- Daily Photo: Obama Jokes Around at G-20
- Blackwater gets replaced in Iraq
- Daily Photo: U.S. Marines Look Out for Taliban in Afghanistan
- Hillary Clinton the Tomboy and Her "Ah-Ha" Moment
- Obama Administration Sudan Envoy Headed to Region
- Daily Photo: Potential Flashpoint in Iraq
- Clinton Says New Afghanistan-Pakistan Plan Depends on Diplomacy
- Exclusive: Three Israeli Airstrikes Against Sudan
- Additional 4,000 Troops to Be Ordered to Afghanistan
- Daily Photo: Navy Submarine Trains in the Arctic
- Alarm Over North Korea Missile Prep
- Anti-Terror Stimulus? US Offers Rewards for Top Terrorists
- Daily Photo: Pakistani Women in Refugee Camp
- Condoleezza Rice Appears on "The Tonight Show"
- Diplomat and Aid Group Sound the Alarm on Darfur Camp Situation
- auto industry rescue
- Ballotwatch
- Biden, Joe
- Bush, George W.
- Clinton, Bill
- Clinton, Hillary
- Dodd, Chris
- Edwards, John
- Giuliani, Rudy
- Gravel, Mike
- Huckabee, Mike
- Hunter, Duncan
- Inauguration
- Iraq
- Kucinich, Dennis
- McCain, John
- Obama, Barack
- Palin, Sarah
- Paul, Ron
- Romney, Mitt
- Tancredo, Tom
- Thompson, Fred
- Veepstakes
- Vote 2008: Democrats
- Vote 2008: Republicans
- Washington
- White House
« Previous | Main | Next »
Carville: Edwards' Backing "Certainly Helps" Obama
May 15, 2008 7:37 AM
ABC News' Nitya Venkataraman Reports: In an interview on Good Morning America Thursday, even James Carville seemed impressed following John Edwards' endorsement of Democratic frontrunner Sen. Barack Obama.
Carville, a Democratic strategist and adviser to Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., said Edwards' Wednesday night announcement in Michigan "certainly helps in terms of psychology of the superdelegates" but that the power of the endorsement would only be truly tested in Kentucky's Democratic primary on May 20.
"Obviously it is something that's good for Sen. Obama," Carville told ABC News' Diane Sawyer, "I wish he would have endorsed Sen. Clinton -- but I'm not sure how much it's going to translate into votes."
Asked if Clinton would accept vice presidential placement on November's Democratic ticket, Carville said "I think she wants to be president...I think she's going to go through this thing to the end. And I know that when you’re doing something like this, you’re not thinking vice-anything."
Referencing Clinton's West Virginia win on Tuesday, Carville also reiterated the sentiment that he would back the Democratic nominee once the primary season is over.
"I'm going to be for the Democrat -- whoever it is," Carville said.
If it's Obama, Carville continued "I'd certainly be for him."
May 15, 2008 in Bush, George W., Kucinich, Dennis, Tancredo, Tom | Permalink | User Comments (161)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Talk about sore losers. There wasn't anything dirty about what Edwards did. He wanted his endorsement to have as big an impact as possible and last night was perfect for that. 30+ superdelegates have endorsed Obama since the IN/NC primaries. WV didn't change anything. Everyone knew he was going to love big. Stop drinking Howard Wolfson's koolaid. The goal of the endorsement is not to sway voters in Kentucky, it is to sway superdelegates. Like Carville said it "certainly helps in terms of psychology of the superdelegates." Hillary supporters can vote for McCain if they want, but when he adds more conservative justices and overturns ROE v Wade, I won't be the one to blame. I'm voting democrat regardless.
Posted by: Carter | May 15, 2008 8:58:37 AM
dl
You gotta assume half o these whacked out ppl are just wingnut Saboteurs just having fun by posing as hillairian dead enders.
Posted by: The Commander Guy | May 15, 2008 9:05:52 AM
Michigan Pam----
I'm from Michigan too. I voted "undecided" so did my husband and most of my friends. Clinton wants all the votes for her, but Obama gets zero, none of the votes for undecided. She played fast and loose with the rules, she kept her name on as a political move just weeks before the primary.
When there was talk of a revote, Clinton's campaign said only the people who did not vote in the first primary would get to vote again. So I coulnd not vote for Obama. BUT that she would get all the votes for her in both rounds and Obama could on get the votes for the second round. So 45% of Michigan voters would have their votes erased. This makes no sense and her argument is verging on criminal.
Posted by: Jeanne from Michigan | May 15, 2008 9:08:28 AM
What a load of crap coming from so called Hillary supporters. Are these the white, blue collar workers she boasted would only vote for her? What is dirty politics about announcing a major supporter on a day pundits will be talking about a loss you suffered? That is called excellent strategic management. HRC used the same strategic advantage to great effect not so long ago when she was reeling from the effects of her Bosnia lies. She seized on Rev Wright and got her lies sidelined. That's what politics is about you use your advantages strategically. As someone recently said: "If you can't stand the heat..."
Posted by: Sue Ann | May 15, 2008 9:09:23 AM
Wow, there are a bunch of Hillary supporters whining about the Edwards endosement today!
Although many have tried to downplay the importance of the endorsement, the outpouring of "poor Hillary" posts shows just how important this is.
I thought the timing of the endorsement was excellent. And who cares if Obama called Edwards and said when it should happen. The Obama campaign has been excellent in their strategy, and I think it was very smart to have Edwards waiting until Obama felt it was the correct time.
Obama is a leader. He surrounds himself with great advisors. He will be a wonderful president.
Posted by: Susan | May 15, 2008 9:13:05 AM
HP Boston....I am inclined to agree with you but it is so difficult to tell from the comments I read. On the issue of Michigan and Florida....I think it is a mess which has been created from the beginning and I think will be a tricky minefield to negotiate...as to whether it must go count to determine the ultimate nominee...my sense is it will not be fair for the reason that anytime te rules are changed mid-way it does not bode well for the results and precedent set.
Posted by: krispin | May 15, 2008 9:19:13 AM
Edwards understands that Hillary can not catch up without the super delegates overturning the pledged delegate count.
The party agreed to use pledged delegates as a way of giving the 14 caucus states equal representation. Anything other than using pledged delegates would be an injustice to the founders of our great country.
The founders understood the importance of equal representation and created the Senate (2 from each state).
The Democrats must unite or everything Clinton, Edwards, and Obama are trying to achieve, will be lost. McCain stands with Bush on almost every position.
Clinton, Edwards, and Obama are very similar on their positions.
Posted by: Debbie | May 15, 2008 9:22:46 AM
Thank you John Edwards. Someone tell Bush the axis of evil is here in the US. It is the Clintons.
Posted by: JJ | May 15, 2008 9:22:58 AM
Edwards endorsement really doesn't mean a thing. He is not even a Super-D! He was brought out at a union talk by BO because Edwards was for the unions. He is just trying to get the working class.
For those that don't get it about the Hillary supporters being upset you might pay more attention to the fact that we are sick of the media pushing BO down our throat. People I know that aren't even Dems are quite sick of it too. The media might find out in the long run that they have over played this biased card
Posted by: rockthebleachers | May 15, 2008 9:24:15 AM
How touching...John Edwards of the $400 haircuts, and Obama, the Elitist, teaming up to vow war on poverty! Since the press has already declared Obama the presidential nominee, I can't see the Democratic Party backing Senator Clinton now. How unfortunate that we can't redo the primaries held before the Rev. Wright. America's the loser on this one. Go independent, Hillary. Please don't force me to vote Republican!
Posted by: Corky Crofoot | May 15, 2008 9:24:57 AM
rockthebleachers...
Isn't this a free country?? Vote for who you want, isn't that the point?
Posted by: Jeanne from Michigan | May 15, 2008 9:29:53 AM
Jeanne + your response invalid = clueless.
Posted by: rockthebleachers | May 15, 2008 9:32:31 AM
To weneedfairreporting and others, if you wanted to have your votes count,you should have insisted that your Florida and Michigan Democratic State parties FOLLOWED THE RULES. No one, not Obama, Howard Dean, JOhn Edwards or Hillary for that matter made you VIOLATE THE RULES and move your primary up to a time we now see, in retrospect, made it meaningless. Oh and the whole one person one vote, what about caucuses, each caucus vote counts about equal to 10,000 real voters. This is the Primary election, each party makes its own rules. The laws don't take effect till the General. Hillary was all for the rules and endorsed them when she thought she would have it wrapped up Super Tuesday
Posted by: Mark | May 15, 2008 9:37:03 AM
Sorry rock, that your candidate lost. Dems da berries! Get over it already. Vote, don't vote. But get over it. SHE LOST fair and square! She didn't plan for after Super Tuesday. She ignored small states and caucus states. She ignored the power of the internet and the small donations. She counted on her rich and connected friends. Misteps go on and on. Bad decisions + arrogance = lost election.
Posted by: Jeanne from Michigan | May 15, 2008 9:40:01 AM
Mark - the people in the state didnt do that. The legislatures did. The party could have offerred a different penalty. I actually don't want the rules changed - but you have to admit, angering democrats in critical states makes for bad policy. if you cannot see this then there is no need to debate.
Posted by: tony | May 15, 2008 9:40:01 AM
I can't believe a lot of what I am reading here. As Sue Ann says, the announcement of John Edwards' support is tactical. Did you critcs listen to the Obama/Edwards message at all, or are you more interested in just saying mindless things? I think John Edwards gave the best speech I have ever heard from him. He praised HRC and emphasized the good of the country which can only come from a Democratic president. Obama's message was equally one of hope. Are HRC supporters so blinded by loyalty to her that they cannot see that a vote for McCain really would be just keeping Bush in the White House for more destruction of our country. I am a fat 59 year old who used to be a Hillary supporter, but I realize that she simply has no chance that is honourable. Come on fellow democrats, it's a new day - accept change. Especially those of you who are racist. Black people really are just like the rest of us. They eat, they sleep, they work and even go to the bathroom just like you and me. The good Lord made us all.
Posted by: JennyR | May 15, 2008 9:40:32 AM
Jeanne from MI: Defections to McCain + Staying at Home by Clinton Supporters = No Democratic victory in November.
Much costlier equation....
Posted by: tony | May 15, 2008 9:42:29 AM
JennyR - so sweet. I am black, and I am glad I, like other Clinton supporters say: No Way! It's not about racism, although I imagine for some it is. It's about treating all candidates fairly and not collaborating with the media to destroy the Clintons. Sorry, but the Democrats need to learn something about strategy. We criticize the Repubs for loyalty, but their loyalty has given them dominance on the national scene. The courts are laden with conservative judges who will block our laws even if we win the White House. Apparently, the Dems need to suffer a little more to learn some lessons. While the lovefest was going on, this side of the party was becoming increasingly more angry. Now, the chickens are coming home to roost.
Posted by: tony | May 15, 2008 9:46:29 AM
Tony,
I did not say the people did it, I said the people could have STOPPED their Democratic state comittees from doing it. yes the state parties did it knowing full well it meant they would violate the rules. Their hope was that there early vote could influence Super Tuesday and then they would be allowed to be seated at the Convention in August because they thought the nominee would be locked up and no one would object to seating delegates from States that WILLINGLY VIOLATED THE RULES but would not have affected the outcome. No one knew it would be this close!
Posted by: Mark | May 15, 2008 9:47:18 AM
Oh my God!! WHy are we whining about this???
Edwards's move yesterday was a perfect political move for team Obama. Yes, he stole the spot light from Hillary. But, I want you to ask yourselves something...
Would Hillary have done the same thing?
Answer = yes. We have seen the lengths of which Hillary will go through to win this election. Obama is simply beating her at her own game. She scored a extraodinary Victory in West Virginia. Sould the Super Delegates use only that state as an excuse to throw Obama out, when he has won 31 (more than half) of the contests, a lot of them being lopsided victories? W. Virginia had their say, and Now Oregon will have their say. This is not the United States of West Virginia. This is the UNited States of America.
Let's stop this petty bickering. Don't be angry at Obama because more people are voting for him. That is democracy. I understand that you are upsetthat your candidate lost, but there can be only one nominee. This happens every four years. in 2004, it was the Deanites who were upset at Kerry. In 2000, it was John McCain backers who were upset at Bush... The list goes on and on. Put this bitterness behind you and unite.
Posted by: DemocratsUnited | May 15, 2008 9:48:10 AM
Post a comment



