say never though.

Posted by R | Report as abusive

I think it’s a bit late for that. Edwards could’ve solidified all of this months ago if he’d been willing to put his support behind Obama (like virtually all of his campaign people did). If the Dems lose the White House in November, a lot of the blame will fall on John Edwards.

Posted by Jamie | Report as abusive

John Edwards is doing the right thing by not succumbing to Obamamania.
I would have preferred he stay in the race first, then that he would have thrown his support to Senator Clinton, but he is a good man, and he knows that Obama is not good for this country.

About a year ago there was a website that had a lot of different bumper stickers from which we could choose to show our support for our favorite candidate. I chose two: RE-ELECT AL GORE and GORE/EDWARDS.

My overwhelming choice of the candidates left now in the race is HILLARY CLINTON.

I am a lifelong Democrat. However, if HILLARY CLINTON does not get the nomination, I will be supporting JOHN McCAIN.

The CHARACTER of our COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF is important to me, and I don’t want a sissy like Barack Obama at the helm.

Edwards could decide the race if he wanted too. But that’s too much power for one person in such a disputed race. Maybe he sees a brokered convention turning to him for President, if Clinton’s made both she and Obama unelectable (their supporters boycotting the opponent in November). Didn’t Edwards once observe he was the most electable of the three? As long as Clinton is insisting the superdelegates have complete freedom and should use it to put the most electable candidate forward, then Edwards probably is the one, having neither the handicap of being black nor that of being a female. He is also popular in the party. With Obama as vp he’d be certain to win, as the blue collar vote was Edwards’ base before he stopped campaigning. Obama would bring the youth, blacks, and the liberal base. I don’t think Clinton should be on the ticket because she has too much baggage, and she has alienated the most loyal parts of the Party in her bid to represent the Bush Democrats. Isn’t it interesting that many states assign delegates in primaries partly on previous turnout, on the theory I imagine that they should have more clout than the Democrats that don’t vote or voted for Bush in 2000 and 2004. One of my problems with Clinton’s imagined route to the nomination is she has garnered her support among the voters who abandoned the Party’s nominees in 2000 and 2004. Since she is so concerned about the lack of judgment shown by Obama in his past associations, I wonder why she prides herself so much on being the favorite of voters who showed themselves such abysmal judges of character in 2000 and 2004? If they like her, shouldn’t we maybe be concerned, because after all their judgment has been faulty in the
past? I think Clinton lacks flexibility, which is a disastrous trait in a President as we’ve learned with Bush. Then there’s her facile mendacity. Sometimes she seems to be a Bush twin, and when she talks about “obliterating” Iran then I don’t know which part of the Democratic Party she thinks she represents. She’s about as concerned with anyone else’s opinions as Cheney.
The most charitable I can be is to think she had a replay of 2004 in her mind. But the times have changed. 2008 is nothing like 2000 or 2004. It isn’t going to be a squeaker, and that’s why her strategy does not serve the Democrats well. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity for a “change” election. But Clinton just aims to keep the Bush Democrats happy. I think Clinton will fare badly in a comparison of character with McCain. She can try to SwiftBoat him, but Mccain’s been on the national stage so long, she’s going to have a hard time making anything stick. Unfortunately for Hillary, it works the opposite direction. She has been on the national stage for so long, and her reputation during that time was for cold political calculation and dishonesty. There is not going to be much she can do to change that longheld impression. In fact, her campaign has had the disastrous opposite effect of increasing her negatives. She is “tenacious”, but isn’t that just another way of saying “stay the course”?

Posted by tina | Report as abusive

In response to those who say “if (insert Dem candidate here) doesn’t win, I’m voting for McCain”, like the No Wool guy, I have to say your position confuses me.

If you agree with Hillary’s positions (pro-Choice, Universal Health Care, wants to withdraw from Iraq immediately, repeal the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy), what is it that attracts you to McCain? His vocal pro-life stance? His determination to stay the course in Iraq? The many other positions he holds which show he has totally different judgement from both Dems?

Saying “if I don’t get Hillary/Barack I’ll vote for McCain” is like saying “if I can only score a date with that brunette girl instead of the blonde, I’m totally going to become gay.”

Posted by jheath | Report as abusive

John Edwards is/was my candidate but I couldn’t vote for him (he left the race too soon)So I voted for Hillary. Edwards cares for the working class just like her. Clinton was a good president I don’t get the hate I see now from those who supported him before. I cannot trust Barrak (sounds like Irak)He is smart so I cannot believe that he does not know where his friends stand. He first defends them but when he sees the need; he betrays them. He is not a black American, his father is African (no American history in his black background). He had problems with “white” granma and left to meet blacks. He’s made these elections something completely racist as blacks are supporting him just because of his color. And he appeals to “the educated” so i think Edwards as my candidate cannot support Obama who stands for nothing but a non define change and does not appeal to the working class. Hillary has been very polite she could talk a lot more about Obama’s past. The press has been so negative to her and protective of obama that is embarrasing. If Hillary is out I will never vote for Irak Osama. If Edwards doesn’t endorse him he will continue to be my candidate.

Posted by SP | Report as abusive

[...] endorsed a Democratic candidate before the primary, but the former North Carolina senator hasn’t made public his support for either one. Of course, Barack Obama already beat Hillary Clinton by more than ten points in the [...]

poor americans. superdelegates?. are democrats real democrats?

Posted by soyaan | Report as abusive

John Edwards is irrelevant. Hillary and Barack should not pick him for anything because he is such a coward. Edwards didn’t even carry his home state of South Carolina. He can keep his endorsement. Obama won North Carolina with a demanding lead without Edwards’ endorsement. He’s holding out for a position that he might have gotten from either candidate. That is so tacky. So, whatever Edwards say, is not important. He’s jealous of Hillary and he hates Obama. Hillary is not going to pick him to be anything and neither will Obama. Both of them can win without Edwards.

Posted by Debmood | Report as abusive

Well, I see that Steve Holland has deleted my previous comments, so I’ll say it again.

Edwards has said A ZILLION TIMES that he will not endorse ANYBODY, so for the media to keep bringing it up is just LAZY JOURNALISM.

He’s also said over and over again that he HATED BEING A RUNNING MATE and would NEVER do it again, so for people to keep saying that he’s not endorsing until he gets promised a #2 position, just shows how CLUELESS most voters are.

Posted by framecop | Report as abusive

It’s pretty pathetic that people come on here and say things like “The hell with John Edwards then.” and claim he is racist and whatnot just because he has decided to hold his endorsement till the race has been decided. Before you go out of your way to tell everyone he hates Obama and blacks, why don’t you look at the hate coming from your own statements? If that’s the kind of attitude Obama supporters have I’m glad I’m not one.

Posted by KC | Report as abusive

Who cares, his endorsement would not have mattered months ago, and that still applies today. He is a “1″ count as a superdelegate and that is it.

Posted by latinovoter1 | Report as abusive

Who cares at this point? He sat on the fence so long that it no longer matters what he does.

Posted by DMR | Report as abusive

former Senator Edward’s home state voted by a 200,000 plus margin for Senator Obama. The right thing to do would be to endorse Senator Obama since his peers have spoken at the polls.

A good percentage of Edwards’ pledged delegates have already gone to Obama at the smaller state conventions, so dont put that on Johnny boy to tell them what to do bc they’re already doing it!

Posted by BOC | Report as abusive

Land of the Brave—I have to disagree. I’m a huge Obama supporter, but I don’t think Edwards’ decision not to endorse (or Al Gore’s for that matter) has anything to do with closet racism. I think if that were that case he’d have endorsed Clinton.

Posted by stan | Report as abusive

good for John and Elizabeth Edwards. What they say about both candidates is entirely true. I know they (and I) will support whoever gets the nominee, because either will be much better than John McCain, but it is not as if one is far superior to the other. They are different. But neither of them have the values and conviction of the no lobbyist, no PAC money accepting Edwards campaign.

Posted by kelsi | Report as abusive

Good for John Edwards; he spoke his mind very clearly and mirrors much of what I am hearing from other life long democrats – Hilary is too beltway and Barack is too light in substance.
Brace yourself America, I see this November going to McCain.

Johnny Reid Edwards was, is and always will be the man who should have been the Democratic candidate in 2008. He stated over and over again “We are becoming a country of two Americas”. I see this happening more and more each day. He is a great man and would have been a great leader for America and we all know America needs a great leader. I admire his courage to not declare an endorsement of either current Democratic candidate. He is absoultely correct in his assessment of both candidates also. Obama is too light-weight and noncommital to be President. I’m afraid a lot of people will be disappointed in the ‘change candidate’ – he likes to toss the word ‘Change’ around but if elected, he’ll probably find himself extremely handicapped to bring it about. At least Mrs. Clinton knows and understands the ‘hard-ball’ rules played inside the ‘beltway’. I think that’s called experience. John and Elizabeth will be successful in whatever or whomever they choose to support.

Posted by Moore | Report as abusive

I’m a little incredulous that so many people believe they know John Edwards’ “real” reasons for not endorsing anyone, at this point.

Posted by jo | Report as abusive

What amazes me is the arrogance of Edwards and Clinton. They’re egos haven gotten in the way of them being true representatives of THE PEOPLE, as in WE THE PEOPLE. Isn’t that what DEMOCRATIC is about? HRC is and always has been for HRC, not the PEOPLE of anywhere USA. I don’t know what Edwards’s problem is because I thought he was populist.

The DEMOCRATIC VOTERS of NC spoke Tuesday. Suck it in and Grow the hell up.

Posted by A NC Democrat voter | Report as abusive

Edwards’ indecision has rendered him irrelevant (unless has some very effective plan up his sleeve).

If he had chosen to make an endorsement before OH, or even before PA, it would have really meant something. He also would have been much more effective in fighting for his “poverty and health care” platform by working with one of the candidates, rather than remaining aloof. Now, it just looks like he is too indecisive or cowardly to make a decision. This is a good example of why he shouldn’t be POTUS.

That said, perhaps he has a plan to do something effective, but it sure doesn’t look like it.

Posted by JP32 | Report as abusive

Why should Edwards “choose a side” as one commentator put it? Endorsements only bruise feelings of the other side. Don’t kid yourselves… both Clinton and Obama supporters will need to unify in the end. Edwards knows this and to endorse one of the other will only upset the other side. No one will care that he didn’t endorse anyone by Novemenber… but they will care when he’s out there stumping for the nominee…

Stop making an issue of it already…

For the record… Edwards didn’t catch fire because for months leading up to Iowa… it was Obama vs. Clinton in the press. The press never validated him… therefore the voters never validated him.

Posted by Scott Tatman | Report as abusive

I loved John Edwards and I thought he would have been great as Obama’s running mate…however, he has totally made himself irrelevant by staying on the sidelines and not supporting a candidate…

I’m sure his supporters would like to know who he has more trust and faith in (Hillary or Obama?).. Who’s policies (although similar) would be more beneficial…

His campaign manager is a complete fool for not making and keeping him viable to the 2008 election. I do still hope that, when president, Obama will offer him a position in the administration! John Edwards is someone who seems to care about the working class American and not just partisan Bull S%*!… It’s too bad he won’t stand up and be accounted for….. Obama 2008!

Posted by amanda | Report as abusive

John Edwards

I cannot believe you are endorsing Barrack Obama. Just when I thought I couldn’t take it anymore I have just been disappointed one more time. What is it going to take for someone to wake up and smell the coffee. I was pulling for you all the way and then you dropped out and now Barack Obama? I am without words or any encouragement for this country’s future. I give up on politics and the hope that somewhere a decent candidate would appear. I will not vote. Shame on you.

Posted by Linda | Report as abusive

With the country in such desperate shape economically, you would think the voters would recognize that a Democrat candidate, whoever it is, is needed, so that John McCain, god forbid, doesn’t become President.

From the earliest point in the campaign, John Edwards was the only candidate to broach policy–old liberal, New Deal-type legislation, including Universal Health Care. Hey, Democrats, ye of the poor and hungry, why so much fascination with Barack Obama?