Edwards to Endorse Obama (Updated)
Filed under: 2008 elections, Barack Obama, John Edwards — Claudia, Assistant Editor on May 14, 2008 @ 10:46 pm CEST
The Huffington Post is reporting on growing speculation that Edwards is set to endorse Barack Obama tonight. Edwards has already said that Obama is the likely nominee. Obama’s campaign has apparently announced a major endorsement at a rally in Michigan today.
As a state that could support Obama in the fall but requires some friendly gestures due to their delegate woes, and also as a state where the economic issues Edwards talks about are close to the hearts of voters, would be a great place to make such an announcement.
It’s still a rumor for now, but please bear with me. I’ve spent the day reading quotes and watching video of uneducated hicks Real Americans™ saying they can’t support Obama because he’s Muslim, or not “All-American” or just plain because he’s black, I need some encouragement.
UPDATE: The New York Times and ABC are confirming the endorsement.
1 George
May 14, 2008 @ 11:08 pm CESTSo, Mr. Edwards has finally decided to endorse Obama, now that the race is over and his endorsement means nothing. Who the hell cares?
2 James
May 14, 2008 @ 11:12 pm CEST"watching video of uneducated hicks Real Americans™ saying they can’t support Obama because he’s….black, I need some encouragement."
Scary. Yes, he’s half Kenyan….and half Irish.
I guess the Irish part is too much for these "simpletons" to understand.
They’d probably look at me (I went to Nassau and developed a deep tan) and give me the cold shoulder, too.
VERY bright people (NOT!!!).
3 C Stanley
May 14, 2008 @ 11:19 pm CESTI imagine it must be a rude awakening to some Democrats to know that not ALL of the uneducated, bigoted hicks in America are Republicans. Of course amnesia will strike in the general election and every newsclip and youtube of ignorant voters will be once again presumed to represent a major swath of the Republican base.
4 politicjock
May 14, 2008 @ 11:19 pm CESTGeorge,It actually means a lot because Obama is going to get Edwards pledged delegates.
5 Tully
May 15, 2008 @ 1:03 am CESTThe Edwards pledged delegates must vote for Edwards on the first round, then they’re free to vote for whom they wish. Why you want that majority in hand for the first vote–there’s no second round then. IF there was a second round of voting, they could then vote for Obama.
6 Just Me
May 15, 2008 @ 6:45 am CESTActually, politicjock since the Democratic party is a private party, the delegates themselves will probably choose in a tie where they’ll go. Edwards is just suggesting that they go to Obama. In reality, they can still do whatever they want. All a "pledged" delegate is saying is that at the Democratic convention, this is who their district said to vote for. Even then it’s not set in stone. It’s the same system as the "electors" but a little more lose.
7 Tully
May 15, 2008 @ 2:28 pm CESTYep. I misstated. There is NO law or rule that says a pledged delegate MUST vote for whom they’re pledged to, and right up until the convention a candidate can even "fire" any of his own delegates he thinks will vote the wrong way. Guess right, tke a vote from someone else. Guess wrong, take a vote from yourself.
Edwards can suggest, but the delegates decide for themselves.