He's right..Obama and Clinton are flawed candidates who cannot win a general election. Edwards is the only one who can.
The only question is how anxious democrats are to lose in the fall.

Edwards is the only one with the guts and determination to fight the entrenched powers of lobbyists, big money and self-serving politicians that are using the same "CHANGE" slongan in every campaign. With Obama and Clinton will be no real change besides changing the Texan gang fo the ones on Chicago and NY. Those are the same powers that are pouring money into Hillary''s and Obama''s campaigns, those are the same politicians that are splitting the endorsement between those the two candidates they know will be safe.
Is very ironic that Obama is prising Reagan who one of his goals was to destroy unions and organized labor and who started Reaganomics and tax breaks for the rich. Obama is doing that just to attract some dissatisfied Republicans and simply playing politics.

Hillary and Obama are fighting for for the same goal...POWER, POWER and selfish ambition. They will do anything to get elected, Obama did it in Illinois and Hillary in NYC.
I am an independent and don't trust any of them, at last Edwards is the one addressing the real issues and tell it how it is.

Edwards speaks out of both sides of his mouth worse than any other politician. He stated he "wants no material things" in a WSJ editorial, yet he moved into a humongous home from an already giant home right before the election (and it wasn't enviro-friendly). As he stood in New Orleans announcing he was for the people, the hedge fund he worked for and had a significant ownership in was foreclosing on New Orleans residence. He rants about CEO pay, yet trial attorneys like him make much more for even less work. He has a net worth of over $60 million from suing hospitals and doctors, which drives up the costs of health care (since he is only one of many ambulance chasers sucking millions from the public). When costs go up, it hurts the poor the most. I am just glad the people don't buy his so-called populist retoric!

Kevin,-- since when we have to be ashame for becoming successfully in life? Edwards like many of the people that are successful coming from practically having nothing in life to be a successful person should be proud, and they more like anyone else have first hand experience on doing it. They didn't read it n the books or inherited from their families, they earned! they earned honestly and legally. Is like criticizing Obama for having now a home that worth millions, that would be silly, or criticizing FDR or JFK for being rich and devoted his political life to a good cause.
The same old and silly attack on Edwards hair cut, price of his home, etc.etc are just stupid.

John Edwards is the only candidate speaking about the issues that are affecting middle class Americans. He stands up for unions and their right to organize. He comes from a blue collar family. Why does the media seem to push Obama and Clinton out front for everyone to see and leave Edwards and his views out of the discussion? It makes for great ratings.

Edwards is in the race for himself. He is trying to gain votes to use to his advantage. He was the VP candidate in 2004 because of his votes. He has sided with Obama to break up the leaders and win votes that will later be used for his political gain. I use to like him but I have had second thoughts ...so whether Obama wins or not Edwards is in a good position to toss his votes for Obama and gain some political clout. Obama wins Edward wins...I rather save my vote for a race that counts not one where someone is going to win politically one way or the other..

John Edwards is the only candidate that is running for president that has a solid foundation for change, which is viable. He has the strength to go through the primaries without taking money from PACS ..special interest groups....JOHN EDWARDS CANNOT BE COOPTED>>>>>HE IS A FREE AGENT FOR CHANGE>>>>NOBODY OWNS JOHN EDWARDS....i am an independent voter, and JOHN EDWARDS WILL GET MY VOTE.

If by a "strong of third place finishes" you mean...one.

If my memory of history is correct, there were only thousands of homeless when Regan took office, there were millions when he left. But, Nancy could afford find clothing while the very nation that paid for their home, and probably the very bed they slept in, went hungry and cold. Not a person I would pattern my life after. While it is true Edwards made millions from insurance companies, health providers, etc, it may be partly his fault health care is so high. A reporter should ask him. How he answers will give us a clue to his character. Remember, the people that need the most help and stay silent are the very people that can not afford to pay for that help or that voice.

Face it people. The sun has set on the dominance of white males. I know its hard to accept, but Edwards will NOT be your "Great White Male Hope".

Edwards has now apoligized for about every major vote he made...the Iraq War, limiting bankruptcies, normalized trade with China, No Child Left Behind, and giving Bush the authority to negotiate trade deals. He voted for these when it would advance his career. Now that public opinion has changed, he is blowing with the wind. Wise up people!

If he had done this sooner, he would be in a better position. I really do feel he is the candidate for working class and blue collar people.

He shouldn't have to split the vote, blue collar workers, with Hillary.

When did Hillary live anything even remotely close to a blue collar existance?

"Great White Male Hope?" I'm a woman who supports Edwards and saw him at a great event in Los Angeles today. It would be wonderful to have a woman or African-American president... I'd vote for Elizabeth Edwards in a heartbeat. But Hillary and Obama are both deeply flawed candidates who have accepted $100 million each in corporate donations from HMOs, drug companies, nuclear power, coal, banking, etc. I want someone who is independent and will restore the middle class and individual rights. I don't care about race or gender, but Edwards is the best, most electable candidate, period!

Edwards is right about these things. Trouble is, change in Washington is slow and incremental. It won't happen overnight with a president that vows to shut the insurance companies out.. or a president that gives a pretty speeches and hopes all his appointees will magically be able to bring about the elusive "change". IF I were in my 20's, I might be able to buy those arguments, but I am older, and I know how this works.

That's why I am beginning to think Senator Clinton is the best prepared. The mess on our plate in January 20, 2009 will be vast, and it will take a manager, who understand the beauracracy, who can run the government efficiently, and with the right oversight to bring the change slowly. I know I know, everyone wants immediate gratification, but that's not how life is, or how the government works. That's false hope, IMHO. I am glad both Edwards and Obama are in the race and bringing these points forward, but I still think, folks, experience and management skills, count.

George Bush had expireince management skills. So did his father. We see how far that got us. I think the we the democratic party shold ask Hillary the same thing that the republican pundints are writing about. 20 of the 35 years of expirience she calims to have is as a first lady. Where exactly besides the 6 years in the Senate does she actually have real political expirience? I think that my vote is going to the only person who has actually said that the country is in need of healing and change. I am not going to support somone who uses the expireince of thier spouse as a campain credential. Nor am I going to support a person who has denounced everything they have endorsed over the lst 10 years of thier career and expect me to think they are going to make the right decisions in the highest office in our country.

In outher words GO OBAMA!